Below is today’s brief essay in the Los Angeles Times that is part of a series called Reflections on 9/11. I was asked that day after the attacks to write a column for the newspaper, which ran on September 13, 2001. As I wrote the piece, I could still see smoke rising from the Pentagon. The plane in Washington hit just behind my car a minute or so after I passed the Pentagon on my way to work from Alexandria. On that day, my greatest concerns were two-fold: a change in the definition of war and the expanded use of assassination. Unfortunately, my worst predictions were exceeded by the Bush Administration and later the Obama Administration. It is shocking to think that this was ten years ago. The images and feelings remain so vivid. My car was forced into a curb by a careening car that morning and I had to replace my tire as the smoke bellowed from the Pentagon. The thought of all the innocent people lost in Washington, New York, and Pennsylvania remains an open wound for so many of us. The sheer savagery and inhumanity of the attacks shocked the conscience — a feeling only magnified later when Bin Laden was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings. The cautionary piece on September 13th was not meant to take away from the legitimate and collective anger that we felt — and still feel. However, it was already clear within two days of the attacks that Bush officials were going to seek the radical expansion of presidential powers and were already referencing our civil liberties as an impediment to our safety. My heartfelt sympathy to all who lost friends and family on that day.
In his September 13 Op Ed (“Cries of “war” stumble over the law”), Turley warned against the government seeking “greater flexibility” in responding to terrorists by treating criminal attacks “as a matter of war.” “Our system,” he wrote, “requires that legal means be used to achieve legal ends. We decide those means and ends within the general confines of the Constitution.” How has the founding document fared?
As the smoke was still rising from the Pentagon and World Trade Center, it became quickly evident that some of the greatest damage from the September 11th attacks would not come from without but from within our nation.
There was an almost immediate effort by Bush officials to change the definition of war. Rather than declare war on Afghanistan (where Bin Laden was sheltered), President George W. Bush wanted to declare war on terrorism. It was no rhetorical triviality. Bush decided to invoke the heightened constitutional powers of a wartime president by declaring war on what was a category of crime. Because there could never be a total, final defeat of terrorism, this “war” would become permanent – as would the heightened powers of the president.
Ten years later, the country remains “at war,” with President Barack Obama expanding many of the national security powers of his predecessor and, in the Libyan war, claiming his own re-definition of war: “a time-limited, scope-limited military action.”
Of course, the ominous signs in 2001 were realized in a myriad of other ways, from the establishment of the first American torture program to the widespread use of targeted assassinations, including operations killing American citizens. Ironically, I wrote then of the possibility of a new law that could govern the use of assassination, one that would deny a president unilateral authority to kill individuals and would reduce the need to invoke war powers. Instead, the Bush administration claimed full wartime authority as well as radically expanding the use of assassination as an unchecked presidential power. The claim of unilateral presidential authority to kill even United States citizens has been embraced by Obama.
What ultimately fell on that terrible day proved to be some of our most important constitutional structures. Tragically, it is a degree of damage that cannot be claimed by Al Qaeda alone.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University.
‘Tragically, it is a degree of damage that cannot be claimed by Al Qaeda alone.”
Massachusetts Initiative Campaign Launch!
Posted on August 18, 2011 by Byron Belitsos
Unprecedented effort for new investigation to be launched on 9/11 anniversary
U.S. SENATOR LEADS MASSACHUSETTS
INITIATIVE CAMPAIGN FOR A NEW 9/11 COMMISSION
(Boston, MA) Senator Mike Gravel announced today the inauguration of a citizens’ campaign to authorize a new investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 after his proposed ballot measure was certified today by the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Martha Coakley. [The text of the initiative is posted below or is available as a PDF: Initiative Petition for a Massachesetts Law.] If adopted by the voters, the new law would create an independent, citizen-led investigatory commission that would be seated in
Massachusetts and be vested with subpoena power and the power to take testimony under oath. “I personally initiated this effort to create a new 9/11 commission,” stated Gravel, “in response to the outpouring of calls for a new investigation—in the light of new evidence—from Americans across the political spectrum. Because our gridlocked Congress is obviously incapable of taking up this issue, I believe that state initiatives are our best alternative approach. Massachusetts is an optimal state in which to begin this work.”
Gravel is a former two-term Senator from Alaska and a 2008 presidential candidate who is also considering a run for the presidency in 2012 at the urging of grassroots groups. The Senator is currently chair and founder of the Citizens 9/11 Commission Campaign (911cc.org), a California-based citizen’s group that is filing similar ballot measures in other states, notably Oregon and Alaska.
http://9-11cc.org/index.php/2011/08/18/press-room/
The Toronto Hearings begin the final day with a moment of silence to honor and remember those harmed by the 9/11 catastrophe.
