Our 9/11

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • John Ashcroft
    Veteran
    • Jan 2004
    • 2127

    Our 9/11

    In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on our country, the families of those who perished on that day became forever linked through our shared anguish and grief. But "the 9/11 families" are not a monolithic group that speaks in one voice, and nothing has made that more clear than the controversy over the Bush campaign ads.

    It is one thing for individual family members to invoke the memory of all 3,000 victims as they take to the microphone or podium to show respect for our collective loss. It is another for them to attempt to stifle the debate over the future direction of our country by declaring that the images of 9/11 should be off-limits in the presidential race, and to do so under the rubric of "The Families of Sept. 11." They do not represent me. Nor do they represent those Americans who feel that Sept. 11 was a defining moment in the history of our country and who want to know how the current or future occupant of the Oval Office views the lessons of that day.

    The images of Ground Zero, the Pentagon and Shanksville have been plastered over coffee mugs, T-shirts, placemats, book covers and postage stamps, all without a peep from many of these family members. I suspect that the real outrage over the ads has more to do with context than content. It's not the pictures that disturb them so much as the person who is using them. This is demonstrated in their affiliation with Moveon.org, a rabidly anti-Bush group that sponsored a rally they held last Friday calling for the president to pull his ads off the air. But by disingenuously declaring themselves "non-partisan" and insisting that it is a matter of "taste," they retain a powerful weapon that they have learned to exploit to their advantage. They are "9/11 family members" and therefore enjoy the cloak of deference that has been graciously conferred upon them by the public, politicians and, most significantly, the media.

    The leader of a lobbying group advised individuals at a 9/11 family meeting shortly after the attacks: "Make no mistake, you have a lot of power. Politicians are more afraid of you than you know." They know. As "relatives of 9/11 victims," they are virtually immune to challenge on the issue of who should have the loudest voice regarding the legacy of this national tragedy.
    But this was a tragedy that was experienced and felt not just by us, but by all Americans. The American people responded to the horrors of that day with unflinching courage and an outpouring of love, support and empathy, the memory of which fills me with a gratitude that I can never repay. We families received cards, letters, homemade quilts bearing the names and likenesses of our lost loved ones, hand-lettered drawings from whole classrooms of children, and an unprecedented amount of charitable funds that sustained and continue to sustain those in need more than two years later.

    These Americans, most of whom I will never have the privilege of meeting, also gave us something even more precious. When the planes hit the buildings and the towers fell, some of their sons and daughters balled up their fists and determined then and there that they wanted to "do something" about it. Those who donned the uniforms of our Armed Forces in order to fight the war on terrorism are not offended by the images of Ground Zero. On the contrary, they are moved and inspired by them.

    Whatever these 9/11 families may think of the president's foreign policy or the war in Iraq, I ask them to reconsider the language and tone of their statements. We should not tolerate or condone remarks such as those of the 9/11 relative who, so offended by the campaign ads, said that he "would vote for Saddam Hussein before I would vote for Bush." The insult was picked up and posted on Al-Jazeera's Web site. In view of the sacrifice our troops have made on our behalf, this insensitivity to them and their families suggests a level of self-indulgence and ingratitude that shocks the conscience.

    George W. Bush says that his presidency is inspired by an enduring obligation to those who lost their lives on that brutal September morning. The images of that day stand as an everlasting example of our country's darkest day and finest hour. They are a vivid reminder of the strength and resilience of our great country. They belong to us all--including this president. Let the candidates make their own choices. I trust the American people.

    Ms. Burlingame, a life-long Democrat, is the sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame, III, captain of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

    Link:
    here
  • Wayne L.

    #2
    I think the terrorists attacks of 9/11 on the WTC & the Pentagon brought our country symbolically together even though politically we were still a divided nation but the war on terror has been won in Afghanistan & even the war in Iraq despite differences between the American people even though looking back on it 4 years later 9/11 was really a local event shown on national television which politicians from both political parties will use for the next ten years.

    Comment

    • ashstralia
      ROTH ARMY ELITE
      • Feb 2004
      • 6566

      #3
      you guys probably know this, but here in australia we are fully supportive of your military. we have a long history of this. personally, when you were attacked on 9/11 i felt i was attacked too, and i was vindicated when our pm sent troops immediately. pres. bush is a hero of mine. i am old enough to remember pres bush snr, and i thought he was a good president too. (regardless of that simpsons episode).
      i would also love to have a terminator as a governor!!!!
      i'll be back!!!

      Comment

      • John Ashcroft
        Veteran
        • Jan 2004
        • 2127

        #4
        Welcome to the board. Now let me get this straight, whay you're saying is that the entire world doesn't see Bush as the new Hitler???

        I'm confused now. Our press and the international press has been saying that everyone hates George Bush. It's just got to be true! Even our new JFK said that "leaders" from foreign countries were practically begging him to beat our President...

