A 9-11 Message - RF Cafe Forums

9/11/2003

Greetings Everyone:

On this 2nd anniversary of the terrorist attacks on American soil, I want to personally thank all of the people of all the nations of the world that were quick to come to our aid in the search for survivors at the WTC site, and for offering condolences for our murdered civilians and the heroic emergency response workers that perished in the rescue efforts. Yes, even France and Germany mourned with us then. Perhaps because the aggression was so blatant and was committed with the determination of suicidal forces, the entire world felt helplessly vulnerable. No one knew if a series of similar attacks were imminent across the globe. The wagons were circled and the world waited.

Because of immediate coordinated and independent actions taken everywhere, a barrier was put in place that prevented the cowardly scum from committing further acts of terror. Partisan differences were cast aside out of concern for the safety of all citizens. Many doves were instantly converted to hawks as the realization set in that no matter how nice you try to be to everyone, there is always someone that would kill you if given a chance. Still, others danced in the streets in joyous celebration while the apologists were busy insisting that we try to understand why the terrorists would want to hurt us.

Appeasement never has been and never will be a cure to aggression; it’s a Band-Aid at best. President George W. Bush knew this to be fact, and acted accordingly. Within weeks our forces were spread throughout the world hunting down and destroying the evil where it lives. Much to the chagrin of the terrorists, this effort has not been “another Mogadishu.” While the usual suspects protested at home and abroad, our brave troops were crushing the opposition everywhere. While the appeasers have demanded that we change our tactics and try to reason with the killers, we have strengthened our resolve to destroy the terrorists’ ability to ever attack us again. So far, so good.

Predictably, time passed and the shock of the event wore off in many people’s minds, resulting in complacency and even contempt. The vigilance of our protectors is to blame. Ironically – and tragically - the very success of our war against terrorism has brought about the situation. Had we done nothing, the entire world would likely be living on a day-to-day basis like the Israelis do – under constant, unannounced attacks against innocent civilians. Indeed, many of those who were the most hawkish in the weeks following 9-11 are now doing all they can to harm the effort that has spared their tails. Some have purposely put our people in harm’s way by their actions – you know of whom I speak.

Two years later, the Taliban no longer rules Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein no longer tortures and kills his own people while hosting terrorist training camps, the Philippines are largely rid of their training camps, terrorist cells inside the U.S., the U.K., Saudi Arabia, and across Europe and Africa have been broken up, and the world knows with certainty that aggression against the United States will no longer go unanswered. Fortunately, we still have a lot of “cowboys” here in America.

Today, the battlefront is in Iraq. A recent news release indicated that the terrorists of the world have accepted Dubyah’s challenge to “bring it on!” The battle WILL happen somewhere – better there where our troops have amassed than on U.S. soil, don’t you agree? Keep them engaged there so they don’t use all their energies trying to come here. That’s a pretty smart strategy if you ask me.

Comments?


Sincerely,
Kirt Blattenberger

Agree on this post.

The biggest challenge facing America today is the lies perpetuated in the name of humanity by the Democrats and entertainers.

For example Mr. Depp made a statement about America being a puppy dog with large teeth, when comparing of America to Europe. Therfore, Europe must be the snarling nasty old Rotweiler, as they brought the world Hitler, Neopolian and other despots. His statement was made to appease his left leaning SO and her freinds. He just wanted to become one of the in-crowd in France were he lives.

These people say what is politically correct just to be popular.

What is alarming is the number of Americans in small town USA who because of an affiliation with politically motivated group parrot this garbage. For example, the other day in Wal-Mart I was picking up a prescription. The woman in front of me who had to pay for prescription and submit the bill to Medicaid was mad because they just don't hand out the money like they use to. She then proceeded to blame it on Bush and his war in Iraq. I could not help but correct here that the two were unrelated incidents. Informing her that the Islamic Extremist are closer to home than she realizes and that was the true goal of the war in Iraq. She shurgged off my comments because she felt the tax payers owed her the handouts she needed.

America is becoming a land of sheep, who follow those that throw them scraps of food. The country is moving away from self reliance toward one that is dependant upon a host. The host will one day be the benovlent Islamic Church, whom will make everyone conform to their ideal society.

better to screw off than be a screw up <hint hint>

Editorial: Truth / Too little of it on Iraq


Published 09/17/2003

Richard Cheney is not a public relations man for the Bush administration, not a spinmeister nor a political operative. He's the vice president of the United States, and when he speaks in public, which he rarely does, he owes the American public the truth.

In his appearance on "Meet the Press" Sunday, Cheney fell woefully short of truth. On the subject of Iraq, the same can be said for President Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz. But Cheney is the latest example of administration mendacity, and therefore a good place to start in holding the administration accountable. The list:

• Cheney repeated the mantra that the nation ignored the terrorism threat before Sept. 11. In fact, President Bill Clinton and his counterterrorism chief, Richard Clarke, took the threat very seriously, especially after the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000. By December, Clarke had prepared plans for a military operation to attack Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, go after terrorist financing and work with police officials around the world to take down the terrorist network.

Because Clinton was to leave office in a few weeks, he decided against handing Bush a war in progress as he worked to put a new administration together.

Instead, Clarke briefed national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Cheney and others. He emphasized that time was short and action was urgent. The Bush administration sat on the report for months and months. The first high-level discussion took place on Sept. 4, 2001, just a week before the attacks. The actions taken by the Bush administration following Sept. 11 closely parallel actions recommended in Clarke's nine-month-old plan. Who ignored the threat?

• Cheney said that "we don't know" if there is a connection between Iraq and the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States. He's right only in the sense that "we don't know" if the sun will come up tomorrow. But all the evidence available says it will -- and that Iraq was not involved in Sept. 11.

