Charles Crawford was British Ambassador in Belgrade when the World Trade Centre was attacked. Here he reflects on his reaction. This post first appeared at Charles’ site on 11 September.

I returned to the Embassy in Belgrade to be told to watch on TV what was happening in New York.

I did. The Twin Towers crashed.

My thought then is still valid:

This level of Islamist madness is quite different. It can’t be defeated by normal means. Only moderate Muslims can do it, if they have the courage. And what will they demand from us as the price for sorting out their own lunatics..?

Israel?

What was 9/11? One thing it was not was a ‘tragedy’. A speedboat death or a fatal fire in a tenement caused by drunkenness is a tragedy.

Some things are so much bigger than mere tragedies that it is insulting if not evil to use that sort of language. Yet a sizeable ‘liberal’ tendency wants to shrink 9/11 down to something manageable, if not banal.

Luckily we have Mark Steyn batting for civilisation. Sorry, Mark, but this column is so powerful I have to quote it at length:

Waiting to be interviewed on the radio the other day, I found myself on hold listening to a public-service message exhorting listeners to go to 911day.org and tell their fellow citizens how they would be observing the tenth anniversary of the, ah, “tragic events.” There followed a sound bite of a lady explaining that she would be paying tribute by going and cleaning up an area of the beach

Great! Who could object to that? Anything else? Well, another lady pledged that she “will continue to discuss anti-bullying tactics with my grandson.”

Marvelous. Because studies show that many middle-school bullies graduate to hijacking passenger jets and flying them into tall buildings?

 

Whoa, ease up on the old judgmentalism there, pal. In New Jersey, many of whose residents were among the dead, middle-schoolers will mark the anniversary with a special 9/11 curriculum that will “analyze diversity and prejudice in U.S. history.” And, if the “9/11 Peace Story Quilt” at the Metropolitan Museum of Art teaches us anything, it’s that the “tragic events” only underline the “importance of respect.” And “understanding.” As one of the quilt panels puts it:

You should never feel left out

You are a piece of a puzzle

And without you

The whole picture can’t be seen.

And if that message of “healing and unity” doesn’t sum up what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, what does? A painting of a plane flying into a building? A sculpture of bodies falling from a skyscraper? Oh, don’t be so drearily literal. “It is still too soon,” says Midori Yashimoto, director of the New Jersey City University Visual Arts Gallery, whose exhibition “Afterwards & Forward” is intended to “promote dialogue, deeper reflection, meditation, and contextualization.”

So, instead of planes and skyscrapers, it has Yoko Ono’s “Wish Tree,” on which you can hang little tags with your ideas for world peace.

What’s missing from these commemorations?

Firemen?

Oh, please. There are some pieces of the puzzle we have to leave out. As Mayor Bloomberg’s office has patiently explained, there’s “not enough room” at the official Ground Zero commemoration to accommodate any firemen. “Which is kind of weird,” wrote the Canadian blogger Kathy Shaidle, “since 343 of them managed to fit into the exact same space ten years ago.”

On a day when all the fancypants money-no-object federal acronyms comprehensively failed — CIA, FBI, FAA, INS — the only bit of government that worked was the low-level unglamorous municipal government represented by the Fire Department of New York.

When they arrived at the World Trade Center the air was thick with falling bodies — ordinary men and women trapped on high floors above where the planes had hit, who chose to spend their last seconds in one last gulp of open air rather than die in an inferno of jet fuel. Far “too soon” for any of that at New Jersey City University, but perhaps you could reenact the moment by filling out a peace tag for Yoko Ono’s “Wish Tree” and then letting it flutter to the ground.

Upon arrival at the foot of the towers, two firemen were hit by falling bodies. “There is no other way to put it,” one of their colleagues explained. “They exploded.”

Any room for that on the Metropolitan Museum’s “Peace Quilt”? Sadly not. We’re all out of squares

Read the rest. And get very angry.

While you’re doing that, reflect on the assertions now flying thick and fast that BlairBusHitler are responsible for “a million deaths and five million orphans” in Iraq and much more in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere. The point here is that the vast majority of these deaths are Muslims murdering other Muslims. Part in fact of the battle I predicted, between more or less moderate Muslims and the lunatic not-so-fringe.

That battle has to be fought. See events across North Africa now. It reflects a huge ‘civilisational’ fault-line in Islam, where the various tendencies have played upon our dependency on oil to get fabulously rich and then lever up the struggle to the point of putting global security at risk.

