How, Exactly, Are They Defending Our Freedom?
-
-
- shanklinmike
- added this
I do appreciate that the soldiers feel like they’re serving America…but defending our…freedom?
Our freedom? We Americans, here in the United States?
When I’m faced with this argument, it is hard to give a clear, coherent response for or against, because the claim makes no sense to me, whatsoever.
This is an honest question, not sarcasm:
What, exactly, does the conquest of Iraq have to do with American freedom?
***This article has been chosen as a discussion topic on PFP Movement Radio, http://www.blogtalkradio.com/pfpmovementradio Friday night at 6pm-8pm. Please Call In To The Show, 347-633-9636. COMMENTS will be included in the show so feel free to discuss or ask questions here on current.com as they will be addressed during the show. This article will also air on Freedom Hour Saturday at 9pm-10pm on Movement TV http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?page_id=36***
-
- groups:
- Community, Current Tonight
-
- tags:
- News, News and Politics, Politics, Current TV, 6 more
-
-
bullpcp
-
spanky07
"it's one of those things that i guess you just don't "get", and the sad thing is you never will."I couldn't have said it better myself.
- 2 years ago
-
bullpcp
-
-
bullpcp
-
I know this is asking for more than I could every hope to realistically expect to receive but beyond the military by its very existence acting as a general deterrent against mass open hostility, I would like a logical explanation as to how the vast majority of recent military action in any way shape or form protect the US from loss of freedom? That is a question that nobody has answered beyond basically stating it as some sort of incontrovertible obvious fact. Again, with all due respect, this article is obviously, if you read it, referring to recent large scale military action and past small scale military action that seems to not only NOT make us safer or defend or freedom but endanger us and make us LESS free. I can't understand how this would influence the validity of my opinions or rational but this view is shared by many military personal in the intelligence community, some of which I have had the pleasure of personal contact with, as well as many of the pentagons experts on the middle east. This is not meant to diminish our servicemen sacrifices only to call into question the necessity of such sacrifice and it's accomplishment of it's goals. It's tempting to assign value to their sacrifice because of the inherent horror of contemplating the alternative, that their sacrifices were in vain, that the atrocity of war have only made our world an uglier less safe place.
- 2 years ago
-
bullpcp
-
-
bombastinator
-
bullpcp:
You ever watch dog whisperer? One of the recurring themes of the show is at the start the owners believe they have a bad dog, and it turns out that the dog was good but the owner was the one causing the problem through ignorance or incompetence.
I vaguely remember Al Franken addressing this question once in a speech. I have failed to successfully google a transcript or video though I'm sure they exist somewhere.
- 2 years ago
-
bombastinator
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
bullpcp:
I heard that on the dog whisperer before.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
spanky07 [removed]
- This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
spanky07 [removed]
-
-
bombastinator
-
spanky07:
I'm not sure whom your statement is directed at. It could be any or all of the above posts. Since yours happens to directly follow mine i will assume it is me as it is entirely likely I deserve it at least as much as any of the other posters.
In light of your statement I think I may have come across as pretending to an authority I did not have, and which was inappropriate. I have edited the post to hopefully better reflect that. If or where you think I continue to be wrong I will believe you. You know better than me here.
As for the statement about the word freedom I still stand by that. I honestly think the term is being badly abused these days.
- 2 years ago
-
bombastinator
-
-
lovelander
-
spanky07:
You sure it wasn't for a pay check?
- 2 years ago
-
lovelander
-
-
jubal
-
spanky07:
oh your soooo tuff I am shaking in my boots.....not
- 2 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
bombastinator
-
"cross post" huh?
Same old problem won't post an article unless you access his private site even though he never has actual content there just another link.
[edit: see next post] [ I don't pretend to understand the experience. Everything I have heard is that unless you do it you just can't. All I can do is understand that i can't. My statement was basically parroting the views of servicemen I have talked to about this throughout my life. Since it's the kind of question that is generally only answered when asked by a child, the views I got were mostly from elder male vet relatives who had been out for sometime and had the space to become somewhat curmudgeonly, which for me means WWII and Korea. These people told me what attitudes they thought I should hold about such things and I have done my best to do internalize them. These men are all dead now, If they weren't I could ask them but this is what I think they more or less might have said to me had I asked them. I could be wrong. ]
In answer of your question though which I think is a fair one, The act of "defending our freedom" in this case is not the particulars of the fact that they are in Iraq or what they are doing there per se. The statement applies equally for instance to air force pilots braving dangerous weather to supply antarctic science bases.
