Bush politicizes tragedy of 9/11

Tue, 09/19/2006 - 4:45pm
By: Letters to the ...

It’s been five years since the 9/11 tragedy. The Bush administration preyed on fear then to push through Constitution-threatening legislation and they continue to use fear to sway voters and garner power unto themselves.

We are no safer now than on that fateful day: Bin Laden is still free, the Iraq war has been shown to have no links to terrorism, and the war there has inflamed the entire region so al Qaeda is more powerful than ever.

In addition, Americans have fewer rights than before 9/11 as the scope of our Constitution is narrowed by an administration that wants to hold the power to “rule” while telling lies and only divulging the truth after they’ve been caught by journalists and Democratic citizens who are then labeled as traitors to America.

Karen Neff
Fayetteville, Ga.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
muddle's picture
Submitted by muddle on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 9:18am.

Well, here are summaries of the six "top of the head" cases you list.
Every single one is up for reasonable public debate. People who charge that these are clear violations of rights--natural or constitutional--beg the question.

Brandon Mayfield: Arrested because of faulty fingerprint analysis. The FBI apologizes for its own blunder. Horrible situation, but an “administration-neutral” case.

Lotfi Raissi—Arrested September 21st, 2001 by British authorities, and at the request of the FBI, at his home outside of London. He was charged as a conspirator in 911. The evidence proved to be insufficient. He later filed a civil suit against the FBI. Another seeming blunder—bad arrest. But what has this to do with the Bush administration? The Patriot Act—the prime target of such charges of civil rights violations—was not signed into law until one month after Raissi’s arrest.

Caitlin Childs—Arrested December 2003 while protesting with an animal rights group outside a Honey Ham store. Childs, who had a history of involvement with anarchist groups, radical gay and lesbian, environmentalist and animal rights groups, had been under surveillance b y local FBI authorities. Knowing this, she overtly wrote down the tag number on an unmarked FBI vehicle. The agent demanded that she hand over the paper or be subject to arrest. She refused, and was arrested. The agents involved said that she was generally boisterous, belligerent, uncooperative and resisted arrest. The ACLU has stepped in. They protest the surveillance in the first place, and released some two dozen photographs of Childs and others taken during the protest. Whether the arrest was justified is debatable. Such arrests happen all the time, as officers use their own discernment for good or ill. Whether the surveillance is justified is also debatable. Presumably, this is a case in which the Bush administration’s policies (including the Patriot Act) come into play. Should the FBI be keeping tabs on activists who might be deemed a threat? I, for one, think it is a reasonable measure that, within reasonable limits, is no violation of civil rights. Note that the controversial surveillance took place during a protest; not of her private activities.

Christopher Freeman: Ditto. He was arrested with Childs.

Yaser Esam Hamdi: Captured in Konduz, Afghanistan by Afghan Northern Alliance forces, along with hundreds of surrendering Taliban fighters. He was taken into custody and imprisoned without trial for some three years without charges. The U.S. Government maintained that, as an enemy combatant, he is not entitled to due process afforded by the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court disagreed. He was eventually deported to Saudi Arabia after renouncing his U.S. citizenship

I agree that he should not have been detained without charges. He should have been shot as a traitor.

Jose Padilla: Of Puerto Rican descent, a former Chicago “gang-banger.” Converts to Islam after a jail stint in Florida. Approaches Al-Qaeda operatives and offers to build and detonate a “dirty bomb” to be detonated in an American city. Held for three years without being charged. Recently charged and will go to trial.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 9:41am.

Muddle, thanks for the response, I googled each of those names yesterday and found the same information, but quite frankly am tired of trying to use facts and reason with some BUSH HATERS.

There have been many cases of DNA clearing innocent people in prison.

In the majority of the cases cited, it seems like the system worked and when the Government could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt an accused guilt, they went free or are being tried.

Will they have the same OUTRAGE if the accused hadifa Marines are eventually cleared. Will they shout that the Marine's rights were violated? I doubt it, it does not fit their BUSH BASHING agenda.

Out of 300 Million residents these are best cases of our Constitutional rights being trampled upon they can come up with? Now had any of these persons succeded in an attack, you can bet they would demand a commission to investigate why intelligence failed.