        Comment

        • FORD
          ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

          • Jan 2004
          • 58783

          #5
          Wow, Rupert Murdoch is a DLR fan! Who knew?
          Eat Us And Smile

          Cenk For America 2024!!

          Justice Democrats


          "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

          Comment

          • knuckleboner
            Crazy Ass Mofo
            • Jan 2004
            • 2927

            #6
            of COURSE it's context that's the problem. though, i doubt it matters that it's bush. if kerry, or dean, or nader, or ANYONE used the images in campaign commercials, the response would be the same.

            when the families see pictures of the fallen towers, they're not seeing the attack on america. they're seeing the grave of their child, spouse, parent, sibling. and not just the grave, but the site of their murder, as well.

            just because all of america felt attacked that day, doesn't mean that the images mean the same thing to everyone.

            i'm not saying that bush is evil for using the commercials. or even that he shouldn't have used them. but anyone who can't see why the families of the victims might feel a little more strongly about the issue than the average american is missing the point.

            Comment

            • John Ashcroft
              Veteran
              • Jan 2004
              • 2127

              #7
              Actually, I posted this because there have been 4 family members of 9/11 coached to slam the President for the ads. It was pathetic. All of them parroted the same DNC talking points, and tried to pretend it was from the heart. And they were on different networks, mind you. Not all sitting together in front of a single interviewer. The Dems have done exactly what they're accusing the Pres of doing (I know, surprise surprise!). They've found some victims to be political hacks for them. And they ought to be disgusted with themselves.

              Anyway, this person's simply stating that those 4 don't speak for all the families (but they acted as they did). Didn't we post the other side of this yet? Let me look, and I'll post it if not.

              Comment

              • ELVIS
                Banned
                • Dec 2003
                • 44120

                #8
                Well yesterday, Rush Limbaugh played the soundbytes of the 911 families who spoke out against the commercials...

                They were almost identical!

                Comment

                • knuckleboner
                  Crazy Ass Mofo
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 2927

                  #9
                  eh...if they're speaking for a group that hasn't approved them to speak for it, then the 4 members are definitley wrong in how they're going about it. no question.

                  however, either way, it seemed like the author was also suggesting that, "Nor do they represent those Americans who feel that Sept. 11 was a defining moment in the history of our country and who want to know how the current or future occupant of the Oval Office views the lessons of that day."

                  again, just because we all suffered in some form on 9/11 (and we all did) doesn't mean that immediate family members of the victims should be viewed from the same perspective as the average American in situations like this.

                  Comment

                  • ELVIS
                    Banned
                    • Dec 2003
                    • 44120

                    #10
                    Right. Immediate family members should not be used as political pawns...

                    Sickening...

                    Comment

                    • John Ashcroft
                      Veteran
                      • Jan 2004
                      • 2127

                      #11
                      Exactly Elvis. And those people were (quite obviously). Which means somebody in the Democratic party put them up to it (and of course we're finding out the Kerry's wife fund the group these 4 associate themselves with). I guess I should be happy that the dems are this desperate, but I'm actually sickened by this.

                      Comment

                      • ELVIS
                        Banned
                        • Dec 2003
                        • 44120

                        #12
                        Their words...

                        VOICE I: I think for someone like President Bush who has not cooperated with this commission, who has stonewalled this commission.

                        VOICE II: This president and his administration blocked the creation of the commission, have stonewalled the commission.

                        VOICE I: If this was realistic from the morning of September 11th, it would show President Bush before a group of school children listening to them read, while the twin towers were burning.

                        VOICE II: If he wants to show a picture of 9-11 depicting what he was doing, it should be a picture of him sitting and reading in a classroom to school children. That's where he was on 9-11.

                        VOICE I: And we need to find out why 3,000 people were murdered on his watch.

                        VOICEII: Well, you know, this happened on his watch.

                        Hmmm...

                        Comment

                        • John Ashcroft
                          Veteran
                          • Jan 2004
                          • 2127

                          #13
                          OK, there's the beginning:

                          Bush Campaign Vows to Keep Controversial Ads on Air

                          Mar. 5 - The Bush campaign, stung by the uproar over its 9/11 ads, vigorously defended the controversial spots yesterday and vowed to keep them on the air.

                          Amid a furious counterattack spearheaded by former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik and presidential confidant Karen Hughes, one top Bush political strategist said the spots might now be shown in even more media markets than the original buy.

                          The first three ads began airing yesterday on cable networks and in at least 17 states.

                          "This is part of the President's record," Giuliani told the Daily News. "It's part of history. He did such a good job it would almost be false advertising not to include images of 9/11."

                          Asked whether the Bush campaign had asked him to step forward to help quell the firestorm from families of the Ground Zero dead and Democratic detractors, Giuliani added: "I volunteered to do it. When we saw the ads, we called them."

                          The ex-mayor's "part of history" remark was recycled throughout the day by presidential defenders, many of them recruited by Bush political aides stung by the vehemence of the backlash from the families.

                          "Sept. 11 is not some distant event in the past," Hughes told ABC. "It's also important to recognize the impact it had on our national public policy."

