FEMA Removes 9/11 Coloring Book For Children From Website 324
FEMA has decided to pull a children's coloring book entitled, "A Scary Thing Happened" from their website. The coloring book contained three images of the twin towers on fire for children to color. Rose Olmsted, the coordinator behind the book said, "I stand firm that it was a very well thought-out and useful resource for kids, but it's obviously being misinterpreted by a lot of people." Since people are so upset about the coloring book, I can only assume FEMA's plan for a human remains concentration game will be put on hold.
Wrong move (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Obviously the submitter is heavily biased and can't be bothered to think past his or (very unlikely her) own prejudices.
That final sentence is just "hey look at me, I'm a bigot but listen to me anyway."
For some reason, this [penny-arcade.com] comes to mind.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What prejudices and biases are you talking about? What does a Penny Arcade comic about punctuation and flaming fan-boys have to do with the summary? I just don't understand what you are referring to at all.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
As with most Penny Arcade strips, it's not about the game the strip is specifically referring to, it's about the concepts that are at play in the background... you gotta read between the lines.
The point, if you can't see it, is that the poster goes through the following process:
1. Frames his rejection of an idea.
2. Claims he's not a bigot/hypocrite and/or attempts to validate why he's certified to hold such an opinion.
3. Makes a stupid statement that completely invalidates the main thrust of his positio
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you reading the same summary I am? Because I do not see:
1. Anything framing a rejection of an idea.
2. Any claims about lack of bigotry or certifications of opinion holding.
3. A stupid statement that completely invalidates a position or confirms bigotry.
Could you point out examples of what you are talking about? I'm still utterly at a loss, trying to figure out what you see that I don't see.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Since you and several others missed it, read the final sentence in the summary: "I can only assume FEMA's plan for a human remains concentration game will be put on hold."
The poster is trying to make an invalid point employing reductio ad absurdum. Assuming there is no such memory game, the poster is using an absurd example that is even worse than the one that does exist to try and emphasize how bad the existing image is.
This is a logical fallacy. The image itself should be judged on its own merits instea
Re:Wrong move (Score:5, Funny)
his or (very unlikely her) own prejudices.
Palpable irony.
THIS AIN'T RIGHT! (Score:3, Interesting)
I mean, I'm just sayin'... [archive.org]
Re:THIS AIN'T RIGHT! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wrong move (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly cry whenever I see a citizen or agency decide not to publish something based on negative public reaction and publicity.
Wait, what do you mean that's not censorship?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bruce Perens is a censor! (Score:5, Insightful)
I notice YOU haven't published the coloring book on YOUR site either, Mr. Perens. Therefore, by your own logic, you are a censor.
Except that is not censorship. Nobody is banning anything. FEMA is choosing not to use our tax dollars to publish a coloring book on their own web site. Calling that censorship dilutes the meaning of the word, and it demeans the struggle against real censorship.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference is that the FEMA site is a site to which people go in search of information about disasters and emergencies. Bruce Perens' site is not. Furthermore, until some silly people began to complain about it, FEMA did have it on its site.
No, this isn't censorship in the strict sense, but it is unfortunate that a government site should take down a perfectly appropriate publication because some people whine about it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't the government supposed to be accountable to the people? Then why on earth is it a bad thing when they listen to them and not publish something?
Why is it a bad thing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Because the people who are asking them to take it down are silly, that's why. Things like coloring or drawing pictures (and talking about the pictures thus drawn) of traumatic events is good therapy. Removing something that supports that is silly.
So yes, the government should be accountable to the people. But they should also know when a few people are being silly and complaining about something that is actually worthwhile.
On the other hand, kids that are of a coloring-book age (like my 5-year-old) at this point probably don't remember September 11, 2001, anyhow.
Re:Why is it a bad thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
On the other hand, kids that are of a coloring-book age (like my 5-year-old) at this point probably don't remember September 11, 2001, anyhow.
Isn't that the point? To explain a tragic and significant event in what is to them American History in an age-appropriate way? I don't see what's wrong with that.