This is getting old and annoying. Can anyone tell me the Democrats plan to protect this country because so far they:

Would revoke the Patriot act.
Would not wiretap Al Queda conversations.
Would not covertly track terror funds.
Will not interrogate terror suspects any differently that shop lifters.


Basmati's picture
Submitted by Basmati on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 9:51am.

I saw this cartoon and it immediately reminded me of you, Herr Major.

Click Here


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 10:03am.

If you are referring to the mess as Iraq, there were a hole bunch of jack asses hands on the jar. Don't you just hate it when the enemy resists and does not roll over passively.

Don't make me post all the Democratic statements of Saddam having WMD and must be stopped. Now that the going is tough and polls shift, they are the sunshine soldiers and springtime patriots of old. They care only about power and not our safety.

Just my opinion, just like your is just yours. Let's see what this November brings about. Will The Republicans keep power or will the Dems continue to be unhinged?

Oh, my family is from Ireland so that would be Mc Major or are you using a clever Nazi reference? I love those peaceful tolerant nuanced lefties.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 9:32am.

The only true and unemotional statement in your emotional meltdown/rant was the 5 year fact.

Constitution-threatening legislation, correct me if I am wrong, but didn't many democrats then also prey on our fears? If you are referring to the Patriot Act, what specific Constitutional threats are you talking about. The Reader's Digest description now allows law enforcement to use the same tactics against terror suspects as police use against organized crime. Don't you think law enforcement should know who is researching bomb making at the library or would you rather weep for another 3,000 dead but sleep better because terrorists Constitutional rights are protected?

Name one person, who had their constitutional rights violated since 9/11.

What is despicable is for Democrats to smear our military about Abu Ghraib(guilty have been court martialed), GITMO or Haditha without a shred of evidence of offenses.

We are safer, no more box cutters, additional screening, air marshalls, checked baggage screening, random checks, attacks and cells found and stopped.

Bin Laden is hiding in a cave and cannot move or communicate without fear of the Zarqawi treatment.

Iraq sponsored terrorists but does not now.

The region has always been enflamed

Al Qaeda is being torn apart, Hammas and Hezbolah should be next.

Name one right we have lost.

There are currently criminal probes, that is right, people who leak classified information are CRIMINALS, against those in the intelligence field playing politics and sabotaging our war on terror.

So, vote Democratic and I pray that your side doesn't win. Can they get any more unhinged and hateful after another loss?


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 6:33pm.

I agree 100% with ArmyMajRetired's post: "There are currently criminal probes, that is right, people who leak classified information are CRIMINALS, against those in the intelligence field playing politics and sabotaging our war on terror." He has switched sides and will now support the prosecution of Libby and Rove for leaking classified information about Valerie Plame. We welcome you major, in the fight against leaking classified information and undermining out intellegence personnel.


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 7:28pm.

I know that you have convicted Libby without a fair trial. No prosecutor has charged Rove, get over your fantasies.

I thought you were smarter than trying to compare sharing with Al Queda our secret way to stop their attacks and arrest their agents with a possible inadvertant slip that "Ambassador Wilson" was sent to Niger by his bed mate. You should be smart enough to know that if the person (Armitage) did not intentionally disclose the info the law was not broken. Wasn't very bright of the CIA to not have him sign a non-disclosure and aloww him to write an Op-Ed about his "secret meeting" now was it. Didn't the Kerry campaign drop him as an advisor as his lies started to be exposed?

Valerie really shouldn't pose for Vanity Fair if she were a super secret agent. Unfortunately the Public and Libby's lawyers don't know her status because it has not been released except by some unofficial hubrus author.

But then again you support the party that thinks that Sandy "pants" Berger just showed poor judgement by stealing and destroying classified documents. I didn't here your outrage about national security then did I, if I missed it please provide the posting.

Once you stop your partisan attacks, we might find common ground, like doing whatever it takes to protect our country. Your constant harping helps how?


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Fri, 09/22/2006 - 12:07pm.

I am confident that Plame's job status will be disclosed at some point in the future, these things usually come out. We shall see. I was unaware of this blog site and not posting when Berger stole and destroyed the documents so I have no post to show. However, I was outraged and felt he should have been prosecuted.


Submitted by Hardtack on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 5:01pm.

