Clintonshits fear 9/11
So Michael Moore can put out a movie that he admits is pure propaganda and riddled with outright lies. The Democrats embrace the movie as truth and the last word on the perfidy of the Boosh administration. Trouble is that most of it simply isn't so.
So now along comes ABC and wants to do a docudrama on the lead up to 9/11. The FACTS used here are all beyond dispute, only the characterizations of the personnel in the Clinton administration are less than favorable: they reuptedly depict a bunch of weenies who can't do anything right (sound like the Booshies?). This opposed to many of the Moore 9/11 facts that weren't facts at all.
Once would think that the Clinton administration was still in power -- and Hills was NOT part of that administration, merely married to crooked-schwanz. So why do they have any sway at all with ABC? If there are lies, let them go ahead and force a retraction and sue them. Trouble is, if what ABC wants to screen is not comprised of lies, then ABC has an absolute defense: truth. OOOhh, wouldn't that be inconvenient for the liberals (and Hillaron -- combo of Hillary and felon), unable to sue or even deny because the truth is too ugly. ABC by contrast could stand up and state: "so sue us" in response to Clintonclan charges of slander.
Now the best part of this is that prior to last night nobody had even seen the new edited version of the ABC program: early versions were sent to journalists (many of whom were Clinton cronies or sympathizers) and leaked to the persons involved. Hillaron said, "[m]y bottom-line view, is that when it comes to something as serious and historically significant as 9/11, the truth is enough and we ought to stick to the facts.” Yeah. But one wonders why she did not stand up and complain about liberal propagana? Madeleine Albright and Sandy berger are particularly incensed at their portrayal as person who stood in the way of "taking Osama out." Funny, I would picture them in that exact role: primarily afraid that they might look bad for failing to complain or protest the sanctioning of Bin Laden. CYA. After all, that would be an example of a sovereign nation ASSASSINATING someone. Big bad liberal no-no.
For my part, having spent a number of years working in WTC 1, the North Tower, it was with an extremely heavy heart that I watched this morning's memorials. What happened there was evil on a scale that still has the power to confound, to make us sit in disbelief.... And to think that people emptied into the streets across the Arab world to dance, cheer and celebrate the deed. It shows a depth of hatred that most did not know existed and cannot fathom, even today some 5 years later. A bit more skill or luck on the part of the murderers, and the toll would have been much higher still. But what was it? Couldn't the powers of Al Qaeda find a couple of genuine airline pilots to do the deed? Or are people with that level of education beyond the grasp of those who would instigate mass murder? Do you need to find the ignorant and/or desperate to commit these acts?
Know what else? I can't think of any other group in the world that do that -- today. When was the last time you heard of some rabid Lutherans/Hindus/Jews hijacking an airliner to use as a tool to commit mass murder? Me neither.
But don't let's delude ourselves into thinking that we Westerners in the recent past haven't done our share of the atrocious. WW2 springs to mind, where we saw kamikaze fliers take solo shots at US vessels -- during a no-holds barred war. And we nuked them -- you could not call Hiroshima or Nagasaki as pivots for industrial production. But even then,the element of suicide as the vehicle was not present; it was premeditated murder from afar as in the fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden. Without getting too down on the Allies, the Germans and Japanese would have done the same to us -- as they proved countless times on other peoples before we got the chance to do it to them. Think: "Rape of Nanking, or Holocaust." Mind you, in the case of the Japanese, they probably would have taken women and children out as part of a suicide mission if they could have arranged it. I doubt the Germans would have.
Nexus between WW2 Japan and modern Islamofascism? Unthinking blind devotion to some ideal and a belief, genuinely founded, that their lives were worth nothing in comparison to the political/religious goal ... Shinto and Islam. Most Japanese today cannot get to grips with their actions in WW2 and coincidently, Shinto and the worship of the Emperor are almost unknown, at least in the form of 60 years ago.... Contrast this with the reluctance of many educated Muslims around the world to condemn 9/11 and suicide bombings.... This does not speak well of vast numbers of people. It may also speak to a view, at least commonly accepted on their part, that this war is "no holds barred" and comparable to WW2 -- in which case we had better wise up quickly and deal with them in the appropriate fashion.