Re:Why is it a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since it happened 8 years ago, I'm am POSITIVE that your 5-year-old doesn't remember it.
Re:Why is it a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a whole branch of psychology known as Art Therapy [wikipedia.org] built around this premise. You may believe psychotherapy is a bunch of hooey, but there is certainly a reasonable body of evidence to suggest that creative processes, such as drawing & coloring, can be useful therapeutic tools for children who have affected by some sort of traumatic event.
Now whether or not the objections are valid or silly, I cannot say - I'd have to defer to the wisdom of trained & accredited psychologists to determine whether or not these particular materials in this particular case had any sort of therapeutic benefit.
I would say the guideline would look something like this: when you have a bunch of people with no psychological qualifications whatsoever complaining about something that a large majority of psychologists actually feel is beneficial, the whiners are being silly. Disclaimer: I do not know if that is the case here, but the government certainly should be capable of determining whether or not an objection has merit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Though I think the book has been published many years too late for it to be of any benefit.
I looked through the book [archive.org] itself, and the twin towers "scene" is just featured as a cover page. The actual colouring book is more generic, about tornadoes, house fires, etc. The first page asks the reader to draw him/herself before it happened, and further on there's an outline of a face where you can draw how you felt afterwards, also explaining that it can happen without warning, the repeated news on TV, feeling ill afterwards, and eventually getting better. I think it's an excellent resource, and pulling
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sorry, this is laziness masquerading as skepticism on your part. A casual review of google search results ("Art Therapy" effectiveness) yielded plenty of references to papers & research discussing the effectiveness of art therapy. There is plenty of research out there, and simply stating "I don't believe it until I see the research," is a nice way of saying "I've never bothered to look."
Art Therapy, [amazon.co.uk]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I am aware of Art Therapy. I was referring more specifically to the FEMA colouring book though.
Wouldn't the coloring book be Art Therapy? I'm not sure I follow you on that one.
I am not aware that children who have lived in New York during 9/11 are the only people who have access to this coloring book.
They've got this new invention, it's only been around about 100 years now. It's called a TeeVee, TV for short. Through the magic of the TV and news media, millions of kids saw the 9/11 attacks. I myself, thousands of miles away, watched them fall.
I would easilly wager hundreds of thousands, if not a million or two, children saw the planes hit those towers and watched them fall. Do you think none of them were traumatized? F
Re:Bruce Perens is a censor! (Score:4, Insightful)
Since when did populism become such a good thing? The government should be holding up the values that created the country and not caving to every populist whim. Accountable to the people means balancing between a vocal minority (and often a vocal majority) and the values in a country. I'm sure there is a large majority of people who would love the government to cut everyone checks for a 100k. When government refuses are they not being 'accountable to the people?'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
See, now this is how we calmly and rationally discuss an issue without resorting to hyperbole. I happen to disagree that this is unfortunate. Not that I think it is fortunate either, I think it is utterly unimportant.
Seriously, if you are going to the FEMA site for tips on how to talk to your kids about terrorism, you have bigger problems than the disappearance of a coloring book.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well said (Score:2)
I don't think I've ever agreed with you before, spun!
Re: (Score:2)
Libertarians suck! Wait, what did you say? Sorry, that's just kind of an automatic response from me. Property is theft! It's like Tourette Syndrome. The free market is broken! I call it 'Libertariette Syndrome.'
Re:Bruce Perens is a censor! (Score:5, Insightful)
Freedom of speech does not require that I give anyone a podium.
FEMA, in this case, was forced to remove the material due to pressure to be "politically correct". Yes, that's censorship.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, that's funny, because I am a supporter of the current administration, and took time off of work to help Obama be elected.
I am pro-government. I am also pro full-disclosure, transparency, and full discussion. I am not so pro-government that I take everything they do as good, and am very relieved that Obama just hinted he would revisit the state secrets issue. I think government o
Re:Wrong again (Score:5, Interesting)
I am well aware that I am "Bruce Fricken Perens" :-)
Well, I see a few problems here.