The casualties in this war are bound to be huge, as the propensity to madness, extremism and savagery among extreme Islamists is so high.

Where do we as mere honest citizens fit into this war?

Watch George Bush and Bill Clinton tell us, in a superb example of the speechmakers’ art drawing on the stunning events themselves and looking at the wider lessons.

They were speaking at a commemoration of the heroism of the passengers on Flight 93, who rose up against the deranged hijackers and thwarted their plan to blow up Washington – at the cost of their own lives.

George Bush:

Aboard United Airlines Flight 93 were college students from California, an iron worker from New Jersey, veterans of the Korean War and World War II, citizens of Germany and Japan, a pilot who had rearranged his schedule so that he could take his wife on a vacation to celebrate their anniversary.

When the passengers and crew realized the plane had been hijacked, they reported the news calmly. When they learned that the terrorists had crashed other planes into targets on the ground, they accepted greater responsibilities. In the back of the cabin, the passengers gathered to devise a strategy.

At the moment America’s democracy was under attack, our citizens defied their captors by holding a vote. The choice they made would cost them their lives, and they knew it. Many passengers called their loved ones to say good-bye, then

Many passengers called their loved ones to say goodbye then hung up to perform their final act. One said, “They’re getting ready to break into the cockpit. I have to go. I love you.” Another said, “It’s up to us. I think we can do it.”

In one of the most stirring accounts, Todd Beamer, a father of two with a pregnant wife with a home in New Jersey, asked the air operator to join him in reciting the Lord’s Prayer. Then he helped lead the charge with the words “Let’s roll.”

With their selfless act, the men and women who stormed the cockpit lived out the words, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” And with their brave decision, they launched the first counter offensive of the war on terror.

The most likely target of the hijacked plane was the United States Capitol. We’ll never know how many innocent people might have been lost, but we do know this, Americans are alive today because the passengers and crew of Flight 93 chose to act, and our nation will be forever grateful.

The 40 souls who perished on the plane left a great deal behind. They left spouses and children and grandchildren who miss them dearly. They left successful businesses and promising careers and a lifetime of dreams they will never have the chance to fulfill. They left something else — a legacy of bravery and selflessness that will always inspire America.

If anything Bill Clinton is even better. Watch the video to see how he uses rhetorical pauses and historical allusions to put the Flight 93 passengers up there with some of the world’s finest historical heroes.

Conclusion?

There are no sure, safe, rational, reasonable ways for dealing with the sort of cynical, depraved wickedness which Bin Laden represented. In fact these extremists bank on our very reasonableness to create operating space for themselves in our own societies.

But they are not doomed to succeed. Security measures work. Some moderate Muslims are fighting back. Western intelligence agencies have benefited from defectors from Islamic communities and used the information gained to destroy Islamist extremist leaderships and their structures. Spare a thought for those Muslims who have risked all to work with us and been murdered when they were discovered. They are true citizen heroes too.

Since 9/11 we have done quite a good job in scaling down the risk in the ‘West’. Soft policies of inclusiveness/diversity have a role. They show a willingness to talk, within civilised limits.

So does killing our enemies. That shows a refusal to be defeated.

Trooper
Thompson September 15, 2011 at
00:18

The 9/11 Commission was set up to fail. Not my opinion, the opinion of a
number of the members of the Commission. There should be a proper
investigation. Even if the US government has nothing to hide, they should have
an open investigation. Let them show the video of the plane hitting the
Pentagon. Let them come clean about the fact that FBI agents were trailing the
hijackers and were told to back off. Let them admit what intelligence they had
and must have ignored. Why is it not important that the truth be told and that
those who messed up are punished instead of promoted?

Some of you are all too quick to get outraged over little things the
government does, but when it comes to the really big things, suddenly the
government becomes unimpeachable, and their word absolute, and no matter how
long the litany of crimes and deceptions which we know about, you still keep
believing.

I may be wrong in my opinion of what happened on 9/11, but I’m not going to
shut up about it because some of you call me playground names.

Cascadian September 15, 2011 at 01:49

I am sure Mr Crawford will be revising his views based on your lucid
analysis of the facts.

Perhaps the Foreign Office will even undertake an internal review of the
facts surrounding 9 September 2001 and call you as an expert witness as you
seem to have amazing insight into the workings of the FBI and the US Federal
Government.

