Summary In a Boston Phoenix article published on September 6th, 2002, and entitled “A Lot To Learn,” David Brudnoy discusses the aftermath of 9/11. Brudnoy claims that Americans believed the impact of that disastrous day would bring even greater prosperity. He belittles the people of America as too desperate and too easily consoled by the government officials in New York and Washington D.C. after 9/11. Brudnoy believes that the phrase “war on terrorism” was not an accurate definition to use and that in fact our government should have taken action against all Muslims, not just Osama bin Laden and his minions. He further argues that Americans have taken for granted the changes since 9/11 and have tried to forget about the attacks. He opines that people have become too weak in the aftermath, living in constant fear of another terrorist …show more content…
He concludes that America must unite and fight to save Western Civilization from terrorism. Response In “A Lot To Learn,” David Brudnoy uses extreme bias and illogical fallacies in an effort to stimulate the drive America needs to fight his definition of the “war on terrorism,” but instead he diverges on unrelated tangents that detract from his argument. From the start of his article, Brudnoy tries to appeal to his audience’s emotions to win their support. In the second paragraph, he uses an “overemotional” fallacy: “To see the Twin Towers in New York City vanish, like some repulsively persuasive special effect in the latest action movie, and then to see them vanish again and again” (226). Brudnoy uses italics to create the impression that 9/11 was a complete shock and that people had to relive it to believe it. Highlighting the action movie also appeals to his audience because it connects his point (irrelevantly) to popular culture. Next,
Before the events of 9/11 the US had been attacked before and we were aware of possible threats. However, these threats, specifically those of Al-Qaeda were not taken seriously by American foreign policy makers or regular Americans alike, so on September 11, 2001 Americans were truly shocked by the scale of devastation and loss of life that occurred. The effect these attacks had on America was incredible. In the years that followed Americans became fearful and discriminatory of religious groups; the government created the Department of Homeland Security and enacted stricter search and seizure laws, and America’s foreign policy became defined by unilateral decision making and preemptive war.
The author of this book Steven Bouma-Prediger main argument is Christians need to live more earth-careful lives and being called to be caretakers is not optional. The responsibility to care for the earth is a part of our faith. Early in the book the authors takes you back to your first encounter with nature he does to make his topic relevant and personal to the reader. He then opposes his first question, how much do we actually know about where we live? He states that this question shows us how little we know about our trees, plants, flowers, and the patterns of the moon. This is also his first argument in which he said if we do not know our earth we are destine to use and abuse it. Understanding and caring about nature is necessary to live properly on this earth. Chapter 1 (page 21) “we are for what we love, we love only what we know, we truly know only what we experience.
Have you ever had that one person that thought he or she knew it all, or that kept on you to do your work, work harder, and just was always nagging you? It could be a parent, relative, teacher, a boss, or even a friend and you always wonder why he or she is so hard on you, but in the end, you realize that it was only in your best interest? They just wanted to teach you something meaningful and important in life. I have had that one person that drove me insane, until I realized why.
Host: On September the 11th 2001, the notorious terror organisation known as Al-Qaeda struck at the very heart of the United States. The death count was approximately 3,000; a nation was left in panic. To this day, counterterrorism experts and historians alike regard the event surrounding 9/11 as a turning point in US foreign relations. Outraged and fearful of radical terrorism from the middle-east, President Bush declared that in 2001 that it was a matter of freedoms; that “our very freedom has come under attack”. In his eyes, America was simply targeted because of its democratic and western values (CNN News, 2001). In the 14 years following this pivotal declaration, an aggressive, pre-emptive approach to terrorism replaced the traditional
In today’s society the word “terrorism” has gone global. We see this term on television, in magazines and even from other people speaking of it. In their essay “Controlling Irrational Fears After 9/11”, published in 2002, Clark R. Chapman and Alan W. Harris argue that the reaction of the American officials, people and the media after the attacks of 9/11 was completely irrational due to the simple fact of fear. Chapman and Harris jump right into dismembering the irrational argument, often experienced with relationships and our personal analysis. They express how this argument came about from the terrorist being able to succeed in “achieving one major goal, which was spreading fear” among the American people (Chapman & Harris, para.1). The supporters of the irrational reaction argument state that because “Americans unwittingly cooperated with the terrorist in achieving the major goal”, the result was a widespread of disrupted lives of the Americans and if this reaction had been more rational then there would have been “less disruption in the lives of our citizens” (Chapman & Harris, para. 1).