Cheney offered stuff, but it wasn't evidence. He said that one of those involved in planning the attack, an Iraqi-American, had returned to Iraq after the attack and had been protected, perhaps even supported, by Saddam Hussein. That proves exactly nothing about Iraq's links to the attack itself.

Cheney also cited a supposed meeting in Prague between hijacker Mohamed Atta and a senior Iraqi intelligence officer -- but the FBI concluded that Atta was in Florida at the time of the supposed meeting. The CIA always doubted the story. And according to a New York Times article on Oct. 21, 2002, Czech President Vaclav Havel "quietly told the White House he has concluded that there is no evidence to confirm earlier reports" of such a meeting.

Moreover, the United States now has in custody the agent accused of meeting with Atta. Even though he must know how much he would benefit by simply saying, "Yes, I met Atta in Prague," there has been no announcement by the administration trumpeting that vindication of its belief in an Iraq-Sept. 11 link.

• In trying to make that link, Cheney baldly asserted that Iraq is the "geographic base" for those who struck the United States on Sept. 11. No, that would be Afghanistan.

• On weapons of mass destruction, Cheney made a number of statements that were misleading or simply false. For example, he said the United States knew Iraq had "500 tons of uranium." Well, yes, and so did the U.N. inspectors. What Cheney didn't say is that the uranium was low-grade waste from nuclear energy plants, and could not have been useful for weapons without sophisticated processing that Iraq was incapable of performing.

Cheney also said, "To suggest that there is no evidence [in Iraq] that [Saddam] had aspirations to acquire nuclear weapons, I don't think is valid." It's probably not valid; Saddam wanted nuclear weapons. But Cheney is changing the subject: The argument before the war wasn't Saddam's aspirations; it was Saddam's active program to build nuclear weapons.

Cheney also said "a gentleman" has come forward "with full designs for a process centrifuge system to enrich uranium and the key parts that you need to build such a system." That would be scientist Mahdi Obeidi, who had buried the centrifuge pieces in his back yard -- in 1991. Obeidi insisted that Iraq hadn't restarted its nuclear weapons program after the end of the first Gulf War. The centrifuge pieces might have signaled a potential future threat, but they actually disprove Cheney's prewar assertion that Iraq had, indeed, "reconstituted" its nuclear-weapons program.

Cheney also said he put great store in the ongoing search for Saddam's WMD program: "We've got a very good man now in charge of the operation, David Kay, who used to run UNSCOM [the U.N. inspection effort]." In fact, Kay did not run UNSCOM; for one year he was the chief inspector for the International Atomic Energy Agency's team in Iraq.

But it's funny Cheney should mention Kay. Last summer, the leader of the 1,400-person team searching for WMD expressed great confidence that they would find what they were looking for. He said he wouldn't publicize discoveries piecemeal but would submit a comprehensive report in mid-September. Apparently he has submitted the report to George Tenet at the CIA. The question now is whether it will ever be made public; several reports in the press have suggested that Kay has come up way short. In five months, 1,400 experts haven't found the WMD locations that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said before the war were well-known to the United States.

Cheney also said that an investigation by the British had "revalidated the British claim that Saddam was, in fact, trying to acquire uranium in Africa -- what was in the State of the Union speech." The British investigation did nothing of the kind. A parliamentary investigative committee said the documents on the uranium are being reinvestigated, but that, based on the existence of those documents, the Blair government made a "reasonable" assertion and had not tried to deliberately mislead the British people.

To explore every phony statement in the vice president's "Meet the Press" interview would take far more space than is available. This merely points out some of the most egregious examples. Opponents of the war are fond of saying that "Bush lied and our soldiers died." In fact, they'd have reason to assert that "Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz lied and our soldiers died." It's past time the principals behind this mismanaged war were called to account for their deliberate misstatements.

For information supporting the points made in this editorial, go to https://www.startribune.com/2cents.

© Copyright 2003 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

Well aren't you a sage for being able to copy and paste someone else's work. We could do point-counterpoint all day long by violating copyright's, which you have done here. I can match all of your points with counterpoints from the political Right. The main difference is, the points printed from the Left come from the major news outlets - you know, the "unbiased" from ALL the major cities in the U.S. Yeah, the tolerant and diversity-loving folks that want to shut down Fox News because they aren't far enough Left, they're the ones.

Unless you have written permission by the Star Tribune (and I know you don't), you are NOT permitted to replicate an entire article - or a major portion of a copyrighted article. Quoting the source with a link to their website does not satisfy the copyright requirements. You may reference the work with a minor excerpt and then link to the full article, but you have broken the law here. If I were the RF Cafe webmaster, I'd edit this posting to steer clear of prosecution potentials.

Of course, the lamebrain that posted this tripe doesn't care what the law says - it's whatever seems right in his/her own mind. The only time the law matters to this type is when someone violates his/her "rights." Of course, many of those "rights" are imagined and not found in the Constitution. This person will steal "little things" from his/her employer, and will want the death penalty (the only time it's permitted in his/her opinion) if some kid swipes a lawn ornament off his/her property.

Why don't you go over to the RF Globalnet "Just For Fun" forum - they love your type over there.

I'll do a little research on the copyright issue, and might edit the posting down to the opening sentence and then use the link to the full story.

I do agree that responding to an original posting with nothing but the full text of an article created by somebody else is rather lame.

Good job Kirt. Keep it up!

Dittos here. I got fed up with all the anti-Americanism on the RF Globalnet Just For Fun forum, and stopped posting there weeks ago. The same whackos that implored me to leave them alone to conduct their hate speech now beg daily for my return so that they might take swipes at me. There's the typical Liberal love and diversity for you!

I see this forum area is rather new, and not a lot of comments have been posted yet. I registered to be able to participate in some of the polls, but didn't need to for this forum, anyway.