It is joining the military, giving up some of their own freedoms and rights, and putting themselves in harms way for the betterment of us, the American people. it's not about freedom it's about service. They used to call it that. "the service" it didn't used to be "I was a soldier" it was " I was a serviceman".
[edit: addendum]
[If the actions of the military are not 'defending our freedoms' it's not their fault, it's our fault. The duty of the American civilian is to support them to the best ability, and to make good and informed decisions about the way the military should be applied. Most specifically without regard to our own personal or political advantage, but that of America as a whole and the military itself since they are the ones standing in service to do it.]The problem [with the term currently] is that the word freedom has been sloganized. The current refrain is "lovers of freedom". which has been bent into "those who agree with our platform". it's a standard technique. it's been going on for years. As the public becomes inured to the trick and the term loses power they will have to go and pollute a new word.
- 2 years ago
-
bombastinator
-
-
bullpcp
-
"How, Exactly, Are They Defending Our Freedom?"
This question should not be confused with being some sort of veiled insult against our military. Emotions aside the burden of proof should be on the side of proving how attacking Iraqi, or Afghanistan for that matter, has made us "freer". Military personnel being Injured, dying and killing are not, in and of themselves, even remotely sufficient proof of an increase in freedom or the avoidance of lose of freedom. Sometimes, as hard as it is to admit, people really do die for nothing. But lambs leading lions to slaughter shouldn't diminish our respect for the lion only our contempt for the lambs. - 2 years ago
-
bullpcp
-
-
jubal
-
bullpcp:
Exactly, we provoke the terrorism by terrorizing them.
- 2 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
bullpcp:
Who were terrorizing someone else.
It's vindictive circle and continuing it on either side is pretty asinine and childish....not just for America but for the Middle East as a whole.
Look at what's going with Israel and whoever.....
constant bickering over WHAT?
Nothing that is worth it.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
acontradiction [removed]
- This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
acontradiction [removed]
-
-
jubal
-
acontradiction:
Obama is not a messiah, if you believed that then you really are gullible.
- 2 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
spacemikey [removed]
-
Freedom to what? be good servants to your corporation, and your mortgage holder??? Give it a rest... Even if you aren't enslaved to jobs you don't want just to cover basic needs, you're still being fuct over at every turn. If you want to be happy in this country you have to pay for it. Prime example; Disney getting a copy write on the "happy birthday" song, they charge 10,000 dollars to record and reuse the song... (that shit should be public domain)
Take into consideration all this land and these resources were stolen from natives, and everyone's wealth comes into question as well.....
Free my ass...... ask Leonard Peltier about freedom...
There hasn't been a war fought for freedom since WWII, but every since then this society has been deluding it's to believe every soldier is a hero, or patriot.... BULLSHIT... It's about like someone taking a job in "Corrections" because they have job security, health insurance, and retirement in enslaving others... Well these soldier/hero's are only murdering and enslaving (which is far better). Bunch of fucking cowards, taking the easy way out.....Let uncle Sam, run your life for you and get paid (not thought involved, some restrictions apply, act now).....
The real freedom fighters aren't fighting wars with guns, depleted uranium, carpet bombs, and torture... The real patriots, heroes, freedom fighter are waging a war with a corrupt system that seeks to enslave and run everyones lives.... The ones defending freedom defend everyones freedoms, not the ideals of a corrupt money grubbing war machine....
- 2 years ago
-
spacemikey [removed]
-
-
plusaf [removed]
- This comment was removed by its owner.
-
plusaf [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
plusaf:
Admit to what you feel instead of pretend you're just facts and numbers and there won't be any pushing.
Lie....and I'll push.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
plusaf:
Jammer -
You're not saying anything though. I can appreciate the intellectual drive to find out what people are actually feeling, but you're just ambiguously moving from one whimsical phrase to another without making any real point at all.
Feel free to inject your next cloudy phrase here:
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
plusaf:
Feel free to be an individual sometime in the near future.
Be sure I'm there to see it actually happen.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
jubal
-
plusaf:
War for profit is fucked up and anybody who supports it is evil imsho.
War of defense is another matter entirely. That is why the 9.11 had to be the catalyst to move people into war again, because then they could justify attacking Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9.11.
- 2 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
rmann0581
-
The United States wasn't even supposed to have a standing army.