I actually read the book. 911 is not centrally featured, it's just one of a number of disasters. There are also fires, floods, etc. And there is a really nice talk, at a child's level, on how to be prepared. Now, a child who knows how to be prepared is going to be more confident of getting through an emergency.
I had a big demonstration of this during a dinner-time earthquake a few years ago. Valerie and I just looked at each other in shock across the table, and it was Stanley, then 7 years old, who said "duck and cover!" and got us moving. He'd been well trained in school.
So, I'm bothered that this resource has been removed just because it had photos of the world trade center burning and being hit by an airplane that a child could color in. That's how you get a child to think about things. Most children would draw in people either running, or helping others, or catching the bad guys. Or all three. That's how they think, and that's how they tell others what they are thinking, which a parent can use as a cue to talk things through further. I downloaded the PDF. My kid is a bit old for this now (he's 9) but he is pretty well trained in self-reliance anyway.
I am also disturbed that some over-sensitive people get to tell our government how to give all of us services. That sounds undemocratic to me.
The article does not say why the book was removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Whoah there, Bruce. Please point out where the article claims that FEMA took down the coloring book due to pressure. Actually, the article does not state WHY the book was removed. Unless you have access to information we don't, you are making completely unwarranted assumptions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Please show us where the article makes any claims whatsoever as to why this coloring book was taken down. This is the problem I have with claims of censorship, for all we know, FEMA had a contract to keep the thing up for six years and it just expired. Or they ran our of space on the web server. Or it was an accident. We just don't know, and assuming it was due to public outcry is unwarranted.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That may be, but there's still no censorship going on here.
Sorry, Bruce.
Re: (Score:2)
And censorship of this... I don't see what is wrong at all with creating resources like this for helping small children cope with disasters.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is. But deciding to pull a publication after you realize that it was in inexplicably awful taste isn't censorship. The government pulling that publication for you (which didn't happen, if TFS is anything to go by) would be.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. So does anyone have a link to download this coloring book?
Re:Wrong move (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
How would you characterize the disappearance of the book, if we're avoiding the word "censorship"?
Re:Wrong move (Score:5, Insightful)
A decision by a government agency to stop selling a book that upset some people.
Censorship would be if FEMA removed the book from their website, and then told the publisher to stop publishing it.
Extreme cases would then involve removing it from book stores, schools and homes... but that wouldn't be necessary. FEMA taking it off its own website though, not censorship. I don't link to slashdot on my home page, am I guilty of censorship against slashdot?
Re:Wrong move (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't link to slashdot on my home page, am I guilty of censorship against slashdot?
If you've never linked to slashdot from your homepage, you're OK. However if you have a link on there and later decide, "You know, that link is unnecessary and silly," and remove it - You've just self-censored. God help you if somebody else sends you an e-mail saying that the link is pointless and that you should take it down - Then if you do what they suggest, you have an obligation to fight censorship by leaving it up.
In case the sarcasm isn't coming across through the post, I agree with you - This is not censorship. And associating it with censorship waters down valid arguments against censorship. The government putting out a publication that the tax-payers largely object to would not be some strike for free speech, it would be misallocated government spending.
Re:Wrong move (Score:4, Insightful)
I would call it "Not choosing to put the book on the FEMA site." Guess what, I chose not to put it on my website either. Am I a censor?
There is a HUGE difference between 'government not using its resources to publish your creation' and 'government banning your creation.'
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not making a political argument, just a pedantic one...if I display something, and then remove it from view for some reason, I am censoring myself (as a poster above said).
Seriously, I'm looking for a word that describes what happened, and failing to find a more approprate one. It may or may not be censorship in the legal sense, I have no idea...I suppose it depends on whether they ask TSG et. al. to remove links to it, as well, but in the literal sense it definitely is.
From Merriam-Webster [merriam-webster.com]:
Wrong decision (Score:5, Insightful)
But given the level of ignorance and PCness in this country, not at all surprising. Games and coloring books are two ways kids learn, remember and process things. I recall growing up with coloring books that depicted, for instance, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Nazis, etc. It didn't turn me into a hateful monster or give me terrible dreams; it helped me learn, remember and understand. I've talked to several friends about this (I have friends across most spectrums you can come up with) and they reached the same conclusion.