September 11, 2001 was one of the most devastating and horrific events in the United States history. Americans feeling of a secure nation had been broken. Over 3,000 people and more than 400 police officers and firefighters were killed during the attacks on The World Trade Center and the Pentagon; in New York City and Washington, D.C. Today the term terrorism is known as the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives (Birzer, Roberson). This term was clearly not defined for the United States for we had partial knowledge and experience with terrorist attacks; until the day September 11, 2001. At that time, President George W. Bush, stated over a televised address from the Oval Office, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.” President Bush stood by this statement for the United States was about to retaliate and change the face of the criminal justice system for terrorism.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were horrific and traumatic events that affected not only the United States but had global ramifications as well. The events of that day produced immediate and long term effects on numerous aspects of society. The human tragedy in the loss of human life was immeasurable. The societal effects of 9/11 continue to be present even today as the war against terror continues. It is difficult to measure the societal impacts, but the economic cost of the attacks, have been and continue to be measured.
Following the 9/11 attacks, the United States came together with a staunch promise to “never forget” that day’s atrocities. Congressmen from opposing parties reached across the aisle and stood arm in arm at the Capitol to show their commitment to this pledge. But,when another terrorist attack had stunned New York City a century earlier, this promise did not exist. In 1920, a bombing on Wall Street rattled the city’s financial core and earned the title as the city’s worst terrorist attack until 2001. The assault came merely two years after the US debuted as a global superpower with World War 1’s end. Despite the attack on this newfound American identity, the bombing never found closure for proving for the first time that the US was not invincible.
The overall, topic for this week’s reading is Social Studies Textbooks and what is there point of view. In Loewen’s book, Lies My Teacher Told Me, the author makes the point that books show one-sided viewpoint of historical figures, fail to show conflict happening today, and fail to present multiple sides of an issue. The second article by David Tyack, Monuments Between Covers, talks about the idea to show that our past was full of right moments and if anything that was immoral was a small part and no big deal. Tyack points out the constant influence from political groups with different agendas fighting to influence and control what textbooks tell our countries’ children. In the last reading History Lesson by Dana Lindaman talks about the view point of American History throughout the world’s public schools’ textbooks. Overall, each of the countries diminished the role their nation played in terrible events and criticized other nations for their actions.
The transformation of America is often discussed in both popular media and academic dialogue. Each generation has a name, new technologies define new eras, and events seem only notable when they are “historic”. While major events catch the interest of a broad spectrum of the public consciousness, subtle interactions between actors and slight shifts in beliefs are constantly changing the realities of the world. When the twin towers fell in 2001, the United States seemed to be thrust into a new world of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Jihadists, and a global fight against terrorism; bombs were dropped, ground forces were deployed in foreign states, and anyone who publicly questioned the urgency of war was at risk to be labeled a traitor. This one event was indelibly branded on the consciousness of the world and if often seen as a moment of sudden transformation. Most Americans believe that the troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan are due to the terrorist attacks on the United States and while it is hard to deny that the 9-11 attacks was the impetus for putting boots on the ground, it is imperative that the chain of events following the horror of September 11 are seen to reflect the willingness and wants of actors in control before the towers fell.
The effects of September 11th 2001 has had a lasting imprint on this nation that ...
James W. Loewen wrote the book “Lies My Teacher Told Me” to help students understand the past of the United States, and how it is effecting the present time. “Lies My Teacher Told Me” looks at 12 different American history textbooks, and points out the different lies, flaws, and sugar coated stories the textbooks present. Lowen explains how textbooks practice heroification, and how race and race relations are a major issue when it comes to American history. Among these topics, Lowen also sheds light on the truth about social classes in America, and how textbooks lie about the past and try to avoid the recent past all together.
There are certain criteria that must be fulfilled in order for a nonfiction book to be successful. The two criteria that we should judge all argumentative nonfiction by are well written anecdotes that capture the reader’s attention and well explained factual data that proves the author’s point. The book Lies My Teacher Told Me by James W. Loewen contains both of these criteria and as such is a successful nonfiction book. Loewen’s purpose in writing Lies My Teacher Told Me is to correct the inaccuracies in textbooks and to help students learn the truth about history. He uses anecdotes that provide insight about history and data that easily proves his point about inaccuracies in textbooks to achieve his goal of helping students gain knowledge.
Bhargava, R. (2001). Responses to 9.11: Individual and collective dimensions. International Views: America and the Rest of the World.
Lev Vygotsky developed his theory of learning in the 1920’s but it was not until the late 1960’s that his ideas about learning became popular and were used to contribute to “Constructivism” as a method of teaching. (Krause [et al.] 2010 p. p81).