The truth is, I am now convinced, that when the decision to invade Iraq was made, maybe before, we decided then that we would never leave Iraq, completely. We wanted a base in that region of strategic importance and Iraq was to be it. Oh, a show will be made sometime that we are leaving, but it will stop far short of going home, and there will always be enough of our assets around there to control the oil fields and be available to defend Israel. A few thousand dead and scores of thousands of our troops who are maimed, delegged, dearmed, and poisoned, driven mad, and ruined, will be a small price to pay.

secret squirrel's picture
Submitted by secret squirrel on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 1:49pm.

Name one person, who had their constitutional rights violated since 9/11.

How about six that I can think of right off the top?
Brandon Mayfield
Lotfi Raissi
Caitlin Childs
Christopher Freeman
Yaser Esam Hamdi (American-born US Citizen)
Jose Padilla

Of course, under the anti-American Patriot Act, the DOJ does not have to reveal names of those detained. But you can search WestLaw or Lexis-Nexis and find out about the cases involving the above.

As for smearing the military, some of the most vocal critics of the military and the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and Haditha have been your fellow military officers, both active and retired. They are proud to be as "despicable" as Democrats and any other self-respecting human being who sees those incidents as unAmerican and immoral.


Submitted by Hardtack on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 5:12pm.

is that none of his family and friends have yet been spied upon or had any right jeapordized.

Basmati's picture
Submitted by Basmati on Tue, 09/19/2006 - 10:11pm.

... but I am astounded at your insight and you are completely right.


Submitted by OldSchoolFootball on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 6:40pm.

That's the fist intelligent thing you have ever said Abduhl ali- Basmati.

Basmati's picture
Submitted by Basmati on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 6:57pm.

Glad you agree with the two of us, OldSchool. I had figured you for a typical slack-jawed mouthbreathing Constitution hating ditto-monkey.

There may be hope for you yet! Smiling


Submitted by OldSchoolFootball on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 7:06pm.

You Muslims seem to like to call blacks "monkey". Reminds me of the cartoon you people had of Condi Rice with the monkey in her belly. Seems aside from Jews, Americans and Catholics you all hate blacks the most. Mohamed was a terrorist and I see his blind hatred still runs throughout his inbred offspring. All blacks aren't monkeys Mohummed Ali-Basmati. May all the pigs in Jerusalem squat on the faces of your dead relatives (Allah be willing) Eye-wink

Submitted by bladderq on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 8:39pm.

To their credit Islam is a color blind religion (unlike some others that will remain nameless or in the name of..). They only ask that you believe in God and accept the prophet. It helps if you learn the language of the prophet, Arabic. Much like Catholics and Latin, it gave them a common vernacular. They may have made fun of Condi because she is a misguided infidel but not because she is black.

muddle's picture
Submitted by muddle on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 8:18am.

The Islamic terrorists are certainly color blind. They will kill indiscriminately, regardless of age, race, religion, political affiliation, gender or sexual orientation.

I'm not sure which "nameless religion" you have in mind, but I am quite certain that you do not mean Christianity. To take you to be implying such would be to attribute ignorance to you, and I wish to be kind.


ImJustSaying's picture
Submitted by ImJustSaying on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 8:49am.

Hey rice, by definition, if one is partially incorrect, than being completely correct(right) is not possible. I think I picked that one in a logic class somewhere, and to tell you the truth, it's not all that an advanced a concept. Anyhow, lets ask the passengers who were NOT BLOWN UP when flying to America from Britain recently if they are safer because the Islamo-fascist-terrorists were caught before they had a chance to kill more civilians. You see, we may be a bit safer now, no thanks to you apparently.


Submitted by OldSchoolFootball on Tue, 09/19/2006 - 6:40pm.

... but I am dumbfounded at your ignorance and you are completely lost.

Submitted by rmoc on Wed, 09/20/2006 - 10:31pm.

I had an ex-brother in law who was of the peace and love religion of islam..He beat my sister after the marriage(not before) and preached the destruction of Israel and all Jews..This was 20 years ago.

Submitted by Hardtack on Thu, 09/21/2006 - 8:53am.

Yeah, and John Dillinger, a white man and I guess a Protestant, also robbed banks, but I don't, and I am a white Protestant. Go figure.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.