"To save America, we need another 9/11"

[mogster]

"ONE MONTH from The Anniversary, I'm thinking another 9/11 would help America.
What kind of a sick bastard would write such a thing?

A bastard so sick of how splintered we are politically - thanks mainly to our ineptitude in Iraq - that we have forgotten who the enemy is."

Thus a columnist starts his rather groundbreaking commentary about the situation today.

In a political landscape where the conservative honeymoon has been replaced by reality, self criticism and self reproach is non existent as their false, fear-based movement have become a minority - despite solid media bias in favor of this extremism, despite the establishments automatic support for the presidents unilateral line, despite overwhelming international support where even NATO was used to attend to the demand for immediate retaliation, and despite a coalition of the 'willing' invading Iraq on Bush' command.

Nothing helps.
So, as one realizes this, the real enemy becomes visible: The people.
We, the People. It is our democracy that has become a danger, our free speech that has become the enemy, because it puts the facts on the table and shows where the buck stops - at the door of the international power-elite.

'We need a new terror attack'. Taste that sample of free speech.
A new terror attack against the US would have made this man happy, made him feel strong and powerful again. His political compadres would again have had fresh murders, fresh fear to use against those that protest, those seeking peace and those disagreeing to the fear policy. They need this fear, it's their foremost argument to stay in power, continue the wars and strangle democracy.

In such a perspective, 2700 people are 'expendable' - they're just pieces in a much bigger game, needed victims to show the US how dangerous the world _really_ is. In a scenario where war in several theatres is a political goal to achieve dominance - isn't this a logical way of thinking? Isn't it logical to want new terror as the old one has been 'used up', has lost it's effect?

One rarely see such a clear indication to what this is all about, and how they think, those that keep the machinery going. One understands the meaning of 'Shock and Awe' and get a glimpse of how this huge project impacts those that has gone astray, and how induced terror fusions with their inverted logic into an ideological platform identical to the platform promoted by terrorists and authoritarian regimes.
You shan't ask questions, but blindly obey. Dissent is dangerous, it helps the enemy and makes him stronger. At the same time, if the enemy isn't dangerous enough, isn't fearsome enough, a wish is formed that this should be manifested in the shape of a new terror attack.
Bush has said that it would be 'a heck of lot easier' if only the US was a dictatorship. If he'd had all power and no dissent.

One may conclude that mr. Bykofsky would agree to that.

Do you?

[Joanne98]

1. The Zeitgeist is number 70 on Google videos. Rate it up!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331&total=100&start=60&num=10&so=0&type=t100_all&plindex=19

[Ezlivin]

2. Should be easy enough - I'm sure they still have the plans from the last attack

Shock and awe, baby.

Works every time.

[mrcheerful]

3. The right has been saying we need another world war to "fix" the economy since WWII

ended. Why do the right keep trying to fix things that weren't broken until they started fixing things? SS, Brings in more money then it spends every year. Theres only one problem, since Johnson every politician has raided the SS funds to pay for wars and weapons of war. The answer to SS isn't "fixing" it, the answer is keep your dirty rotten politician paws out of the GD SS till.

[Imagevision]

4. Another 9/11/ - nah!, even Bush wouldn't allow another 9-11 to happen on his watch but,

if the Dem's do manage to get the documents they seek after returning from vacation? hard to tell, Bush would need to create some diversion to allow him to get past January 2009. (if you get my drift?)

[Uncle Joe]

5. He totally misreads the fundamental reason as to why unity broke down.

"Most Americans today believe Iraq was a mistake. Why?

Not because Americans are "anti-war."

Americans have turned their backs because the war has dragged on too long and we don't have the patience for a long slog. We've been in Iraq for four years, but to some it seems like a century. In contrast, Britain just pulled its soldiers out of Northern Ireland where they had been, often being shot at, almost 40 years."

While it's definitely true some Americans are anti-war or pro peace depending on your viewpoint, that alone didn't eliminate the unity, he is referring to. And with those that aren't it's not necessarily because the war has dragged on, although that is an influence.

The major reason American unity was squandered is because the American People's good faith in their government and their watchdog fourth estate guardians for democracy "free press" in leveling with them and telling them the truth about a matter so grave as going to war has been cynically abused with lies and deceit at all levels.

You can't send a nation off to a war based on lies, asking them to risk their family members, friends and fellow Americans lives, limbs and minds and not expect serious repercussions. You can't ask them to go out and kill a bunch of people that didn't pose a threat to us and not expect a loss of faith.

Once a "leader" has lost the people's faith in his or her credibility, just as Bush/Cheney have, should we have another 9/11 on their watch, the last thing they will get is unity, but maybe unity isn't really what they're seeking anyway.