                          The clamor over the ads will continue today when one group of 9/11 families assembles at Ground Zero to demand that Bush pull the commercials.

                          The September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows quoted Bush saying on Jan. 23, "I have no ambition whatsoever to use [9/11] as a political issue." The dovish group also has opposed the Iraq war.

                          Some Bush supporters conceded the Ground Zero footage, particularly a fleeting glimpse of flag-draped remains being removed from the wreckage, may have been a political miscue.

                          The campaign "could have just used the building," said one Republican, referring to a shot of the scarred facade of one of the twin towers.


                          Another local Republican official was harsher, saying the Bush camp misjudged the local impact.

                          "They messed it up," the source said.

                          A GOP congressional source said, "It's an early warning to Republicans that it's a risk to be using 9/11 images. . . . If there's a backlash because of it, it does more to hurt than to help."

                          Several GOP sources said Team Bush had been warned about the need to tread carefully with Ground Zero images and should have tested the ads with New York focus groups to check for possible trouble.

                          Meanwhile, a new poll showed Bush tied with Democratic challenger John Kerry, with independent candidate Ralph Nader at 6 percent.

                          The survey, conducted by The Associated Press and Ipsos-Public Affairs, reinforced Democrats' fears that Nader could cost Kerry the election.

                          Link: here

                          And protestors from "The September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows" worked the television circuit. This story makes them seem like just a small scale lobbying group. Wrong they were (see next post)

                          Comment

                          • John Ashcroft
                            Veteran
                            • Jan 2004
                            • 2127

                            #14
                            I posted this in another thread, but for your convenience I'll post it here as well.

                            (MRS.) KERRY'S CASH CONNECTION

                            March 9, 2004 -- To hear some folks tell it, families of the 9/11 victims have risen en masse to denounce President Bush for using brief images from Ground Zero in his campaign commercials.
                            We have no doubt that the use of the images is appropriate - given that the president's leadership in the wake of 9/11, and his conduct of the War on Terror, are under drumbeat assault by John Kerry and the Democrats.

                            But now it turns out that this whole furor is driven by a tiny group that's motivated by a far-left agenda and a festering hatred of the president - and has some quite dubious financial ties.

                            Leading the rhetorical charge has been an outfit called September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows - which, the group admits, has only a few dozen members and represents relatives of no more than 1 percent of the 9/11 victims.

                            More to the point, the group was formed specifically to oppose the entire War on Terror: Not just the campaign against Saddam Hussein, but also the toppling of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

                            Indeed, the group's leaders traveled to Afghanistan, drawing a detestable moral equivalence between the 9/11 attacks and U.S. bombing of the Taliban and opposing "violent responses to terrorism."

                            Then, before the onset of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a Peaceful Tomorrows delegation went to Baghdad to "demonstrate solidarity" with Iraqis - a move that Saddam's deputy, Tariq Aziz, termed at the time "a very important international development."

                            They also demanded that Congress set up a $20 million fund to compensate Afghan "victims" of the U.S. military.

                            And back in January 2003, the group said had it had gotten a "verbal commitment" to the fund proposal from the junior senator from Massachusetts - John F. Kerry.

                            Little surprise there - because Peaceful Tomorrows' parent group, the San Francisco-based Tides Foundation, has received millions from foundations controlled by Kerry's heiress wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.

                            A spokesman for Kerry insists that her donations to Tides were earmarked specifically for environmental charities based in Pennsylvania. But money is fungible - and the Tides Foundation has a lot more than greening the earth on its plate.

                            It has given millions to anti-war groups since 9/11 - particularly the extremist MoveOn.org.

                            Tides has also funded groups like United for a Fair Economy, which has been involved in violent anti-globalization street protests.

                            For example, the Ruckus Society, which was largely responsible for the anarchy in Seattle in 1999 and trains would-be environmental terrorists in the practice of "monkey-wrenching" - the willful destruction of construction equipment and so on.

                            Tides gets much of its funds from philanthropists like Mrs. Kerry and billionaire George Soros - who has made defeating President Bush his top personal priority.

                            As Richard Berman, director of the Center for Consumer Freedom, told Congress in 2002: "The Tides Foundation distributes other foundations' money, while shielding the identity of the actual donors."

                            Call it charitable money-laundering.

                            This, then, is the fringe crowd that declares itself "offended" by the Bush ads.

                            They're people who are offended by anything this president does - and they are working hard to put John Kerry in the White House.

                            Remember that the next time you hear a news report about "widespread popular outrage."

                            Link: here

                            Comment

                            • Jesus Christ
                              Veteran
                              • Jan 2004
                              • 2428

                              #15
                              Here's a letter to the New York Post
                              The worst piece of paper on the east coast
                              Matter of fact the whole state forty cents
                              in New York City fifty cents elsewhere
                              It makes no goddamn sense at all
                              America's oldest continuously published daily piece of bullshit
                              - Chuck D

                              Comment

                              Working...