It's so wrong, it's right
Well it looks like Salon had the same idea I had, given I had and still have some strange reactions and feelings about 9/11. And a First Person account in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution does reflect more people's views about this than you might believe. Hopefully this will be one of very few posts on the subject as the anniversary approaches.

First, the "proper" reactions: I was stunned by the whole thing, and knew it would be absolutely crazy at the office, if not for us, but for the rest of the company. There was lots of confusion whether we should've been there at work or gone home. I was worried for friends and relatives in New York and Washington that day but got word reasonably quickly that everyone was OK, and that I was fine as well. I ate up the CNN coverage, and being very impressed with new superstar hires Aaron Brown and Paula Zahn stepping up big time in their first considerable time on air for the network. I was very curious to see what non-news cable networks were doing that day (switching to other news feeds, altering schedules, going off the air or status quo). I was doing a lot of thinking about how the media was covering the day -- although from the perspective of covering a true disaster, as opposed to all the causes, etc. that would come up later (and is/was good or bad, depending on your point of view. The book of newspaper front pages from 9/11 and 9/12 by the Poynter Institute is an amazing collection.

Now the "improper" reactions: I was thinking of all those people who hate New York who might've rejoiced in seeing the towers attacked and seeing something bad happen to the city. (That attitude probably comes from dealing with anti-New York fans, especially those against the Yankees.)
-- Thinking how many people not living in New York would've cared less about the attacks (and having that indignant "Nooo York City???" bit from the Pace Picante ads swirling in my head). The fact that three of the planes originated in places other than New York probably debunked some of that.
-- All of those people screaming about a New York bias in the media (tangentially related to the anti-New York sports stuff): The instant images generated by local news helicopters, plus the dispatching of tons of reporters trying to get the many facets of the events that day doesn't happen in most places. Obviously everyone felt the impact of the events in some way or another, but the depth and urgency was felt a lot more because, oh yeah, it happened in the main base of the media. (Compare that to Oklahoma City, for instance.) Somewhat related to the New York media bias -- How come New York is getting all of this attention? What about the folks at the Pentagon or those who died in central Pennsylvania? Damn New York bias again.

I guess a lot of my reaction comes down to this: Many people despise New York in some way because of the power it wields over the rest of the country in different ways. And yet everyone seemed to run to its aid and give its sympathy (and continue to do so today) after the attacks. Hmm, this could be a lot like unhappy employees rallying around a tyranical boss after he suffers a heart attack or some other major illness/injury and then still kissing up to him when he returns, even though he's pretty much the same SOB he's always been.