I think you underestimate the power of fearmongering from the bully pulpit, and the way that the Bush Admin used 9/11 as a vehicle to target their "enemies", both foreign and domestic. "With Us Or Against Us" was applied universally, even to domestic politicians who did their best to be on the "With Us" side. Witness the 2002 midterms.
It was, after all, the biggest political windfall since Pearl Harbor, and to hear the Admin and their pontificators tell it, there was a terrarist! under every rock.
Sometimes, it's wise to pick one's battles and live to fight another day. Or would it have been better if Dems had basically stuck their own heads on the chopping block so that some rightwing toadies could replace them in congress?
No offense intended. I do think, however, that we all really want to forget just how profoundly the American consciousness was manipulated in the wake of 9/11. We (the collective We) all like to think we're smarter and more rational than we really are, and don't want to squarely examine instances where we weren't. And that's not about you or me personally, since I suspect you never did fall for it, but about our countrymen in general and our friends, neighbors and families in particular... I hate to consider the idea that we really were that stupid, but would rather put it in terms that the Bushistas really were that good, that they could successfully manipulate otherwise rational folks into accepting things that really were wrong given the right triggering event.
If anything, congresscritters are probably more susceptible than the rest of us. I told anybody who'd listen that it was a crock of shit, but I doubt many congressmen or senators could have been re-elected doing the same thing at the time... they certainly didn't perceive that they could, anyway, and they were probably right.
It is sickening how you can minimize the loss of 3000 lives and the direct attack on New York City as a "political windfall". Not to mention you minimized the attack on pearl harbour as a "political windfall".
Your views on politicians is pathetic if you see them as nothing but snakes who sit and wait for there countrymen to die to take advantage of it.
Thanks for the Ad Hom, Richard E. Generally, that means you really have nothing to say, no actual argument beyond some gut level emotional response- which is precisely what the Bushistas used and abused in the wake of 9/11, and what you personally still seek to exploit in support of the torture agenda.
I didn't use the whole thing as an excuse for pre-emptive war on false pretenses, or for the indefinite imprisonment of people I couldn't actually convict of anything in a court of law, nor did I use it as a bludgeon against my political opponents, either. But the Bush Admin did, so if you want to heap scorn on somebody, put it on the perps, not on those who simply recognize it for what it was and still is- skillful and callous exploitation of a national tragedy for partisan political gain.
I didn't use the whole thing as an excuse for pre-emptive war on false pretenses, or for the indefinite imprisonment of people I couldn't actually convict of anything in a court of law, nor did I use it as a bludgeon against my political opponents, either. But the Bush Admin did, so if you want to heap scorn on somebody, put it on the perps, not on those who simply recognize it for what it was and still is- skillful and callous exploitation of a national tragedy for partisan political gain.
For it to be a use of an Ad Hom your argument would have to be a factual claim, which it is not. You wish to use wildly inaccurate statements expect to get response such as mine back.
The attack at Pearl Harbor was not a "political Windfall" as you like to call it, but an attack on an American Naval Base from a defined state that was followed by a declaration of War.
The attack on the Twin Towers was not a "political Windfall" but an attack on civilians by a group of people who cheer in the deaths of civilians who had a state backing them up.
You want to bitch about Bush? You want to bitch about Iraq? About the false war in Iraq, about the war posturing with Iran, than fine go ahead and do that, don't minimize these real attacks that resulted in real deaths to further your own political grandstanding.
Political grandstanding, Richard E? That's exactly what the Bush Admin did with 9/11, using it to beat down anybody who got in their way, and to twist public sentiment into something akin to your own odious support for the ruthless fearmongering and flaunting of the rule of law and the Constitution itself by the chief executive and his minions.
I agree he was an opportunist using a tragedy to consolidate power. I take issue with your referencing of both those tragedies as windfalls that is all Jhhnn. There was nothing positive to come from those tragedies at all, it was opportunistic, but your use of windfall makes it seem like republicans were rejoicing.
