Posted on 09/13/2001 11:54:38 PM PDT by kristinn
Recently, some well known posters on FR have stated that criticism of the Bush administration is treasonous and cause for those critics to be arrested under martial law. Those comments have been cheered by dozens of other active FReepers.
I am watching Free Republic turn into a totalitarian groupthink of the kind that the left used to unjustly smear us with when we criticized the Clinton administration.
Good people like Alan Keyes and Larry Klayman who stood tall and faithful with FR for years, and posters who supported them, have been crucified as heretics and run out of the FR family for daring to criticize the Bush administration.
The forum is now dominated by vicious Bush supporters with an 'Us versus Them' mentality against fellow conservatives. The desire to root out government corruption and advance conservative causes has been replaced with a bloodlust and blacklisting for those who don't worship the Bush administration like they do. This situation has been going on for awhile, but it has gotten out of hand with this week's terrorist attacks.
Now, with regards to the present situation, I'd like to pose some questions: Why were all passenger flights grounded for almost three days since the attacks so that new security procedures could be put in place? If our air traffic safety was so secure before, why is there a perceived problem now ? Could it be that it wasn't really that safe ?
Where were our intelligence services ? Why did we have Clinton holdover DCI, George Tenent, doing the work of the Secretary of State in the Middle East instead of cleaning up the wreckage of the past eight years ?
How is it that foreign terrorists can go to flight school in the U.S., plot and carry out a complicated, coordinated massive assault involving several dozen conspirators against two vital American facilities without being detected ?
How is it that four hijacked planes flew unmolested and unchallenged by neither our air traffic control system or our military ?
We have experienced a massive failure of our almighty-two-trillion-dollar-peacekeeper-of-everywhere-but-home-bipartisan-protection-racket-federal government.
Thousands upon thousands of our fellow citizens are dead because of this failure to detect or intercept these heinous terrorist acts during either the months before or the hours of their execution.
The federal government lulled us into thinking that those silly questions (is this your luggage ?) and an ID check at the gate made flying safe. All the while there were gaping holes in our defenses.
They let us down.
The purpose; the job; the responsibility of the federal government is set forth in the preamble to the Constitution:
WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The eight corrupt years of President Clinton accompanied by four corrupt, compromised Congresses followed by nine months of a Bush administration that chose to sweep the rot of those years under the rug rather than clean it up has cost us dearly.
For those who say nine months is too short to change things in the government, remember this was the return of the grown-ups to Washington; this was the return of wise, experienced old hands such as Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, John Ashcroft and former President Bush; this was the era of the rising stars like Condi Rice, Karl Rove, and Karen Hughes. They chose to 'move on', not clean up.
In the aftermath of the attacks, it appears that the Executive and Legislative branches of our constitutional republic are finally bearing their responsibilties as they should. Except that while they call this attack an act of war, they are refusing to actually declare war.
The terrorists and those who aided and abetted them bear full responsibilty for the deaths and destruction and should pay with their lives and their cities.
But the federal government bears responsibility for leaving this nation and its citizens so vulnerable. Saying that is not treasonous--it is said out of patriotism and borne of a love of this Great Nation and a desire to see it survive.
One of Free Republic's greatest strengths has been the freedom to ask the hard questions of our government. It would be a crime to lose this freedom to any mob of posters, especially in this time of crisis.
I support President Bush, but I reserve the right to criticize him without my patriotism being called into doubt.
Truth. I agree. There is also an implication that somehow Bush is the bad guy here, and I'm sorry, that is not fair, and it is CERTAINLY the wrong time for such an unfair recrimination.
Pat Buchanan surprises me on occasion. I am amazed by how well this commentary fits this thread.
Kristinn, you mention Pat Buchanan. Please, good sir, learn from the very man you cite.
Deal.
The BATF is the most cowboy-ish, unprofessional, problem-ridden organization in the United States. The FBI has its share of foulups and coverups. The DEA enforces laws that merely serve to strip us of our BoR. The CIA has so many failures it has been called "Comedy In Action".
However, right now, I salute them. I am proud of them all. I wish them much success in this investigation. They are my fellow Americans and they are our only line of defense.
With whom?
What does this do? During wartime, it aids and abets the enemy. It weakens your President as he and his family are the target of terrorists, ridiculed by the press and surrounded by opponents trying to set traps for him.
