The Politics of 9/11: The activists who claim to speak for the families are not politically neutral.

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal ^ | March 10, 2003 | Editorial

[Burkeman1]

Same will happen in Iran (I meant). Managed slaughter and we will call it democracy.

[Burkeman1]

??? You don't care? What is your motivation against Islam then?

[bjcintennessee]

What I do not like is when opponents of his would solicit campaign volunteers and orchestrate a phony outrage against the President...now that is nothing less then political.

There are some people who believe that because of personal loss, 9-11 belongs solely to them. I doubt that any of these people refused the vast amount of money offered by the taxpayers or the charities -- not that that could compensate them for their personal loss -- and I am truly sorry for their loss.

But the fact is that 9-11 does not belong to them. It belongs to all of us as an attack on our sovereign nation, on our sense of security -- as the first attack of many unless we thwart them.

In the same the democRATS protested Bush appearing in a flight suit on an aircraft carrier (which BTW, NO ONE flies in a fighter jet without wearing a flight suit), they are now seeking to make republicans hesitant to use Bush's successful war on terror as a campaign issue.

Those who lost loved ones on 9-11 who are now protesting against Bush have an agenda. They have been bought and paid for by the democRATS and should be marginalized as such.

[Burkeman1]

Defemd or go in a coherent fashion.

[torchthemummy]

You don't own 9-11! We all do! So don't tell our Commander-In-Chief to not use 9-11 images when the Dems have accused him (seems you are in that vein) of everything from knowing about the attack beforehand to concocting a plot in Texas to (insert Iraq War Criticism of the Day). We will never forget and should never forget just because you claim a co-worker died. If you had your way, any images of these horrific acts would be banned pending you and your Democrap compatriots approval.

[CWOJackson]

Defend or go in a coherent fashion. Dude, you are sadly mistaken. When I made that comment about where I stand with the wife I was joking...and she means something to me.

[Burkeman1]

Done.

[CWOJackson]

You were well done a long time ago.

[backhoe]

Cross-link:

-The Prince of Tides- Bush ads, Kerry ads, the Tides Foundation, and so much more--

[driftless]

Yeah, you're right. Hussein was a benevolent mid-east potentate who loved his people so much he helped their transition in the life-death process by the hundreds of thousands. And he wished for peace with other nations...which is why he kept invading them to show them how much he loved them. He never ever had any evil WMDs and of course if he did have them, would never have used them...except on some nasty Kurdish minorities who probably deserved it. And he would never have given them to terrorists, like Al-Qaeda and various Palestinian murderers, who may or may not have taken up residence in his country by the hundreds or thousands and to whom he may or may not have given bushels of money and arms to kill us and our allies the Israelis...who may or may not have had to destroy one of his nuclear facilities in 1981. And even if he did have a nasty WMD and nuclear weapons program, he would never hide them, destroy them, or send them to other sympathetic countries. Or as David Kay asserted plan on reinstituting his nuclear and WMD programs. Yeah, right.

[Criminal Number 18F]

That is what Afghanistan is now. What do the Afghanis call our puppet in Kabul? Kharizai?

If you ever met Hamid Kharzai, you wouldn't think of him as anybody's puppet. Some of the more militarily difficult things in the war resulted from his decisions.

"Mayor of Kabul" for he rules nothing else and the drug dealers and war lords hold sway in the rest of the countryside.

Bullshit. This is the conventional wisdom portrayed in the lib/left press, which wants him to lose. In fact, he has a professional, and slowly growing, Army, and in the last year he has successfully jerked the chains of the two most powerful warlords, Ismail Khan (Herat) and Mohammed Fahim Khan (nominal defence minister, and head of Massoud's old Jamiat-i Islami party from the Panjshir Valley). He got IK to pony up tax receipts that IK had been withholding, and he got FK to turn over the weapons he held in his warlord role, including Afghanistan's only working (? well, it passed self-test, anyway...) SCUD.

Hamid Karzai is an educated, urbane, and gentle man. You can easily forget that he is a Pashtun tribal chieftain -- and if you do that while negotiating with him, he will hand you your head. He is not misunderestimated with impunity, as legions of Afghan political and military actors could tell you.

Our troops do nothing but stay in their barracks and announce offensives weeks before they happen so we have no casualties!

Bullshit squared. First place, our troops there don't have barracks. They have nasty, dusty, poorly insulated tents. But more importantly they don't stay in those tents but a third of the time. The rest of the time they are out, either on operations, or patrolling. And we have SF and infantry forces inkspotted all over the country, in the areas where they're needed. (For example, we don't have them in the North, where the regional governors solidly support the central government). Secondly, we are still taking casualties. One was killed by an antitank mine Feb 13; one died in a non-hostile accident Feb. 25. They also identified some remains Feb 2. from a soldier who had been carried DUSTWUN since an explosion in January that killed seven other Americans. Apart from the killed we've had wounded; an acquaintance of mine stopped two bullets in January. Thirdly, we continue to conduct aggressive operations, taking the war to the enemy where he is strong, and winning the civilians over with the Provincial Reconstruction Teams. (Incidentally, the first of those teams went not to a secure area, but to hairy Gardez. That was one of The Mayor of Kabul's decisions. It seems to have worked. Don't play poker against him).

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[GailA]

btt

[GailA]

Wish we could have the full article.

[lightning]

The media mainstream has been more flagrant and egregious in their partisan liberal Kerry's all for win!

It is sickening, but will prevail on alternative conservative and the majority of sensible values and truth.

[Dog]

Steve Deucy brought up the Peaceful Tomorrow to David Frum this morning on Fox and Friends......so the story is getting out.

[jmstein7]

Yes!!! Yes yes yes.

[bondjamesbond]

No- there couldn't possibly be some moderate to conservative Republicans among them since not one shred of WMD evidence has come through that justified their sons lives?

How would WMD evidence justify the lives of the sons killed on 9/11? We are talking about the 9/11 families here, after all...

I'll get back to ignoring you now.

[bondjamesbond]

If you asking about the original post then I believe the President should leave this alone...stay above that fray right now and allow certain elements of the media to pursue it.

I think the President's statements yesterday about third-party funding of advertisements being potentially illegal is exactly the right note to strike. It gives a legal "hook" to this story, which will make it much more interesting to the media.

As long as it is all just people doing nasty, but not illegal things, it can be sloughed off as typical rough-and-tumble politics. If there is a potential criminal violation, it becomes a much bigger story.

[talleyman]

Mega-Bump!

[Deb]

You were right, quid. It ran in my delivered copy and I heard several people referencing it today on the talk shows.