Shee-it. Neocons wanted war, sought it fervently. They said so, time and time again, all through the Clinton years. With GWB in the Whitehouse, all they needed was an excuse, a batch of lemons from which to fashion lemonade, and they found it in 9/11. Don't tell me they found no pleasure in it. They barely contained their glee, unlike the Israeli intelligence agents who jumped for joy across the Hudson as they watched the second plane slam into the WTC.
Rumsfeld and the rest might have wasted a few split seconds in mourning, followed by a concerted and callous effort to fashion perception of those events into a bludgeon suitable for their purposes. In a more primitive society, they'd have used the skins of the victims to make war drums, and anybody with a lick of sense should recognize that.
they did exactly what he said..they were fucking overjoyed because it enabled them to enact their plans..if you can't admit that to yourself, that's your problem..have fun living in a bubble
are you trying to tell me that they were sad that they could get away with "consolidating power"?
There plans were in motion from the Clinton era, and would have been father along if not for the debacle of the Lewinsky scandal. You are kidding yourself if you think that the suggestions of PNAC were only considered by NeoCons in Bush's room.
Yours and Jhnns inability to see anything beyond a very simple explanation of the invasion of Iraq is pathetic, especially when you use the death of the people of the twin towers as a tool for the furthering of your own political ideas, ironically, ideas which contain accusations of people doing the same thing as you. We were going into Iraq one way or another after Bush was elected, anyone who had paid any attention to institutional papers that were coming out in the late 90's, early 2000 knew that. All 9/11 did was put us in Afghanistan, something everyone agreed was needed.
You accuse people of rejoicing at 9/11, let here you are rejoicing at it because it gave you a basis of your blame to attack Bush for mistakes that had nothing to do with it.
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Nonsense. If under exceptional circumstances we would want a law ignored, then the law should be modified to point out what those exceptional circumstances are. Otherwise, those in power can just ignore whatever laws they want, whenever they want, and claim that "exceptional" circumstances warranted their actions.
No one should be above the law. No one.
That opinion is too restrict, the law should be arbitrary, it's main purpose to protect the masses. Some lost assumption that people will begin systemic abuse of the law if it is too lenient is the reason we have so many laws in this country, useless laws for the most part. Law is not a tool of freedom, but one of restriction.
Considered? Maybe so, but they couldn't be acted upon w/o the conflation of Iraq and Al Qaeda, post 9/11.
I certainly didn't use the bully pulpit and the boogeyman to spend trillions on war and cause the deaths of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of people, engage in illegal domestic surveillance, torture, false imprisonment w/o charge or trial, scorn the rule of law and the Constitution itself. So let's just say my political agenda is a little different than the quasi-fascists of the last 8 years, OK?
Pure conjecture in pursuit of obfuscation and justification.
You're right that GWB&Co wanted that invasion- he told his advisors to find him a way. 9/11 was the way, even though the Iraqis had no involvement in that tragic event. Conflation was achieved through the masterful application of propaganda and fearmongering (plus a little bloodlust), repeated endlessly by the Admin and their sycophants. As Goebbels pointed out, repeating a lie often enough makes it the truth, and that's exactly what the Bush Admin did- mercilessly, relentlessly, w/o regard for anything other than their agenda.
Your political Agenda is different but it is based on the same use of a tragedy to further it. Which is equally pathetic.
I haven't exploited tragedy, Richard E- it was your heroes who did that. I merely point out what they did, and the craven nature of those words and deeds.
How is it my heroes if I agree with you about how sickening it was what they did? You are delusional and far too partisan.
First of all, I never claimed that it began with the bush administration..and secondly you are completely making shit up when you say that I am somehow rejoicing in it. I didn't even have a political opinion at the time that Bush first came into office. It confirmed NOTHING to me. My opinion was formed by how they handled the situation and then going back and looking at their opinions and agendas retroactively.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter