...
That is why they are so eager to equate criticism of them with treason and to stifle debate. They have not only lost the debate over Iraq and general Middle East militarism, but their continuous extremism and deceit is being exposed, and they fear being held accountable. It is only natural that they want to render criticism of their war and their conduct impermissible.
...
I wish my mom were still alive to recount the stories she told me of how the Nazis slowly but surely stifled any dissent. Many of the citizenry not trusting their neighbors by the time the war started, all wondering who was in the employ, either monetarily or ideologically, of the Gestapo. My grandfather was elected mayor of the little town that is my ancestral home just after the war and told of the time it took to heal the wounds of Nazism, the suspicion and distrust of the townspeople toward each other and authority.
...
And that was the point of Gaffney's column as well -- that it should be considered not only un-American, but actually criminal, to criticize the war and the people such as Frank Gaffney and Doug Feith who concocted it and sold it to the country. But ultimately, that tactic will get them nowhere. Americans are not going to be persuaded by the idea that they are obligated to refrain from criticizing Doug Feith, Bill Kristol and the wars they have spawned, to say nothing of the new ones they are attempting to foist on the country.
It is insufficient simply to have persuaded Americans that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. It was not merely a mistake. It was the by-product of extremely deceitful ideologues who exploited the 9/11 attacks to implement a very destructive agenda that long pre-dated 9/11 and that has nothing to do with combating terrorism other than the fact that terrorism is the pretense used to justify that agenda.
...
So, can we revisit the question of whether Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen, if not facilitated it, now?
No comments:
Post a Comment