We've become absurdly over-sensitive as a nation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, if you read Fahrenheit 451, is one of the main reasons that firemen will soon start fires, instead of putting them out. We can't have books, because they will offend people.
Re:Wrong decision (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I have issues with the coloring book and I'm mostly glad it was removed.
In my opinion, 9/11 is still a very large and very sore subject for many people. I believe the little fly-by stunt the government pulled this week proves that. However, that's not the direct reason I think the book was "off color" (forgive the pun).
I was speaking with my girlfriend and we're in agreement. Children, especially children that are at the age where coloring books are a learning aid really don't need to be exposed to the details of 9/11. Frankly, most children barely understand that different people live in different parts of the world. The U.S. is a big enough place with enough demographics to keep a kids mind chugging out questions for quite some time.
Children coloring in planes flying and blowing up into buildings won't mean squat to them. The word "Terrorist" is basically just another word for "bad" or "stranger". The meaning of what happened and what it means is entirely lost on a child.
Think of it this way, I can't see explaining to a child (of coloring book age) what really happened on 9/11. What is a coloring book really going to teach them then?
I don't know, rambling a bit here, but I just don't see the point in coloring in 9/11 imagery. If you want children to learn about 9/11, show them news footage and witness accounts. Then teach about the politics and religions that led up to the event and what happened afterwards (in response to and the just because's). But kids of that age, again, really aren't ready (as a whole) to be told, let alone understand, what really happened.
Regardless of what you may think, Wars, Nazis, 9/11, etc, just simply aren't coloring book material. Lets keep kids coloring books to Spongebob and Animals. When they are old enough to understand and respect what happened, then they can be exposed.
All this is of course from a schooling perspective. If you want to teach your kids about the realities of the world at home at whatever age you choose, please feel free!
Re: (Score:2)
And while you are at it, keep those kids away from Grimm's fairy tales.
Re:Wrong decision (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wrong decision (Score:4, Informative)
The best reason to take it down now is that it is irrelevant.
*Cough Splutter*
What? How could you possibly say it's irrelevant?? In October/November last year in California wildfires burned down at least 900 homes! In Australia just a few weeks ago 200 people lost their lives in the Victorian bushfires! Disasters continue to happen all the time.
It seems to me that have absolutely no idea what this coloring book is about. I suggest you go back to the GP and follow the link and actually READ IT like you were invited to. Then you can come back and start throwing your opinions around.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Somehow I really doubt that details beyond: "New York", "World Trade Center Towers", "Airplanes", "Fire", and "Collapse" were involved. If you think honestly think that these details are too much, then you and your girlfriend are seriously underestimating that children understand the very very basics of th
Remove all 9/11 images (Score:3, Insightful)
It's like trying to take guns and cannons out of civil war coloring books.
It happened and it's history. People need to know the truth.
Vampires, Garlic, Elephants, and Donkeys (Score:2, Informative)
Remove all 9/11 images is what the government is saying. Please forget this ever happened.
Because the more fixated you are on the events of 9/11, the less likely you are to vote Democrat. Or so the prevailing sentiment on both sides of the political aisle goes. Republicans trot out the images every opportunity they get when up for election, from dogcatcher through president, and the Democrats feed the Marketing Mindset by running from them like vampires from garlic -- or doing stunts like this.
I think it
Re: (Score:2)
And an appropriate way to teach kids about it is to have them color in pictures of burning buildings and planes aiming for buildings?
Sorry, big bag of fail there. Kids who need coloring books to learn about a terrorist attack do not need to learn the history yet. Wait until they are older, when it can be taught as history and discussed rationally, instead of indoctrinating their very young minds.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, as a publication from FEMA related to disaster response, it probably made a lot of sense when it was released.