Who is to support the President? Why would you send your leader out to fight all enemies, even those behind his back, all alone? When you encourage support of your troops, why would you not want encouragement for the Commander-in-Chief? What would happen to a soldier if he was treated as the President is treated?
I have been so disappointed on what I have seen from you conservatives. Where are the constructive criticisms, the respectful differing points of view, the suggestions? I see none of this - I see people unhappy with government as government is today. They will never have a government that they like because you can't evolve backward in time. They then take it out on the man who is in power doing their best to prevent him being an effective president. I see armchair quarterbacks second-guessing every move knowing only a fraction of the total picture, I see complainers and whiners trying to gain respect by attacking their president.
If you expect us to take the criticisms, then make them criticisms handled in a respectful way. Quit the Bush-bashing because you don't have the Hollywood president who is all things to all people at all times. You have one man as president and he can do no more than one man. A pity you didn't get your perfect candidate but that is life. You have to play the cards dealt you.
I recommend Pat's whole commentary...cancerous as it is.
Too many are extremely reactive...Larry Klayman and Alan Keyes for example, have not produced anything but a bunch of empty talk..Sure it sounds good, but what good have they really done? If we do not stay united we surely will fall.
What have any of us done, but empty talk? It's okay for them -- and us -- to express ourselves, since we are largely helpless. Sure, we've given blood and our paltry sums of money and so on, but there's nothing else to do BUT talk.
Actually, on one account I read, apparantly fighter jets were scrambled from a nearby base, but arrived in the region too late.
JimRob himself says this site was intended for like-minded people. He congratulated Bush on the victory. I would expect some fair-mindedness regarding his performance. Some don't possess that, showing the worst attributes of liberals.
Believe it or not, Free Republic was not established as an "anything goes" free speech forum, or as a liberal debating society. This forum was established as a working forum for like-minded lovers of individual rights to work toward preserving a concept near and dear to our hearts. Freedom.
1 Posted on 05/09/2001 17:30:14 PDT by Jim Robinson.
Obviously, it was not as safe to fly as we assumed.
If our air traffic safety was so secure before, why is there a perceived problem now ?
Um, probably because there was a group of insane whack jobs that flew into the WTC, Pentagon, and who know where else if they didn't crash.
Could it be that it wasn't really that safe ?
Perceptive.
I was supposed to fly to LOGAN airport the night this happened. You think I wanted to get on plane? How many bomb threats were logged after these events? How many buildings were shut down and evacuated. After an event like this, its probably safer to err on the side of caution until there are mechanisms in place to try and prevent John Q. Terrorist from boarding our domestic flights and killing thousands more. People have long been saying that airport security is lax. Seems like it is a good time to start fixing the holes, especially since no one knew if there were more whackos interested in meeting their maker via a flying fireball.
I have been more than happy to criticize the Bush administration and its KoolAid drinking cheerleaders who blindly support what I perceive to be anti conservative ideas. But I think it is a stretch to blame this on Bush jr. Our intelligence agencies have been neutered by Clinton mostly. Our security has been rendered inefficient by Politically Correct rhetoric that makes any "questioning" the target of claims of racisms, sexism, xenophobia...etc.
These problems are the result of extended corruption. Make sure you blame the right people.
You must have inadvertently skipped over the excellent comments at #28.
Well, what ever makes you feel good. But the red letters above the reply box makes alot of sense. A little wisdom before shooting off doesn't hurt either and that is why so many here see people like Klayman and Keyes as useless idiots.
I didn't/don't see it that way in relation to airport "security". The fact is we never had any at all. What we had was political pablum to convince the non-thinking people that gooberment was "doing something". All this "something" amounted to was insuring traveling was a supreme pain in the ass for innocent civilians. It obviously did nothing at all to deter any terrorists. Name ONE terrorist who was ever stopped or arrested because of the metal detectors,the lack of lockers in waiting rooms,or a minimum wage security guard. Now they are going to ban pocket knives and prohibit people from loading luggage at curbside. Just more BS and pablum to convince people they are "doing something".
OOOPS! There is ONE exception to this. The gooberment DID manage to totally eliminate smoking on aircraft,even going so far as to put smoke alarms in the toilets. At least they protected us all from the "dangers of second hand smoke",huh?
I wouldn't. He'd be bombing a sheep ranch in New Zealand. The man was/is a total bleeping idiot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.