- 2 years ago
-
rmann0581
-
-
kennymotown
-
Your country is being run by for profit corporations, when compared to the rights corporations have you have none.
- 2 years ago
-
kennymotown
-
-
PirateSauce
-
Invading countries and killing millions of people makes us less safe as Americans. Common Sense. Our foreign policy is beyond broken. It's all about resources and profits, and we never see ANY of it.
OH, and boycott the military.
- 2 years ago
-
PirateSauce
-
-
Ares
-
PirateSauce:
Name ONE developed nation where resources and profit do not play a role in day-to-day dynamics. Please.
Boycott the military? Are you serious? I can't even begin to adequately explain all the things that are wrong and idiotic with that statement.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
oh_dear
-
PirateSauce:
how does one exactly boycott the military? their salaries are paid for through your taxes...and i'm sure you don't get a say in paying taxes or not.
- 2 years ago
-
oh_dear
-
-
maasanova
-
Does defending our freedoms include the Obama Department Of Justice to support extending key provisions of the Patriot Act, like spying on Americans?
- 2 years ago
-
maasanova
-
-
hunzedog
-
-
dont loose any sleep there..people talk about the casualties of war ? the collateral damages ?
these are children. - 2 years ago
-
hunzedog
-
-
rmann0581
-
If we really want to protect freedom, the United States empire around the world needs to stop.
- 2 years ago
-
rmann0581
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
CS – And finally Mr. President – Number 20; A few days after the attack, several newspapers as well as the FBI reported that a paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August 2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah’s visa was found in the remains of Flight 93 which went down in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victim’s bodies were vaporized and many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond recognition. And yet visas and paper passports which identify the perpetrators and back up the official version of events miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted steel buildings.
(The Senior aide appears again beside the President whispering in his ear. He then quickly moves off).
PBO – Well Charlie I can’t say this hasn’t been interesting. As I said earlier you’ve showed up today focused and organized. Regardless how I feel about the material you’ve presented, I must commend your dedication and zeal. However, our time here is up.
(the President rises from his chair , I do the same).
CS – Mr. President! One more second!
(The President starts towards the door – I follow him quickly step for step).
CS – Mr. President, I implore you based on the evidence you now possess, to use your Executive Power. Prove to us all Sir, that you do, in fact, care. Create a truly comprehensive and open Congressional investigation of 9/11 and its aftermath. The families deserve the truth, the American people and the rest of the free world deserve the truth. Mr. President -
(He pauses. We shake hands).
CS – Make sure you’re on the right side of history.
(The President breaks the handshake).
PBO – I am on the right side of history. Thank you Charlie, my staff and I will be in touch.
(I watch as he strides gracefully out of the room, the truth I provided him held firmly by his side; in the hand of providence.)Charlie Sheen
- 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm, CNN’s Aaron Brown reported that the building “has either collapsed, or is collapsing.”
CS – Number 13; Solicitor General Ted Olson’s claim that his wife Barbara Olsen called him twice from Flight 77, describing hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11 story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined after Olsen kept changing his story about whether his wife used her cell phone or the airplane phone. The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004. American Airlines confirmed that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have airplane phones on board.
According to the FBI, Barbara Olsen attempted to call her husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore Olsen must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife from Flight 77.
CS – Number 14; The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125ft in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no more than 16ft in diameter. The engines of the 757 would have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner, especially when contrasted with other images showing airplane crashes into buildings.
CS – Number 15; What is the meaning behind the following quote attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11 Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders were to let the plane find its target?
CS – Number 16; In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush administration was refusing to release a 900-page congressional report on 9/11 because it wanted to “avoid enshrining embarrassing details in the report,” particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings as well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight schools.
CS – Number 17; Top Pentagon officials cancelled their scheduled flights for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, following a security warning, cancelled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 18; The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that point it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones which formed an integral part of the official government version of events were technologically impossible at the time.
CS – Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath. They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of “state secret.” To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the public domain. - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, the answer to this question remains unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS – Number 4; In April 2004, USA Today reported, “In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.” One of the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS – Number 5; On September 12th 2007, CNN’s ‘Anderson Cooper 360′, reported that the mysterious “white plane” spotted and videotaped by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the White House shortly before 10am on the morning of 9/11, was in fact the Air Force’s E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a communications pod behind the cockpit; otherwise known as “The Doomsday Plane”.
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
CS – Number 6; Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph, they could still have defended the skies over Washington well before 9am, more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, however, they did not return until after 9:55am.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off on the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 7; WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS – Number 8; Flight 93 is fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03am. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down order at 10:10-10:20am and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation.
CS – Number 9; Scores of main stream news outlets reported that the F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11 hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS – Number 10; In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their mouths shut by FBI agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, “Their story raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at Ground Zero.”
CS – Number 11 – Hundreds of eye witnesses including first responders, fire captains, news reporters, and police, all described multiple explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS – Number 12; An astounding video uncovered from the archives shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their tapes from 9/11 had been “lost” before admitting that they made the “error” of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened without adequately explaining how they could have obtained advance knowledge of the event. - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
futuregen:
None of that explains the phone calls from the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
CS – Interesting angle sir. Nevertheless, Vice President Cheney didn’t stop there. In early 2008, Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh and MSNBC, both reported that Cheney had proposed to the Pentagon an outrageous plan to have the U.S. Navy create fake Iranian patrol boats, to be manned by Navy Seals, who would then stage an attack on US destroyers in the Strait of Hormuz. This event was to be blamed on Iran and used as a pretext for war. Does any of this information worry you Mr. President? Should we just ignore it, until these realities can be dismissed years from now by our children, as ancient history as well?
PBO – Of course this information worries me, yet it’s not nearly as worrisome as you sitting here today suspiciously implying that 9/11 was somehow allowed to happen or even orchestrated from the inside.
CS – Mr. President I am not suspiciously implying anything. I am merely exposing the documents and asking the questions that nobody in power will even look at or acknowledge. And as I stated earlier, I voted for you, I believed in your message of hope and change. Mr. President I have come to you specifically hoping for a change. A change in the perception that our government has not yet made itself open and accountable to the people. These are your words Mr. President not mine. The lives of thousands were brutally cut short and those left behind to suffer their infinite pain are with me today Mr. President. They are with me in spirit and flesh, and the message we carry will not be silenced anymore by media fueled mantras insisting how they are supposed to feel. Deciding for them, for 8 long years, what can be thought, what can be said, what can be asked.
PBO – And I appreciate your passion, I appreciate your conviction. In spite of your concerns, in spite of what your data might or might not reveal, what you and the families must understand and accept is that we are doing everything we can to protect you.
CS – Mr. President , I realize were very short on time, so please allow me to run down a list of bullet points that might illuminate some reasons why we don’t embrace the warm hug of Federal protection.
PBO – We’ve come this far. Fire away.
CS – Please keep in mind Mr. President everything I’m about to say is documented as fact and part of the public record. The information you are holding in your hands chronicles and verifies each and every point.
PBO – You have five minutes left. The floor is yours. Brief me.
CS – Thank you Mr. President. Okay, first; On the FBI’s most wanted list Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 911. When I called the FBI to ask them why this was the case, they replied: “There’s not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the crime scene,” I later discovered he had never even been indicted by the D.O.J.
CS – Number 2; FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001. In July of ‘09, Mrs. Edmonds broke the Federal gag order and went public to reveal that Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS – Number 3; The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. “I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us.” - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
PBO – And I’d like to believe that I am here to restore that hope. To restore confidence in your leaders, in the system that the voting public chose through a peaceful transfer of power.
(An odd moment of silence between us. Precious time ticking away).
CS – Mr. President, are you aware of the number of days it took to begin the investigation into JFK’s assassination?
PBO – If memory serves I believe it was two weeks.
CS – Close. Seventeen days to be exact. Are you aware sir, how long it took to begin the investigation into Pearl Harbor?
PBO – I would say again about….two weeks.
CS – Close again sir, eleven days to be exact. Are you aware Mr. President how long it took to begin the investigation into 9/11?
PBO – I know it must have seemed like a very long time for all the grieving families.
CS – It was a very long time Mr. President – four hundred and forty days. Roughly 14 months. Does it bother you Mr. President that it only took FIVE HOURS for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the initial attack to recommend and endorse a full scale offensive against Iraq?
PBO – I am not aware of any such purported claim.
CS – I have the proof Mr. President, along with scores of documents and facts I’d like you to take a look at. Here.
(I hand him another file – much thicker than the first)
PBO – I see you came prepared Charlie.
CS – No other way to show up Mr. President. When in doubt over prepare I always say.
PBO – Now you sound like the First Lady.
CS – That’s quite a compliment sir.