I seriously doubt that the book talks much about terrorists and "indoctrinates young minds". On the contrary, removing the book (assuming it talks about how to deal with people being hurt and dying unexpectedly) initiates it's own fair share of indoctrination, don't you think? Ever tell a kid "you can't read/watch/see that", and have them ask you why? You learn a lot about yourself and your
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If I ever have kids, the first step will be to teach them that I'm a hypocrite.
After that, when they ask why not, I can tell them I am an asshole, while emphasizing that they aren't to use such language.
Re: (Score:2)
I love it. (Score:2)
FEMA selling the books == indoctrination.
FEMA removing the books == indoctrination.
If selling the books or removing the books both result in indoctrination, does that mean FEMA == indoctrination? :)
It just goes to show you the power of perspective. Mine is that FEMA shouldn't have published the thing in the first place, because it does nothing to actually prepare kids for disaster events (a stated purpose of FEMA). I wouldn't call its publication indoctrination and I wouldn't call its removal censorship:
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"A Scary Thing Happened", and the kids were going to be thinking about it, and maybe drawing it anyway. Maybe it might have been good to let them know (via a coloring book) that scary things are rare, and that happy t
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry, big bag of fail there. Kids who need coloring books to learn about a terrorist attack do not need to learn the history yet.
I'm not sure someone who has to describe something as a "big bag of fail" has a proper perspective on what children need much less how to educate them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Is what the government is saying. Please forget this ever happened.
DHS, Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, TSA, color-coded 'Terrorists Might Get Us Today' alert levels, Boston freaking out over L.E.D.'s, troops in Afghanistan, troops in Iraq, 'No Fly' lists, etc...
I think that genie is irrevocably out of the bottle, but it would still not surprise me if you were correct.
It happened and it's history. People need to know the truth./quote
And remember it to avoid the same mistakes.(we seem to be having trouble with this one)
Just remember kiddies, when you stick your head in the sand, it puts your butt up in the air for easy access...have plenty of lube ready.
Karma restored! (Score:2)
This was simply done to balance the karma equation, after terrorizing most of lower Manhattan with a 747 and a fighter jet.
Karma restored. Yay government!
You can clearly see! (Score:5, Funny)
In those coloring book images, you can clearly see that the towers were rigged for demolition! See, I just drew in a team of CIA operatives with a TNT plunger! COVER UP! I call COVER UP!
Next on the list for removal (Score:3, Funny)
FEMA's Katrina Snorkel & Search underwater body hunt field kit
The SEC's Big Book of Why Daddy Contemplates Suicide guide to financial hardship for kids
The FDA's Crush&Snort Mortar and Pestle Set
Look for a complete list to be published by early summer.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's not very funny. However, the primary point of the post was to lampoon how ridiculous the catastrophe coloring book idea is. Whether or not you agree with that point is something else, but I hope you considered the idea.
Off-topic, completely, I know... but it seems there are so many rush-moderators now, maybe you'll consider thinking about it next time.
I'll be the karma whore (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a copy of the coloring book: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/pdf/femacoloringbook.pdf [thesmokinggun.com]
Re:I'll be the karma whore (Score:5, Insightful)
Why can't they change the cover, change the image on that page, and MOVE ON!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'll be the karma whore (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree. I'd never heard of this book before now (I am from the UK) and expected something either frightening/sickly sweet. It's actually good.
If anything the only problem I can see with the use of the 9/11 image on the front is that it's 'out of date' - in the sense that there have been a number of more recent disasters that it may be better to refer to (given the target age).
Change the cover and it's good to go, no?
I like the book! (Score:2)
The only thing that did annoy me was the christian cross on the last page, though at least it was very subtle.
Re: (Score:2)
putting the towers on the front cover was a bit PR mistake though. If they hadnt done that they probably would have avoided this whole mess.
You cant judge a book from its cover, but most people do anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a big deal (Score:3, Insightful)
While I agree it's a bit odd to have the twin towers getting hit by airplanes in a coloring book, I wouldn't have a problem with my kids coloring the picture.
Serves the same function as Fairy Tales (Score:3, Interesting)
..to teach kids about bad stuff.
