Remember why we fight
President Bush's address to the nation on Sept. 11, 2001:
Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger.
These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation.
Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.
America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.
The search is under way for those who are behind these evil acts. I've directed the full resources for our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.
America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism. Tonight I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened. And I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us, spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for you are with me."
This is a day when all Americans from every walk of life unite in our resolve for justice and peace. America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time.
None of us will ever forget this day, yet we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.
- May we never forget 9/11... may we take to heart President Bush's words, and stand tall and strong for freedom, and for justice.
Posts
23 comments:
http://miaculpa.blogspot.com/2006/0
5/blog-post_16.html
this speech on 9/11 was a long time ago, well before the adminstration started illegally detaining people in Guantanamo, spying on average Americans in violation of the 4th amendment, and fighting an illegal war in Iraq. Meanwhile, allowing training camps in Pakistan to flourish, and ignoring the fact that the hijackers of the 9/11 planes were from Saudi Arabia, and allowing Iran - the real rogue state - to continue to laugh at us as they develop nuclear weapons.
Thanks Jen, that was a good read.
MG: Do you believe that load of sewage?
"well before the adminstration started illegally detaining people in Guantanamo,"
Um, yeah. Enemy combatants that fight without a uniform on are not covered by the US constitution, nor the rights granted by it to US citizens. Nor are they under the Geneva convention, which is for a war where both sides are trying to minimize civilian casualities. The Islamic Terrorists make no distinctions, rather they prey on the civilians.
"pying on average Americans in violation of the 4th amendment,
For clarity, the 4th amendment:
"
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularity describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
Notice the small part about 'unreasonable searches and seizures'. Now, is a record of who you called, and who called you unreasonable? And the spying is not on average americans, the wiretapping is on calls from outside the country pertaining to al queda and other assortiated bad guys.
"and fighting an illegal war in Iraq"
How praytell is it illegal? Congress authorised it, and the military is winning it.
"Meanwhile, allowing training camps in Pakistan to flourish"
Yeah. Sure.
"and ignoring the fact that the hijackers of the 9/11 planes were from Saudi Arabia,"
Sure they were. But they weren't trained in Saudia Arabia. The training took place elsewhere, after they left Saudi Arabia.
"and allowing Iran - the real rogue state - to continue to laugh at us as they develop nuclear weapons."
Axis of Evil: North Korea and Iran remain. Iraq is gone from the evil part. So, if the war in Iraq was illegal, what about a war in Iran?
MG,
If you really beleive its illegal to detain terrorists,
Please post a link to the law, code, or convention that states such and show you reasoning that applies that law to these un-uniformed murders.
FYI, The government has been screening all your phone calls since the 70s.
All we've done is make the intelligence more accesable to the organizations that can use this valuablt information to help stop terrorism.
How, praytell, was Operation Iraqi Freesom illigal?
If it was indeed illigal,
How were we able to convince 40+ other countries to help out?
Um...
I'd like to see some documentation from a repuatable soucre stating that there are terrorist training camps in Pakistan.
By suggesting we should invade our ally Saudi Arabia just because the majority of the 9-11 hijackers were from there is borderline racism.
As for Iran,
The fact that people like your self give the administration greif over doing what we all thought was right in Iraq with a similar situation does not help the matter any.
Rest assured however,
We're working on the problem,
But it is extremely complex.
I've looked into it myself and it will be intenslly more difficult than Iraq.
If you don't beleive me,
Start by researching the geography.
One more thing
I'd much rather go kill the terrorists in their backyard,
As opposed to them killing me in mine.
Or you in your back yard.
You people are SO naive. You actually believe that fighting in Iraq will prevent attacks here or in the rest of the world? sure - that's why London was bombed. That's why Egypt has been attacked.
unbelievable the naivete and blind support you give to this joke of a president.
the 4th amendment - "unreasonable" for them to be capturing a database of EVERYONE I have ever called? you bet that's unreasonable. and to LIE about it? like everything else, they lie, lie, lie...
I hate to do this,
But right back at you.
Who ever said that liberating Iraq would stop terrorism?
No one.
That's cause terrorism is a global problem.
Freeing the Iraqi people deprived the terrorists ov a lot of resources,
But it did not stop them.
That would be like saying invading Iran will prvent the a nuclear exchange.
That's wrong because we've still got North Korea and China to worrying about.
it would significantly reduce the odds,
but it wouldn't garuntee its prevention.
Where was this whole phone thing lied about?
And FYI, the fourth amendment only mentions physical things.
Your conversations don't fall under that.
And they're not being seized,
They're being passivly monitored.
If you think that passive monitoring goes against the 4th Amendment than you'd better right your congressman and tell him that air port security and speeding tickets are unconstitutional.
Yeah, Let us know hoe that goes.
And FYI, the fourth amendment only mentions physical things.
How old are you? 12? clearly you haven't had the most basic gov't class yet, let alone attending any law school courses. it applies well beyond "physical" things - and has been interpreted that way by courts pretty much since the first session of the Supreme Court following ratification of the Constitution.
And what if I am?
Have you attended such law classes as you infer that I have not?
And if speciallized schooling is a requirment for interpreting the constitution,
Than I beleive the system is severly flawed.
May we see some examples of it being interpreted as you claim?
And if this is the case,
Why is it just know becomeing an issue?
Why was this not brought to our attention when it started?
One more thing,
If you really think that your take on the 4th Amendment is right,
Did you take my suggestion and expose the unconstitutionality of our national security program?
I thought not.
"You actually believe that fighting in Iraq will prevent attacks here or in the rest of the world?"