PBO – As you wish. Please continue.
CS – Sir, I’d like to direct your attention to the stack of documents in the folder I just handed you. The first in from the top is entitled “ Operation Northwoods“, a declassified Pentagon plan to stage terror attacks on US soil, to be blamed on Cuba as a pretext for war.
PBO – And I’d like to direct your attention to the fact that the principle draftsman of this improbable blueprint was quickly denied a second term as Joint Chiefs chairman and sent packing to a European NATO garrison. Thank God his otherworldly ambitions never saw the light of day.
CS – I wouldn’t be so certain about that Mr. President.
PBO – I could easily say the same to you Charlie.
(the President checks his watch)
CS – The next document reads “Declassified staged provocations.” Now, Honestly Mr. President I wish I was making this stuff up. I’m certain you are familiar with the USS Maine Incident, the sinking of the Lusitania, which we all now know brought us into WW1, and of course the most famous, the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
PBO – Of course I am familiar with these historical events and I’m aware that there’s a measure of controversy surrounding them. But to be quite frank with you, this is all ancient history.
CS – Mr. President, it has been often said; “Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.” And I concede to you sir, these events are the past.
PBO – A vastly different world young man, shouldering a radically disparate state of universal affairs.
CS – No argument sir, I’m merely inviting you to acknowledge some credibility to the pattern or the theme. Case in point; the next document in your folder. It was published by the think-tank, Project For a New American Century and it’s entitled “ Rebuilding Americas Defenses“, and was written by Dick Cheney and Jeb Bush. To quote from the document sir – (the President interrupts)
PBO – “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
CS – Touche, sir. Your thoughts on this statement Mr. President?
PBO – I would call this a blatant case of misjudgment fueled by an unfortunate milieu of assumption. For some, the uninformed denial of coincidence. - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
futuregen
-
Continued:
(the President continues to view the documents)
CS – On pages two and three, sir, are the statements, as well, from commission co-chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, commissioners Bob Kerrey, Timothy Roemer and John Lehman, as well as the statements of commissioner Max Cleland, an ex-Senator from Georgia , who resigned, stating:
“It is a national scandal. This investigation is now compromised. One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up.”
He also described President Bush’s desire to delay the process as not to damage the ‘04 re-election bid. They suspected deception to the point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation. Mr. President, this information alone is unequivocally grounds for a new investigation!
PBO – Mistakes were clearly made but we as a people and as a country need to move forward. It is obviously in our best interest as a democratic society to focus our efforts and our resources on the future of this great nation and our ability to protect the American people and our allies from this type of terrorism in the coming years.
CS – Sir, how can we focus on the future when THE COMMISSION ITSELF is on record stating that they still do not know the truth??
PBO – Even if what you state, might in some capacity, begin to approach an open discussion or balanced debate, I can’t speak for, or about the decisions certain commission members made during an extremely difficult period. Perhaps you should be interviewing them instead of me. Wait, don’t tell me; I was easier to track down than they were?
CS – Not exactly sir, but let’s be honest. You’re the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, the buck stops with you. 9/11 has been the pretext for the systematic dismantling of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Your administration is reading from the same playbook that the Bush administration foisted on America through documented secrecy and deception.
PBO – Mr. Sheen, I’m having a difficult time sitting here and listening to you draw distorted parallels between the Bush/Cheney regime and mine.
CS – Mr. President the parallels are not distorted just because you say they are. Let’s stick to the facts. You promised to abolish the Patriot Act and then voted to re-authorize it. You pledged to end warrantless wire tapping against the American people and now energetically defend it. You decried the practice of rendition and now continue it. You promised over and over again on the campaign trail, that you would end the practice of indefinite detention and instead, you have expanded it to permanent detention of “detainees” without trial. This far exceeds the outrages of the former administration. Call me crazy Mr. President, but is this not your record?
PBO – Mr. Sheen, my staff and I authorized this interview based on your request to discuss 9/11 and deliver some additional information you’re convinced I’d not previously reviewed. Call me crazy, But it appears as though you’ve blindly wandered off topic.
CS – Sir, the examples I just illustrated are a direct result of 9/11.
PBO – And I’m telling you that we must move forward, we must endure through these dangerous and politically challenging years ahead.
CS – Mr. President, we cannot move forward with a bottomless warren of unanswered questions surrounding that day and its aftermath.
PBO – I read the official report. Every word every page. Perhaps you should do the same.
