No More 9/11s, Apparently That's What's Wrong With Us
Thanks Dick.
In an interview for Nightline, the Chenster said "What I'm concerned about...is that as we get farther and farther from 9/11...we seem to have people less and less committed to doing everything that's necessary to defend the country."
So the veep's a bit upset that we're not still running around in mass panic. Sorry man, personally I would love to still be mired in a mass panic that clouds my judgment over the basics of American society's civil liberties. Those were the days, huh Chenster. Got pretty much any laws you wanted passed without debate.
In an interview for Nightline, the Chenster said "What I'm concerned about...is that as we get farther and farther from 9/11...we seem to have people less and less committed to doing everything that's necessary to defend the country."
So the veep's a bit upset that we're not still running around in mass panic. Sorry man, personally I would love to still be mired in a mass panic that clouds my judgment over the basics of American society's civil liberties. Those were the days, huh Chenster. Got pretty much any laws you wanted passed without debate.
posted by Anonymous at 8:32 PM
1 Comments:
good observation. they've gotten so much mileage out of this thing, i'm surprised no one has accused them of displaying the victims' bones(or ashes)for their own advantage.
as i've said before somewhere, i think we all thought we were under siege after the attacks, in danger from all sides, every plane with a hijacker lurking, etc. i even sort of understood the patriot act from that perspective, trying to put an ID on everyone who might be harmful. but let's face it, it's been five years, and it looks increasingly as if this was a lucky, if spectacular, hit that will probably never be repeated. but these people leading us have used it as a cover to do all kinds of imperial things--hold hundreds of people without trial, trash the geneva convention, invade iraq, and now unleash domestic surveillance on god knows how many people. i understand there are individuals who still want to hurt us, but why can't we have a national conversation on what we want to do to "suspects," what kinds of surveillance we want to sanction in order to keep ourselves safe, whether or not "regime change" is a valid use of american power and influence. why can't we have some input in determining the things done in "our name?" someone tell me why. we're teetering on the edge of something serious here.
i could never understand the time and money expended by the FBI during vietnam to "keep track" of people who refused the draft, people who protested the war, people who just weren't "with" the president. here i am, not understanding again and i'm supposedly older and wiser now...
Post a Comment
<< Home