So now along comes ABC and wants to do a docudrama on the lead up to 9/11. The FACTS used here are all beyond dispute, only the characterizations of the personnel in the Clinton administration are less than favorable: they reuptedly depict a bunch of weenies who can't do anything right (sound like the Booshies?). This opposed to many of the Moore 9/11 facts that weren't facts at all.
Once would think that the Clinton administration was still in power -- and Hills was NOT part of that administration, merely married to crooked-schwanz. So why do they have any sway at all with ABC? If there are lies, let them go ahead and force a retraction and sue them. Trouble is, if what ABC wants to screen is not comprised of lies, then ABC has an absolute defense: truth. OOOhh, wouldn't that be inconvenient for the liberals (and Hillaron -- combo of Hillary and felon), unable to sue or even deny because the truth is too ugly. ABC by contrast could stand up and state: "so sue us" in response to Clintonclan charges of slander.
Now the best part of this is that prior to last night nobody had even seen the new edited version of the ABC program: early versions were sent to journalists (many of whom were Clinton cronies or sympathizers) and leaked to the persons involved. Hillaron said, "[m]y bottom-line view, is that when it comes to something as serious and historically significant as 9/11, the truth is enough and we ought to stick to the facts.” Yeah. But one wonders why she did not stand up and complain about liberal propagana? Madeleine Albright and Sandy berger are particularly incensed at their portrayal as person who stood in the way of "taking Osama out." Funny, I would picture them in that exact role: primarily afraid that they might look bad for failing to complain or protest the sanctioning of Bin Laden. CYA. After all, that would be an example of a sovereign nation ASSASSINATING someone. Big bad liberal no-no.
For my part, having spent a number of years working in WTC 1, the North Tower, it was with an extremely heavy heart that I watched this morning's memorials. What happened there was evil on a scale that still has the power to confound, to make us sit in disbelief.... And to think that people emptied into the streets across the Arab world to dance, cheer and celebrate the deed. It shows a depth of hatred that most did not know existed and cannot fathom, even today some 5 years later. A bit more skill or luck on the part of the murderers, and the toll would have been much higher still. But what was it? Couldn't the powers of Al Qaeda find a couple of genuine airline pilots to do the deed? Or are people with that level of education beyond the grasp of those who would instigate mass murder? Do you need to find the ignorant and/or desperate to commit these acts?
Know what else? I can't think of any other group in the world that do that -- today. When was the last time you heard of some rabid Lutherans/Hindus/Jews hijacking an airliner to use as a tool to commit mass murder? Me neither.
But don't let's delude ourselves into thinking that we Westerners in the recent past haven't done our share of the atrocious. WW2 springs to mind, where we saw kamikaze fliers take solo shots at US vessels -- during a no-holds barred war. And we nuked them -- you could not call Hiroshima or Nagasaki as pivots for industrial production. But even then,the element of suicide as the vehicle was not present; it was premeditated murder from afar as in the fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden. Without getting too down on the Allies, the Germans and Japanese would have done the same to us -- as they proved countless times on other peoples before we got the chance to do it to them. Think: "Rape of Nanking, or Holocaust." Mind you, in the case of the Japanese, they probably would have taken women and children out as part of a suicide mission if they could have arranged it. I doubt the Germans would have.
Nexus between WW2 Japan and modern Islamofascism? Unthinking blind devotion to some ideal and a belief, genuinely founded, that their lives were worth nothing in comparison to the political/religious goal ... Shinto and Islam. Most Japanese today cannot get to grips with their actions in WW2 and coincidently, Shinto and the worship of the Emperor are almost unknown, at least in the form of 60 years ago.... Contrast this with the reluctance of many educated Muslims around the world to condemn 9/11 and suicide bombings.... This does not speak well of vast numbers of people. It may also speak to a view, at least commonly accepted on their part, that this war is "no holds barred" and comparable to WW2 -- in which case we had better wise up quickly and deal with them in the appropriate fashion.
posted by Zaphod at Monday, September 11, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home