CS – I have sir, and so have thousands of family members of the victims, and guess what; they have the same questions I do and probably a lot more. I didn’t lose a loved one on that horrific day Mr. President and neither did you. But since then I, along with millions of other Americans lost something we held true and dear for most of our lives in this great country of ours; we lost our hope. - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
boywhocould
-
Not sure any of us are complaining, but we are free to question the motives of our leadership. (As it was written: "self evident") but. . . a statement could be made that on all sides there is economic motives along with the social subdue-ing. Al-Qaeda, US industry, NATO, all want to posture themselves/ourselves in the best possible light wile taking the best possible advantage of situations. Al-Qaedo (regardless if you think it was a Pakistani intelligence community concoction) is run like a business, with investors, mission statements, holidays, events etc. . . put in that light they are no different then any of our regimes. their methods clearly deplorable but on scale we Americans have tore ass a sunder all over the world for over a century now and not by the thousands but by the millions. So if it came to questioning ones motives, the logical best target of questioning would in fact be ourselves.
- 2 years ago
-
boywhocould
-
-
futuregen
-
-
Why are we fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan when the Bush/Cheney administration pulled off 9/11? Osama Bin Laden is not even on the FBI most wanted list for 9/11. Experts say Osama died in Dec 2004.
Charlie Sheen is requesting twenty minutes with the president. The following are his twenty questions: (fictional meeting)
----------------------------Charlie Sheen – Good afternoon Mr. President, thank you so much for taking time out of your demanding schedule.
President Barack Obama – My pleasure, the content of your request seemed like something I should carve out a few minutes for.
CS – I should point out that I voted for you, as your promises of hope and change, transparency and accountability, as well as putting government back into the hands of the American people, struck an emotional chord in me that I hadn’t felt in quite some time, perhaps ever.
PBO – And I appreciate that Charlie. Big fan of the show, by the way.
CS – Sir, I can’t imagine when you might find the time to actually watch my show given the measure of what you inherited.
PBO – I have it Tivo’d on Air Force One. Nice break from the traveling press corps. (He glances at his watch) not to be abrupt or to rush you, but you have 19 minutes left.
CS – I’ll take that as an invitation to cut to the chase.
PBO – I’m all ears. Or so I’ve been told.
CS – Sir, in the very near future we will be experiencing our first 9/11 anniversary with you as Commander in Chief.
PBO – Yes. A very solemn day for our Nation. A day of reflection and yet a day of historical consciousness as well.
CS – Very much so sir, very much so indeed…. Now; In researching your position regarding the events of 9/11 and the subsequent investigation that followed, am I correct to understand that you fully support and endorse the findings of the commission report otherwise known as the ‘official story’?
PBO – Do I have any reason not to? Given that most of us are presumably in touch with similar evidence.
CS – I really wish that were the case, sir. Are you aware, Mr. President, of the recent stunning revelations that sixty percent of the 9/11 commissioners have publicly stated that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11 and that the Pentagon was engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack?
PBO – I am aware of certain “in fighting” during the course of their very thorough and tireless investigative process.
CS – Mr. President, it’s hard to label this type of friction as “in fighting” or make the irresponsible leap to “thorough,” when the evidence I insist you examine regarding 6 of the 10 members are statements of fact.
(At this point one of Obama’s senior aides approaches the President and whispers into his ear. Obama glances quickly at his watch and nods as the aide resumes his post at the doorway, directly behind me.)
PBO – No disrespect Mr. Sheen, but I have to ask; what is it that you seem to be implying with the initial direction of this discussion?
CS – I am not implying anything Mr. President. I am here to present the facts and see what you plan to do with them.
PBO – Let me guess; your ‘facts,’ allegedly supporting these claims are in the folders you brought with you?
CS – Good guess Mr. President.
(I hand the first folder of documents to the President)
CS – Again sir, these are not my opinions or assumptions, this is all a matter of public record, reported through mainstream media, painstakingly fact checked and verified.
(the President glances into the folder I handed him)
CS – You’ll notice sir on page one of the dossier dated August of ‘06 from the Washington Post, the statements of John Farmer, senior council to the 9/11 commission, his quote stating, “I was shocked how different the truth was from the way it was described.”
PBO – (as he glances down at the report, almost inaudible) …. um hmm….