Hansel and Gretel -- your parents can't feed you so they abandon you in the woods to starve to death. Kids had to be exposed to the realities of the world, which despite our attempts to pretend otherwise, were way worse for your typical non-aristocrat in 17th century Europe. Abuse. Abandonment. Starvation. Fairy Tales served as a way to expose kids to what might happen next.
How is that story -- which was a real threat back when famine and starvation weren't just inspirations for pop music sing-alongs -- any worse than a 9/11 coloring book which tries to help kids understand what happened?
We're so fucked when the response is to just shelter kids from everything. Shelter them from nothing. Expose them carefully and they will learn.
The coloring book is late wrt relevancy (Score:2)
It's been over 7 years since 9/11, so I'm not sure how relevant painting burning towers now would be for a kid who probably wasn't born yet.
For those who say history shouldn't be covered up, that's true, but this isn't a history book. It's a coloring book aimed toward coping with disaster.
Airplanes! (Score:5, Funny)
So that's why they flew air force one over New York City. They were making a live action version of this comic book.
In another news... (Score:2)
I want one! (Score:2)
That's so stupid it's passed around to the other side to become genius. I totally want a copy.
What's the spirally thing to the left? A tornado or the Tasmanian Devil?
Coloring Book (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/pdf/femacoloringbook.pdf
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What happened to "9/11 - Never Forget". When did it become "9/11 - Never Forget, But Don't Tell the Children!!".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess we should having coloring books for the blown-off limbs of soldier who got caught by IEDs in Iraq.
It happened. Certainly, it's something one should know about. But it's in very poor taste.
Re: (Score:2)
Children colouring in a terrorist attack... This doesn't worry anyone?
It doesn't worry me. Yes, it will probably desensitize them, but considering the overreaction our nation had to the killing of fewer citizens in a terrorist attack than we lose on the highways to drunk driving on a holiday weekend, I think we can use some desensitizing.
Re:Yes, clearly misinterpreted (Score:4, Interesting)
A certain amount of desensitization is necessary to live.
I open the paper every day to see a two-page spread of people who died. If I wasn't desensitized to death to a certain degree and instead had a huge emotional reaction to everyone who had died, I'd be screwed.
You don't want kids to be callous, but you don't want them to live in fear, either.
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't want to see green flames and purple pictures of the WTC Towers. And where are the people jumping?
I mean, how far do you take it? I have a feeling a lot of people's problems is the coloring book to light heartedness relationship. I know it's mine, I don't want to hide kids from 9/11 nor do I want to shove it down their throats.
So, while I'll have discussions with young kids, watch news footage with older ones, and visit the memorial with both I don't want plush toys, coloring books or theme song
Re:Yes, clearly misinterpreted (Score:5, Interesting)
The coloring book was a well thought out resource then for allowing toddlers work out their emotions from that event.
Honestly, can you imagine how scary it would have been to be a 4 year old during 9/11? We adults, the folk they looked to for guidance, were primarily broken. Most of the people I knew back then were completely at a loss on how to act, what to think, or even what to say, they just sat there organically BSOD'ed.
Now imagine you are a kid and your parents are doing this, and the TV is saying we are under attack, showing buildings falling and people jumping out. Over and over again.
The kids back then needed something to help them cope, and giving them the opportunity to draw it in a coloring book, as much as it sounds counter intuitive, is pretty much the standard "coping technique" any child psychologist will suggest for children who've experienced a tramatic event.
On the other hand, I really don't see it being as useful today. I would have supported removing it, not because of 'negative pressure' but simply because it was no longer relevant or useful for the purpose it was created.
don't even let your kids watch this stuff. (Score:2)
There are some things children are just NOT ready for, and watching 3000 people get killed is one of them. The best you could do is desensitize them to killing.
Right now, that book would be something helpful, but five years down the road, every cool kid will be laughing at this book and at 9/11. "Something scary happened"... will become a mockery.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And having spoken before seeing the link to the coloring book, I see that I'm wrong in part. I assumed due to the summary and the linked article that this was a 9/11 specific coloring book and thus that it was no longer relevant.
