Below is an image of a very personal relic of 9/11. It is the page from my reporter's notebook, recording the very instant when the first of the Twin Towers fell. I was a New York Post columnist that morning, and ran from my apartment on the Brooklyn waterfront, notebook in hand, minutes after the second plane hit. I told my wife I was going "to get as close as I can" to the fires. I knew the only way for me to get downtown was to hoof it over the Brooklyn Bridge, so I set out from just south of Atlantic Avenue, going as fast as I could on foot.
I stopped at a little Arab Muslim-owned convenience store to buy a couple of bottles of water, figuring I'd be in for a long day covering a major fire. Everyone in the store was buzzing about the fires just across the harbor, which you could see from the street outside the store. People kept running in and out saying, "The towers are on fire," and suchlike. The owner was on the phone, laughing and smiling and talking to friends. I watched him: he looked as if he'd just won the lottery. That was the last time I shopped at that store.
I pressed toward the bridge, and saw there on Hicks Street a woman stopped in traffic. She was young, and black, and well-dressed. She had a distressed look on her face, and kept punching the keypad on her cellphone. I pulled mine out to call Julie to tell her she should probably cancel her doctor's appointment in Manhattan that morning. The phones were down. A few minutes later, I stopped at a pay phone on the corner of Montague and Remsen to call her to tell her not to go into the city today. In front of me in line was a young woman in a daze. When she hung up, she pointed to the burning towers and said, "I was supposed to be there. My son, my three-year-old, wouldn't let me go. He kept crying. He made me late. He saved my life." She wandered off in a daze. I called my wife, gave her the news, then hustled on through Brooklyn Heights toward the bridge.
When I got to the bridge, there was already a steady and thick stream of dazed people, some bloodied, ambling over the pedestrian walkway out of lower Manhattan to safety. I stopped to interview some of them about what they'd seen. I kept stopping when I could get people to talk to me, and recording their comments. At some point halfway across the bridge, a man with a boombox or a portable radio, can't remember which, called out to the crowd: "They've hit the Pentagon!" I was so angry at him for spreading what I was sure was a crazy rumor.
I went on, stopping along the way to get quotes. Then I reached the last pillar of the bridge before descending into Manhattan. There I ran into Jessie Graham, my NYPost colleague. She was out riding her bike, as she didn't come to work till later. We talked for a short while, and stared gape-mouthed at the smoking towers. Finally I said to her, "Come on, let's get down there."
No, she said. "Those things are going to come down."
I looked at her like she was crazy. "They're not going to fall down," I said. "They're the Twin Towers."
Then, seconds later, the crown of the south tower did a little twist, and there was that horrible, horrible roar, which I can hear inside my head as I type this, as the south tower collapsed. You can see on the image below the precise moment this happened, because I had my pen to my paper. At the top of the page were quotes from bystanders gathered just before the tower went down ("This is Tom Clancy. This is unbelievable." "Plain and simple and act of war." "This isn't a pizzeria w/10 employees.") But look under the line I drew -- you'll see a shaky line falling away toward the bottom of the page. That's where my pen was on the paper as my knees went weak and I literally began to fall down. I reached out and grabbed Jessie to keep from going down.
Then I wrote, in a crazy scrawl:
explosion, fell to ground people on bridge sobbing,one woman
It's not there anymore!
It collapsed!
A short, stout young black woman in front of me threw her head back and her arms open. She looked at the sky and bellowed an apocalyptic line from Scripture: "And every knew shall bow, and every tongue confess!" She added: "It ain't over, people!"
I decided not to try to run toward the cloud of God knows what hurtling toward us, channeled by the canyons, but instead to go back to Brooklyn and be with Julie and the baby, and protect them. Nobody knew what was coming next. I didn't realize it till I got home, with a light coating of dust from the tower and carrying a croissant in a bag (I'd stopped on the way home to bring Julie some breakfast, figuring it would be a nice thing to do) that I was in some kind of shock. I got about half a block away from my front door and my cellphone rang for the first time that morning.
"Hello," I said. Then I heard Julie shriek. Suddenly, our front door opened, and she ran toward me holding baby Matthew, sobbing. Because she couldn't get me on the phone, she assumed I was dead. She remembered that I'd told her I was going to get as close as I could. If I hadn't stopped to interview those people, I'd have had time to have gotten to the towers. But I didn't know that then. I couldn't get what she was so upset about. She told me later that I was in a fog.
We went inside and I called my folks to tell them I was okay, and sent a note via e-mail to friends with the same news. Then I wrote my column for the Post, filed it for the extra edition, and then tried hard to figure out where I was.
The story of what it was like to cover the events of that morning is well-told anecdotally in a book called "Running Toward Danger," published by the Newseum. You should get this book if you are a journalism student or a media junkie. It captures the immediacy of the day. Here is an entry they published from my interview with the editors. I'm speaking about events on the afternoon and evening of 9/11:
I went out to water the plants in the back yard. There was an airplane ticket from the World Trade Center sitting in our garden. It was from May. My wife, Julie, and I went to a Lebanese Catholic church memorial that night. Some of the people there had grown up in Beirut, and they told us, "Once you smell burning human flesh, you never forget that smell. That was the smell over Brooklyn today." I realized then what was in the ash that was covering our back yard.


Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
Rod,
I managed to block this day out of my head rather sucessfully and only ventured 3 blocks from where I live.