CS – He goes on to further state “The [NORAD Air Defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. - 2 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
hunzedog
-
no really, how does killing a million civilians make us safer? when we carpet bomb women and childeren how in the fuck does that make us safer......somebody handed our government a note saying 9/11/ was coming and they didnt do shit. where were all the heros on that day. when america was defeated by a couple of boxcutters..you tell me who is responsible for this war to begin with before you condone it.
- 2 years ago
-
hunzedog
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
Civilians die in war. If you think this is a new concept, you must have been sleeping through your entire educational career, or you've had such thick wool pulled over your eyes you're blind to reality.
It's sad, sure, but civilians die in wars. Deal with it.
I don't know how I can spell it out any clearer for you: the troops serving make your lives safer because they are taking violence to a foreign nation, so you don't have to. You need proof that their presence has been effective? How many cataclysmic terrorist attacks have occurred on American soil since 9/11?
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
You don't think it's that sad.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
It's a reality of war. I accept this apparently much more readily than most of the users on this website. I won't apologize for that.
I neither condone nor encourage the killing of innocent civilians, but collateral damage is inevitable, and I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
You are ok with children dying.
Don't dance around that one.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
I'm not dancing around anything here bud. I thought I was pretty explicit earlier: "I neither condone nor encourage the killing of innocent civilians, but collateral damage is inevitable, and I'm not going to lose sleep over it."
No matter how advanced technology becomes, no matter how well trained soldiers are, no matter how accurate our weapons are, there will be innocent lives lost in all war. So be it.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
You are ok with the death of kids.
I'm just making it simpler for you. You didn't say you were NOT ok with it.
And by what you stated, twice now, you are ok with it. You live your life just fine not caring that kids die.
You can devoid it of feeling until you are content...doesn't mean that it doesn't show character.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
I've seen more dead kids than I care to remember, pal. If you want to keep repeating yourself that's fine by me. If you had seen what I've seen you might be a bit more desensitized too.
Fuck you for judging me.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
And you still have not stated that it's not ok.
Ok and apathy are pretty closely related.
There is no such thing as true apathy...it's just a more justified feeling of ok. Oh I don't care....but the person does care. They choose not to care because it hurts to much.
I'd wager for you that that is what you "feel".
Why you're so scared to state it....well...
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
"There is no such thing as true apathy"
False.
Do you know how many people die every day? Do you weep for all of them, because you'd better believe I don't. That's called apathy.
People die, this is perfectly acceptable. Children die, old people die, women die, men die. Yes, it's OK. It is unfortunate, perhaps, that some must die at the hands of violence, but this is how LIFE WORKS.
Let me reiterate so this can finally get through your thick fucking skull: IT'S OK THAT PEOPLE DIE. It is a natural and inescapable part of life. If you choose not to believe that, you're living in an altered reality.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
If you really had this so called apathy I wouldn't be getting any replies from you.
You don't have to tell me I am right when I already stated that a while ago. I don't need confirmation. You could have just said I was and saved yourself the trouble.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
You're introducing two different elements into your logic: my opinion on the death of innocent civilians, and my feelings towards your presentation of your ideas.
Your "argument" is valid but not sound.
Let me put it another way: You're using overly simplistic diction in attempt to condemn my character. Whether you realize it or not, this is speaking to your character. I have no idea what your upbringing was like, but this is called condescension in most communities.
You are putting your ideals on a pedestal over mine; however, by not stating this outright, you protect yourself from having to really express your beliefs at all.
Stick to movie reviews.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
I'm observing you how you are presenting yourself and then you speak and it contradicts your own rules and ideas.
Therefore I am going to tell you.
It can have a complete contradiction with how I act, don't care. I'm not you and your rules are yours to live by not mine....therefore I'm within sound bounds to state what I have.
And if I were not the reactions I get....wouldn't exist.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
You physically cannot create "your own" logic. You are inciting reaction by stating questionable "facts" and hiding behind this "objectivity" you're claiming to display. I am literally at a loss of how to better explain the facts I am giving you:
See if you can follow along with me: People die. People die in war. There will always be war. Therefore, people will always die, in war or by other causes.
This is an irrefutable logical chain. For you to state that it is "not OK" for children to die is a fallacy.
I could keep this up all day, brother.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
all logic is like a knife that's all blade.
All you do is cut yourself.
Your blood is everywhere but where it should be.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
hunzedog:
Impressive side stepping. Once again, you prove that ambiguity can effectively make it look like you've said something without ever making any real point at all. Congratulations on your whimsy.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
hunzedog:
And you prove 'apathy' is not at all real in the sense of the word.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Ares
-
That's an easy one, I can't believe people are actually asking this question.