Now that I've read it and see it's a general "any disater" book that simply has two pictures that one would assume were the 9/11 attacks on the twin towers, I wouldn't have even supported removing it due to it's relevance.
The people putting pressure on FEMA to remove it are idiots,
Re:Yes, clearly misinterpreted (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes.
One thing that I have never really understood.... whats so bad about being desensitized?
I mean really, do we think that the proper reaction, in just about any situation, is to immediately reduce yourself to a quivering blob of jelly? Isn't desensitization exactly what you want when a major event happens and you have to keep a calm and level head and act rationally?
I mean seriously, other than a bunch o fhand waving about the bogus dangers of "desensitization" is there really any way at all that this could be, in the least bit, harmful to children?
Seriously, if we had been a bit more "desensitized" to this extremely rare event, by a very small number of people (who are mostly all dead or captured), then maybe we wouldn't have overreacted so badly.
At current count, adding security to cockpit doors is the SINGLE change I have seen since 9/12 thats made anyone any safer. In reality, the attack vector was one that relied on passengers believing they would be involved in a bloodless standoff that was exploited. 9/11 was a 100% self correcting problem, as it educated airline passengers to a new type of terrorist plot.
As of about 11 am on 9/11 the plot could not have been repeated ever again. No new "security measures" were needed. However, being nation of ultra-sensitive cowards who like to hide behind big police forces and military might, we did a lot more than that.
I see desensitization as a good thing. Lets have them color in some suicide bomb belts while they are at it. so maybe next time we can act like mature adults rather than sacred little children.
-Steve
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry but I think exposing children to this sort of material will desensitise them to such actions if (when) they happen again... Is that what we really want?
Yes, by all means. We should keep them fearful and unable to deal with situations and concepts that even adults have difficulty dealing with.
Re:Yes, clearly misinterpreted (Score:4, Insightful)
Early exposure to things almost always leads to better handling of it and less severe consequences then later in life.
Re:Who thinks of this stuff? (Score:4, Informative)
...The individuals on the terrorist training cards are no more random than the airplanes, tanks, and trucks on the NATO/Warsaw Pact training cards.
They're not used to fuel hate, they're used to familiarize soldiers with the appearance of specific human beings so that they don't pass by unnoticed. Kind of like "wanted" posters, but made in a way that they're likely to be looked at more often.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not used to fuel hate, they're used to familiarize soldiers with the appearance of specific human beings so that they don't pass by unnoticed. Kind of like "wanted" posters, but made in a way that they're likely to be looked at more often.
Which is probably true of the original decks distributed to US soldiers in Iraq. But is definitely not true of the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands more decks sold on ebay and hundreds of websites to those who have zero chance of encountering the people depicted on the cards.
Re: (Score:2)
What are you talking about? The only vaguely similar thing I could think of is the Iraq War playing cards. (First relevant link I found was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most-wanted_Iraqi_playing_cards [wikipedia.org])
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Now, would you care to rescind your flamebait?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm... it's still torture, even if you can argue that it was defensible.
If I walked into a camp in Pakistan and shot Osama Bin Laden in the head, it would still be murder, or at the very least, assassination (aka, fancy political murder). Whether it was justified or not does not change what the action was.
Now, given that everyone tortured under the Bush regime had *not* been committed of a crime, that multiple serious studies have shown that torturing is not a useful way to acquire reliable information, and
Re: (Score:2)
I think our poseur of a president should watch those videos every morning as he eats breakfast. Then maybe he won't be so quick to call waterboarding "torture."
It has nothing to do with them... however evil, horrible, or unlike us they are... or even how much they deserve to have horrible things happen to them.
It's about US, our values, and what we stand for. It's about being willing to say we won't sacrifice our principles just because we're frightened of some bogeyman.
There is always some bogeyman and if
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, it's only torture when other countries do it. When our country does it, it's a valuable interrogation technique.
But hey, just because torture is generally considered an unreliable method of gaining information, why shouldn't we do it anyway? It proves we're tough, right?