Um, as far as I can tell, we haven't been wacked by any terrorists on US soil in 5 years. Fighting in their backyard makes'em think about other things then attacking US citizens.
"unbelievable the naivete and blind support you give to this joke of a president."
Tell me, who did you support in 2000 and 2004?
This phone thing is a joke. Bellsouth and Verizon are both saying 'What the heck are ya'll talking about, we didn't do anything!'.
And like Jason said, its only passive monitering.
"How old are you? 12? clearly you haven't had the most basic gov't class yet, let alone attending any law school courses. it applies well beyond "physical" things - and has been interpreted that way by courts pretty much since the first session of the Supreme Court following ratification of the Constitution."
Yeah. And keeping track of who called who is in violation of the 4th amendment how?
Still, you didn't answer any of my arguements above, or Earthys. Why?
"special schooling?"
Um yes, actually - there is an entire jurisprudence entitled "Constitutional Law" - which is the study of the way in which the courts have interpreted the Constitution from the days of ratification through the present. Most law schools offer at least 3 levels of Constitutional Law because the history, the caselaw, the theories and interpretations are so vast and expansive.
So, uh, yeah - there's some "special schooling" that every single law school and state bar in this country requires.
And I assume you have this schooling?
You still didn't answer his points.
That wasn't my question.
I didn't ask if it exists.
I asked if you've been through it.
You're avoiding the questions.
yes, i have.
the war was illegal because it was a "fraud" and "misrepresentation." All reasons put forth were known falsities, in other words "lies."
Ok...
I'm going to explain this in plain english...
(You do understand english, right?)
We understand that is your opinion.
We're asking you do back it up with evidence from documented sources.
anon. could I have the link to the website for the Law Firm where you are employed? Somehow I have a hint that you're not a lawyer at all. With a reasonably large interest in that field myself I understand somewhat the training that goes into passing the bar exam.
From my observation you are severely lacking in some of those areas, so could you back up your claim?
Heh, thanks David. I was going to say that in much harsher terms, but your question works well enough.
MG, you still have not answered our points, is it because you have no factual evidence to back up your fraudulent claims?
Wow, I love to sit and read these debates. After all, why tune into the news when ye can sit and listen to what seems like a Consevative vs. Liberal blood bath? Keep it up guys, I'm sure we'll make a difference by arguing with each other.
Also I'm just cuirous, who did each of ye support in 2000 and 2004? I might be able to make an educated guess, but I just want to hear it or... see it me self. I do however wish to state that I believed Bush to be far more capable of running this country than Kerry could ever 'ave been. And better than Gore obviously, I mean, Clinton backed the guy. And personally I thought that Clinton was an imbecile.
Peace be with ye all,
Maverick
no - i'm not disclosing the firm i work for. but i assure you, young child....i'm well qualified for the work that i do.
i voted for Gore in 2000, and Kerry in 2004 - but i wasn't a Kerry fan, i would have accepted ANYONE but Bush. he has NEVER been qualified to lead this nation. its laughable. if it weren't so detrimental to our nation.
http://www.themoderntribune.com/
iraq_war_violating_the_war_powers_act.htm
here's one of many, many articles you can find simply by googling "illegal iraq war."
again, going to war based on lies is quite simpley "fraud and misrepresentation" which are both illegal acts under the common law of this nation. You don't need a statute to rely on.
"Now I am isolated," said Monkath Abdul Razzaq, a middle-class Sunni Arab, who decided to leave after the bombing. "I have no government. I have no protection from the government. Anyone can come to my house, take me, kill me and throw me in the trash."
yes - things are so much better for the Iraqi people, aren't they?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/19/world/
middleeast/19migration.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Thatnk you for finally posting some evidence.
However,
Next time,
Do us all a favor and put the link followed by a few lines that prove your point.
And use a more cediable sourse,
As far as I can tell,
This is a small group of people who got their own website in 2002.
It's not actually a publication.
Try for the Washington post or some well known distobution that actaully has a national reputtion.
And something less biased too.
It seems everything on that site is extremely liberal.
It's better to use something more moderate sense you think we're so conservative.
You have a better chance of getting us to agree with you then.
As for your NY TImes quote,
There's no context in your post,
We have know idea what is being talked about,
And to read the article,
I have to subscribe to their service.
Sorry,
I'm not goin to pay money just so that someone can convince me I'm wrong.
There are better ways to go about that.
As for your backround,
As far as we know,
your just a kid too.
You might actually work for a law firm,
But we don't know,
You could actually be one of the top lawyers in one of the best firms in America,
Or you could be some kid that helps daddy with the paperwork in his private firm.
Big difference.
I'm going to assume its closer to the later,
Since I've never seen anything close to your style of speaking in any of my friends that are lawyers.
If your not going to give your own credentials to back up your opinion,
Than don't fall back on them.
I too have some failry impressive credentials,
I haven't shared them her,
but all my examples don't deal with just my opinion,
they've been based on people I know.
So that actually works.
Alright I went through and read this. MG why do you think it is illegal to detain terrorists?
Anon,
The telephone companies have been keeping records for years and years about the telephone calls that everyone who owns a telephone. So when the NSA went in and demanded these records with a court order mind you they had to hand it over. I doubt you have had these trainings as you will not put down a link to where people can look up the laws.
with a court order mind you they had to hand it over. I doubt you have had these trainings as you will not put down a link to where people can look up the laws.
This is EXACTLY my point.
(a) there WAS no court order. If there WAS a court order, it wouldn't be illegal.
(b) there IS NO LAW...if there was a law that authorized this...it woulnd't be illegal.
Jus tcause there's no law specifically authorizing it,
Doesn't make it illigal.
When was a law passed that said you could breath?
Post a Comment