They are defending your freedom in that they have forfeited a life of peace and countless career opportunities to live by the gun so YOU DON'T HAVE TO. They are defending your freedom to do whatever you want to do, and you're choosing to complain about it. Outstanding.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
3RRRs
-
Ares:
"...they have forfeited a life of peace and countless career oportunities ..." This is a true statement and soldiers should be honored for this.
I also honor them for the willingness to stare death, pain, injury, and torture in the face for their countrymen.
They should be given the highest respect in the land for their willingness to sacrifice, follow orders, and trust that those orders are what's best for their country.
I think the real question here is whether or not those orders are the best method to defend our freedom.
The first thing we should do to honor our troops is to be willing to honestly answer this question.
- 2 years ago
-
3RRRs
-
-
Ares
-
Ares:
That's something you'll have to take up with the new president who you are all apparently expecting to end all war, for all time.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
3RRRs
-
Ares:
With the prevailing ambience of this site and around this post, I understand where you are coming from, but that was a presumptive statement, was it not?
If you agree that the question of whether or not the orders are just is a legitimate one, Is this not a question we should expect any president to fully answer before sending our friends, brothers, fathers and sons to sacrifice as they do?
- 2 years ago
-
3RRRs
-
-
Ares
-
Ares:
Perhaps, though it's unrealistic and foolish to think we can all of the sudden withdraw from a conflict that may or may not be justified without any serious consequences for both sides.
The time for complaining about the war in Iraq is over. Our focus now is to make it safe for civilians to live freely there, and to protect our own security by making it an act of lunacy to attack the United States.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
3RRRs
-
Ares:
I agree.
We made our bed in Iraq and now we have to sleep in it. It's the least we can do...especially if you believe we went their unjustly.
But I am careful not to assume I know exactly what' s going on over there. Therefore the "question" remains. Is our mission just? I demand that my elected officials answer this question on a continual basis and I wish there was a viable method to verify their answers.
- 2 years ago
-
3RRRs
-
-
Ares
-
Ares:
I'm with you bud. That's the tricky part though, innit? I think there was a good basis to enter there in the first place, but where Bush screwed up was thinking that basis wasn't good enough, and that's when he introduced the WMD theory.
We should have just stuck with the fact that they were refusing to cooperate with our hunt for Al-Qaeda and utilized small unit operations. We screwed up, but we're in it for the long haul now, no matter how big of a shit show it is, or at least it's being made out to be.
- 2 years ago
-
Ares
-
-
3RRRs
-
Ares:
Tricky indeed. But I'm not sure I can follow you down that line of thought. I am extremely suspicious of the pretenses the authorities used for war in Iraq. And I DO lose sleep over the fact that innocent lives were lost.
All the more reason the question this post proposes should be answered. Otherwise, we just become the "Red Coats" and making things right over there becomes all the more difficult.
- 2 years ago
-
3RRRs
-
-
rmann0581
-
The war in Iraq has nothing to do with freedom. The only benefits of the war go to large corporations that are in bed with the government.
- 2 years ago
-
rmann0581
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
The military industrial complex lobbyists and special interests are destroying us economically. We need a serious change in foreign policy and the administrations behind the scenes. Now we have William Lynn III, an ex-Raytheon lobbyist, in high positions at the Pentagon thanks to Obama....just what we didn't need. Another military industrial complex lobbyist running this country...
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
Too bad our foreign policy is still status quo....
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
I also agree with Dr Ron Paul in this video, Clinton should've never been impeached for Monica and should've been impeached for war crimes.
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
shanklinmike:
He is right. Why is it that their children die and no one outcries as much as when other country's children die.
This does not justify any action in retaliation if one really does care about the death of those that are not part of the problem...ie children, but he does make a valid point aside from the hypocritical nature of it.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
vesher
-
shanklinmike:
excellent point. the aggressive actions we take do not secure or solve anything. they breed more 'freedom fighter' training grounds and the like. in effect, justifying more domestic 'defense' spending and so on and so on down the rabbit hole.
- 2 years ago
-
vesher
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
Watch Dr Ron Paul call out the neoconservatives back in 2003...
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
Is Rachel Maddow correct in her assessment of Obama and Iraq....?!?
What a shame....more unneeded, unconstitutional war...
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