When I read what you wrote, I literally retched. It's one of the few things I have ever read that brings me right back to that time - to lying at the foot of the North Tower, with burning things falling around me (and on me) to the growing realization that what surrounded WERE body parts (you haven't really been to hell until you find yourself staring into the eyes of a human head not 10 feet away.
I went beyond PTSD long ago.
Matt, it seems to me that you're ignoring half of the age-old conundrum between God's omnipotence and man's free will.
In the example of a loving parent, no, parents aren't omnipotent, and can't protect their children from every unforeseen consequence of every action. But even the most loving of parents occasionally steps back and allows a child to choose something that may not be particularly good, not to "teach him a lesson" or for some such ulterior motive, but simply to respect the child's ability to exercise his free will, independently and separately from the will of his parents.
If parents let their children make such choices, but then rushed around behind the scenes trying to protect the children from every possible negative consequence of those choices, then the parents aren't really respecting the children's free will, are they?
It is proper and appropriate to constrain the will of a very young child, whose free choices will be clouded by emotion and appetite to the point of not really being free in any meaningful sense. But it wouldn't be proper to so constrain the will of an adolescent or young adult who is beginning to learn both the power and the responsibility of freedom; and it would be wrong to constrain the will of an adult merely because that adult happens to be your child.
If you really want God to stop all bad things from occurring, to end evil in the world, to make it impossible for murderers and terrorists and other evildoers to wreak their havoc, then what you are really demanding is an end to free will, an end to our power to choose between good and evil.
But though God may still permit such evil things to happen, these things are never part of His plan; and, in His mysterious ways that are beyond our understanding, even in a tragedy, He may end up thwarting the true goals of those who commit such crimes. The Virginia Tech shooter planned to kill more people than he did; the Columbine killers thought they'd succeed in setting off bombs that would kill dozens of their classmates; even Andrew Kehoe, perpetrator of the Bath School massacre that killed 45 people in 1927, had rigged a second set of explosives in the school building that might at least have doubled that total, if they hadn't unaccountably failed to detonate.
And I have little doubt that the 9/11 killers expected, and even hoped, to kill far more people than they did; I remember the early news reports speculating that as many as twenty thousand people might be dead in the Twin Towers alone. This is not meant to diminish in any way the lives of those who did perish, whom we mourn and remember today; but to see God as absent somehow from the dangers and sufferings of the world is to fail to see Him when He is most present.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I also have no wish to engage in vituperative debate. But, I will respond with a couple of thoughts.
First, as a student of history and a frequent visitor to the former Soviet bloc, I would disagree that these regimes did nor commit numerous atrocities with the specific intent of aggressively crushing religion, which they saw as defending atheism and atheist doctrine.
Yes, religious faith does require ritual and reflection. So does fighting tooth decay or getting an education, or a myriad of other worthy pursuits. Few habits worth having are fallen into, or maintained without care.
I don't believe in an omnipotent God. I simply do not see the only alternative being an impotent one. I am not sure why you see these as the only alternatives. I believe that the Gospel points to a God who chooses the pain of love over the insulation of power. That is what the cross says to me.
As for God being a glorified yet somwhow lousy human being...I clearly differ. I believe God is relentlessly loving toward humanity which demands that God fix our every problem but simultaneously demands that God not interfere with our self-centered schemes and short-sighted plans. We become angry and resentful when God won't play the role of Cosmic Butler and simply work in accordance with our instructions. The patience that loving us and working with us demands is beyond my capacity...and I don't think most folks would consider me a lousy human being.
I also do not believe that God is required to adjust the universe to my particular needs...even if those needs are quite real. Because doing so may hurt someone else in ways I may not notice, but which would be no less real..and possibly worse.
The Kitty Genovese incident was an example of all the witnesses assuming someone else would act, so they didn't have to. If God had swooped in to rescue her, they would have still assumed the same thng, afterward. And if angels came to our aid every time we failed to demonstrate love, compassion, or simple responsibility...the result would be a world filled with people devoid of love for others or responsibility for themselves.
This is the incredibly difficult conundrum which God faces. Never intervene and people lose hope and grow hard. Constantly intervene and they will become loveless and hopelessly immature.
It's not a job I would covet, though many people throughout history have claimed they were qualified to hold it. They have always proven to be disastrously wrong.
Again, I truly thank you for the thoughtful and respectful tone of your response. I have tried to accord you the same measure of respect, and I hope I have succeeded. If I have written anything that you feel was a personal affront, I am sorry and assure that was definitely not my intent.
I wish you happiness and peace.
Before this topic falls off the radar, I just wanted to say to Scott R. and Rod and anyone else who was there or lost loved ones that I am sorry this happened to you. Very sorry. For those who want prayers I offer prayer. For those who don't, I can only say that I'm thinking of you, and that I'm glad you survived.
I understand that the good will of a stranger is not exactly going to make everything all better, but it doesn't seem right to me that a comment like Scott R.'s should go completely unanswered, and since everybody else is busy defending God, I've elected myself to attend to this detail.
Sig, Scott's and Rod's experiences, while far more intense, are not entirely alien to those of us a thousand-plus miles removed, and I think we would easily echo your offerings without reservation.
There are plenty of us who can identify, and empathize, having wondered while having coffee on our patio that Saturday four years ago this past Feb 1 what that sonic boom and contrail overhead was, and, after we learned, proceeded a bit queasily to mow and bag those strange, pretty bits and shreds and strips of gold foil that appeared thereafter in our lawns, never before, and never since.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.