9/11 Olberman on Bush: Who Has Left This Hole in the Ground?

from Crooks and Liars, via Jesus’ General.

Transcript:

And lastly tonight a Special Comment on why we are here. Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space.

And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again, trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter.

And all the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people, including four of my friends, two in the planes and — as I discovered from those “missing posters” seared still into my soul — two more in the Towers.

And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors.

I belabor this to emphasize that, for me… this was, and is, and always shall be, personal.

And anyone who claims that I and others like me are “soft”, or have “forgotten” the lessons of what happened here — is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante — and at worst, an idiot — whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President.

However. Of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast — of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds… none of us could have predicted… this.
      Five years later this space… is still empty.
      Five years later there is no Memorial to the dead.
      Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.
      Five years later this country’s wound is still open.
      Five years… later this country’s mass grave is still unmarked.
      Five years later… this is still… just a background for a photo-op.
      It is beyond shameful.
      —

      At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial — barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field, Mr. Lincoln said “we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract.”

      Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice. 

      Today our leaders could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. “We can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground.” So we won’t.

      Instead they bicker and buck-pass. They thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists to write how good a job they’re doing — instead of doing any job at all.

      Five years later, Mr. Bush… we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir — on these 16 empty acres, the terrorists… are clearly, still winning.

      And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it.
      —

And there is something worse still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation.

      There is its symbolism — of the promise unfulfilled, the urgent oath, reduced to lazy execution.

      The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it… was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support.

      Those who did not belong to his party — tabled that.
      Those who doubted the mechanics of his election — ignored that.
      Those who wondered of his qualifications — forgot that.

       History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government, by its critics.

       It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation’s wounds, but to take political advantage.

       Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.

       The President — and those around him — did that.

       They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, “bi-partisanship” meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused; as appeasers; as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, “validate the strategy of the terrorists.”

       They promised protection, and then showed that to them “protection” meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken… a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated Al-Qaeda as much as we did. 

       The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had ’something to do’ with 9/11, is “lying by implication.”
        The impolite phrase, is “impeachable offense.”

        Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space… and to this, the current, curdled, version of our beloved country.

        Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11.

        Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated, that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible — for anything — in his own administration.

        Yet what is happening this very night? 

        A mini-series, created, influenced — possibly financed by — the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes.

        The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option.

       How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death… after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections… how dare you or those around you… ever “spin” 9/11.

       —

       Just as the terrorists have succeeded — are still succeeding — as long as there is no memorial and no construction here at Ground Zero

       So too have they succeeded, and are still succeeding — as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans.

       This is an odd point to cite a television program, especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney’s continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things.

       And long ago, a series called “The Twilight Zone” broadcast a riveting episode entitled “The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street.”

       In brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm. 

       Suddenly his car — and only his car — starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man’s lights go on.

     As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced.

       An “alien” is shot — but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help. 

       The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials areseen, manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there’s no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, “they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it’s themselves.”

       And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing, Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight.

       “The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices – to be found only in the minds of men.

       “For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own — for the children, and the children yet unborn.”

       —

       When those who dissent are told time and time again — as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus — that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American

       When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have “forgotten the lessons of 9/11″… look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:

       Who has left this hole in the ground?

      We have not forgotten, Mr. President.

      You have.

      May this country forgive you.
      —

happy patriots day, Yankistan!

Are you celebrating by watching ABC made-for-tv-and-edited-in-a-blind-panic-so-we-don’t-get-sued movies? Here are some alternative credits from Jesus’ General. Carville‘s not the only one who’s gone Hollywood, it seems.

WordPress Avatar Awards

I nominate myself in the category of “Most Fascist Avatar.”

raincoaster’s avatar is, in a sense, not unique, yet in another sense it is utterly unique Why? Because the Department of Homeland Security, Total Information Awareness Unit which originated the avatar almost immediately foreswore it once the blowback hit. It may be the most Masonic, New World Orderish, Aleistar Crowleyian logo the world has ever seen, and raincoaster doubts very much if the US government would dispute her use of this image, for fear of having to admit they designed it.

thememoryhole.org/policestate/iao-logo.htm

TIA Large

Scientia est Potentia means “Knowledge is Power

would you watch Steve Irwin die?


Steve and Conan, together again for the first time!

It seems what I reported here as rumour is indeed true: Steve Irwin said, “If I’m going to die, at least I want it filmed.”

Does that mean he’d want it shown around the world, rather than just to the people who were his friends and family? Does it mean that he’d be okay with it being interrupted every thirty seconds for commercials and stamped with a watermark, as it undoubtably would be?

Would you watch?

from the BBC:

Crocodile hunter Steve Irwin’s final moments were captured on camera. But should that film ever be broadcast to the watching public?

Yes, says Anna Smajdor

No, says Daniel Sokol

Steve Irwin made a career partly based on taking risks with wildlife. His death this week at the barb of a stingray on Australia’s Barrier Reef was filmed, and in a Sydney Morning Herald poll 40% of the 24,000 or so respondents thought it should be shown.

It’s typical of the elite-driven media in the UK that they thought only medical ethicists should be interviewed about this, rather than any other kind of philosophers. This is far too narrow-minded for me; they should, if they really wanted two different viewpoints, have gotten two different kinds of philosophers.

In any case, the answer for me is that I began searching for the video immediately upon hearing news of Steve‘s death. Why? Because I do think he’d be okay with it being broadcast; he was always very clear about the risks of what he was doing and I think that he’d want to show that sometimes you pay the ultimate price. He showed videos of animals dying and dead, and are any of us in any doubt whatsoever that he revered them? He’d have asked for no different treatment himself. If I find the video, I will watch it and post it, with a very clear warning, and you can make your own choices.

I also want to find out what watching the video can tell me. I’ve seen people die in hospitals, and it’s not horrible; worse is watching their faces the moment they realize that their death is inevitable, and close. I’ve read the manual of Afghani Jihad, and the Japanese kamikaze manual, and I’ve learned about myself, the world, and right and wrong by reading those “forbidden tomes.” This is, in its own way, as disturbing, but that in itself is no reason to turn away from it.

That said…do I believe that Steve‘s wishes have to be obeyed? I’ve spent the last few years trying to ensure that my father’s last wishes were obeyed, with mixed success, but I realize very clearly that while the wishes of the dead are to be respected, they do not have to be obeyed. If you wouldn’t obey them when they were alive, it makes no sense to do so when they’re dead, and it is in fact a betrayal of your real relationship.

His family should make the call. They knew him better than anyone, and they’ll have to deal with the fallout. Whatever they say, whether the video makes it to the Net or not, I’ll respect their wishes.

You?

Courtney Love Schoolhouse Rock: Unpack Your Expletives!

and can’t nobody unpack ’em like Courtney.