Matt
Wardman September 14, 2011 at 15:00

Charles

My comments on the article:

* I agree on the basic Muslim vs Muslim question – there are ubscurantist
and more progressive tendencies, and there will be a continuing battle.

* The more progressive tendencies, and it’s worth noting that all the
people revolting seem to wanting aspects of our system that the teeny bopping
revolutonaries are trying to overturn – will be through more progressive
interpretations of Islam rather than rejection of it.

(And I’d note the small number of countries claiming Sharia which have
abandoned the death penalty)

Where do you stand on culpability of Bush et al on the intervention in Iraq
+ torture which, I think, they still defend (?)

Matt

barnstable September 14, 2011 at 05:38

I quickly learned that there were a great many inconsistencies and
unbelievable coincidences in the official 9/11 story. For example, no steel
framed skyscraper had ever completely collapsed due to fire before. Even those
which had been ablaze for many hours never fell to the ground. Yet three of
the World Trade Centre buildings fell completely – even the 47-story Salomon
Brothers Building (WTC7) which was not hit by a plane.

For many, Building 7 is the biggest ‘smoking gun’ of all because it
resembles a classic controlled demolition. 1,500 architects and engineers
agree and want a new investigation. So many people in New York City have never
seen footage of Building 7’s collapse, that a poster and TV ad campaign is
underway this week.

And Building 7 wasn’t even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. But
then, the chairman and vice chairman wrote in their book that the Commission
was “set up to fail”.

When George W Bush gave his evidence to the Commission it was not under
oath and he was chaperoned by Dick Cheney, the man responsible for making
NORAD stand down, according to “conspiracy theorists”. Former Transportation
Secretary Norman Mineta testified that the Vice President had ordered the
plane heading for the Pentagon NOT to be shot down. This testimony was omitted
from the Commission’s final report.

JuliaM September
14, 2011 at 05:51

“For many, Building 7 is the biggest ‘smoking gun’ of all because it
resembles a classic controlled demolition. 1,500 architects and engineers
agree and want a new investigation. “

Is that more or less than believe we never went to the moon? Or that the
Earth is flat?

Cascadian September 14, 2011 at 06:32

“no steel framed skyscraper had ever completely collapsed due to fire
before.”……that may indeed be true, but nobody had crashed a jet aircraft
fully loaded with highly flammable fuel into a steel-framed building before
either. Do you think that might be a factor? Think about how steel is made
and get back to me.

Regards building 7-do you suppose an adjacent 110 storey building
collapsing might conceivably catastrophically weaken its foundations and
structural integrity?

Looney tunes is on the comedy network, please take your friend Trooper
Thompson with you.

barnstable
September 14, 2011 at 06:57

argue with facts not insults, by the way jet a1 is an oil not a spirit
and its not highly flammable, bit like diesel,i spent a lifetime working
with steel and you cant melt it with jet a1, poets and female bloggers no
bugger all about practical things

Spiral
Architect September 14, 2011 at
07:41

No, he’s right ‘barnstable’ you’re a bloody numpty.

barnstable September 14, 2011 at 17:33

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&list=PL1F1D256253433E82&v=-3zBGL40orc

Ed P September 14, 2011 at 07:48

Perhaps they do not, but engineers do know and, as one, I know you
are spouting utter nonsense, confusing heat & temperature.

barnstable September 14, 2011 at 17:35

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/how-hot.htm

gladiolys
September 14, 2011 at 07:51

“female bloggers”… this piece was posted by Charles Crawford. As you
have problems with facts written clearly in front of you, I think I’ll
give your other theories a miss.

Anna
Raccoon September 14, 2011 at
09:04

That is possibly why female bloggers and poets don’t write posts
about big masculine testosterone filled fings like wot u know all abaht
me old mate…….
They are reasonably good with spelling and capital
letters and fings like wot that is.

barnstable September 14, 2011 at 17:28

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/sep/12/9-11-symposium-charlie-skelton?INTCMP=SRCH

barnstable September 14, 2011 at 17:51

sorry ,it wasnt my intention to insult you ,it was just
exasperation with the clowns on the blog, some calling themselves
engineers etc, ive worn a boiler suit for nearly fifty years ,im a
fitter welder and have vast experience with steel etc, before elf and
safety i welded cracked steel jet fuel tanks whilst there was still
fuel inside and thought nothing of it, perhaps under laboratory
conditions steel behaves this way but not in the real world, cant
punctuate or anything like that, but can work wonders with steel and
wood, anyway good luck with your treatment , i know alot about that
aswell

Engineer
September 14, 2011 at 09:23

In support of Ed P – you don’t need to melt steel to reduce it’s
mechanical properties. For most structural grades, reduction of
mechanical properties starts at a temperature of about 150C, and by the
time you reach about 600-700C, severe distortion of any stressed member
(which most skyscraper columns are) is usual. Add that to impact damage
from the plane impacts (not catastrophic in itself) and what happened to
the Twin Towers is entirely consistent with known engineering theory and
practice.

Matt
Wardman September 14, 2011 at
13:13

I believe that steel loses half it’s strength at 600 degrees or so,
which is well within the possibilities for a fire with 10k gallons of
aviation fuel. Aviation fuel fires in air are around 1000 degrees C.

And if you combine that with brittle fireproof coatings not being
mechanically sound against the impact of perhaps 65 tonnes of jet
arriving at 200 knots or whatever the speed was, I think the conspiracy
theories for the WTC collapse as thoroughly as the Towers did.

For building 7, I see nothing wrong with the official explanation,
and the possibility of all the infrastructure for a controlled
demolition being put in while it was in use largely by highly secure
government organisations more than a little far-fetched.

Cascadian
September 14, 2011 at 17:38

Thank you all for ensuring I do not have to correspond with
barnunstable.

I am off to ponder whether I am a poet or a female blogger, neither
of which I aspired to be, but such is life and if barnunstable says so
, it must surely be correct.

John
Pickworth September 14, 2011 at
21:13

Many people perhaps do not realise that much of the WTC site was
constructed above a vast 9 story (70 feet) deep hole in the ground. If
you cast your mind back you might remember seeing on TV the cavernous
hole and the vast access ramps made for construction equipment once
the debris was cleared?

Before the attacks, this hole in the ground contained stores,
garages, car parking and other services for the WTC buildings that sat
above… oh and a subway station too.

So, having two of the world’s tallest skyscrapers collapse into
this void probably wouldn’t have done a lot for the foundations of the
neighbouring WTC7. Nor would the tons of concrete and steel that fell
onto the building itself. Once a fire broke out – which was inevitable
– then the crippled sprinkler & hydrant systems, destroyed fire
safe zones (fire doors and stairwells etc), ruptured services and
impossible access; it pretty much ensured we got the conclusion we
actually arrived at.

So no conspiracy*, CIA plot or act of vandalism by passing aliens
on their way for a burger at Roswell.

* The popular alternative 9/11 ‘industry’ was largely
started by an 18 y/o kid with a laptop computer and camcorder.
However, Dylan Avery no longer believes the Bush administration
orchestrated the attacks. He has also stated that he is now ambivalent
about the 9/11 Truth Movement and has had to “distance” himself from
it.

john malpas September 14, 2011 at 00:18

and what will you do about the quislings?

Engineer September 13, 2011 at 20:33

Freedom has always had it’s price. Once a year we stand silently by the
Cenotaph and War Memorials to honour those who have paid the price on our
behalf. There seems to me a sort of rightness in that way of remembering – a
short, simple, dignified but nonetheless solomn and profound ceremony. I
recognise that for many, 9/11 is still raw in the memory, but the dragging the
memorial introspection out for the best part of a fortnight just seems a bit
over the top, somehow.

I’m ambivalent about ‘inclusiveness and diversity’. If they’re
reciprocated, then fine; but there’s a risk of being taken for mugs by a
cynical opponent. There’s much to be said for the ‘speak softly and carry a
big stick’ school of international relations – with the corollary that the
stick is only used when it absolutely has to be. By that measure, the Afghan
conflict is justifiable, Iraq much less so. Waving the stick in Libya may yet
be for the greater good of all.

JuliaM September
14, 2011 at 05:49

Might it? I still can’t see that it’s our fight.

Engineer
September 14, 2011 at 09:32

A more-or-less democratic government has to be better for world peace
than an unpredictable ditatorship, and that’s in our interests,
surely?

Matt
Wardman September 13, 2011 at 19:13

(Note: Author updated)

Trooper
Thompson September 13, 2011 at
18:49

I heard Flight 93 was shot down by the Happy Hooligans and that the ‘let’s
roll’ story was just that … a story. Still, if it give opportunities for
politicians like Clinton and Bush to justify a series of wars on people who
had nothing to do with 9/11, why let the truth get in the way?