Dredd:
Toronto and Massachusetts
Kinda reminds me of this:
“Buffalo Springfield – Stop, hey what’s that sound”
The US Government will not allow a truthful investigation of 9/11
The US Government is complicit in the murders of 9/11
Architects & Engineers – Solving the Mystery of WTC 7 – AE911Truth.org
NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology LIED in final government report! WTC 7 did NOT come down from office furnishings fires.
“The following documentary includes several of the dozens of technical and building experts that were interviewed and that appear in our forthcoming full length documentary – 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out. Altogether of course there are more than 1,500 Architects & Engineers that have signed the AE911Truth petition calling for a new investigation of the destruction of all 3 high-rises at the World Trade Center on 9/11.”
“a feeling only magnified later when Obama was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings.”
Would you like to clarify this?
Dr. Alan Sabrosky: Mossad, Jewish neo-cons, and Israelis orchestrated 9/11 attack
Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: 9/11 and Beyond
By Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College
“Dr. Alan Sabrosky says that the military brass now know that Israel and traitors within our nation committed the 911 attack.”
“Only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA and Israel’s Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the “who benefits” principle: Mossad. And that incentive dovetailed perfectly with the neo-con’s agenda and explicitly expressed need for a catalytic event to mobilize the American public for their wars, using American military power to destroy Israel’s enemies. Only the unexpected strength of the Iraqi resistance kept Syria and Iran from being attacked in the second Bush Administration. Thus, the evidential trail for 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq run from PNAC, AIPAC and their cohorts; through the mostly Jewish neo-cons in the Bush Administration; and back to the Israeli government. None of the denials and political machinations can alter that essential reality. Terms such as treason, betrayal and deceit do not overstate the case against them.”
“Zionism Unmasked” – Dr. Alan Sabrosky 07-13-2011
Glenn, don’t waste time with the resident conspiracy theorist. BVM does not let facts, science, photographic evidence, or common sense get in the way of the delusions. Most of the rest of us just ignore and do not respond. BVM never responds directly but just adds more copy and paste material from other conspiracy theorist web sites.
With all the media coverage, I have been having a rather difficult time the past few days.
Ten years ago this morning, my wife and sister were supposed to be taking the rooftop tour of the WTC. Neither she nor my sister responded to my repeated calls to their cell phones.
She finally called home about 7:00 that evening. She had not been able to get through. The two of them had decided to delay their visit for a day.
The nightmares started again a few days ago.
BVM – where ya been? Sorry to see you crawl out of the feted cesspool you inhabit to rejoin us. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since cockroaches thrive on chaos.
This madness is part and parcel of the of the orgy of terror porn, empty, cheap manufactured emotion and pseudo patriotism that we get ‘enjoy’ this weekend.
Meanwhile we ignore the fact that an relatively minor attack that only cost a few thousand bucks generated a response costing well over $4 trillion dollars (the total is hard to judge since so much of it is buried in other crap) of money that could have done so much good in other places, caused us to invade an innocent country killing many times the original attacks death toll, remove important safeguards from our personal freedoms, become a torture State, sell our moral position in the world for an orgasm of self-righteous revenge killings and pretty much doomed us to second class status for the foreseeable future.
Dredd….For What Its Worth…
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/09/03/for-what-its-worth/
I have been sadden very much with the events that unfolded that day…To say I am in shock…is an understatement….Nothing is ever the same once a day passes….
The Years of Shame
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.
Definition of complicit:
“Involved with others in an illegal activity or wrongdoing”
Obama has not ordered a new, independent investigation of 9/11 in light of overwhelming evidence that it is needed.
The definition of complicit fits Obama perfectly in the murders of 9/11.
Obama can be arrested for the his birth certificate forgery. No need for impeachment. Legally, Obama is a usurper and doesn’t have to be impeached. He can be arrested at any time just like anyone else. “No man is above the law.” Legally, he cannot be impeached. To be impeached a person must be the legal president. Obama never was. His election was illegal. Obama is not a citizen of the US and he was guilty of massive criminality before the election.
On 9/7/11 former AZ Sheriff Richard Mack stated, “My good friend and colleague, Sheriff Arpaio from AZ, is now investigating Obama re. the birth certificate. It is entirely proper. Should charges develop, then yes, he would file the charges. The President is not above the law.”
Forgive me but I can’t keep from my mind on this day the manifesto of the
Project For The New American Century from 1997, of which two signatories were Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
Try as I might the implications of this document, in light of the events that have transpired in this last decade, can’t be pushed to the back of my mind.
@Glenn
You are correct!
Jonathan Turley wrote; “a feeling only magnified later when Obama was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings.”
I think it is extremely important for JT to clarify that statement. I’m pretty sure he meant to say Osama.
If Professor does clarify that statement, it would be appreciated if he would tell us what grounds we would have for declaring war on Afghanistan, though we knew those involved in the terrosrist attacks on 9/11 were not government sanctioned actors.
The striking thing about 9/11 not how much it’s changed, but how little
Published: Sunday, September 11, 2011, 9:15 AM
By John Farmer/The Star-Ledger
“The death of the twin towers 10 years ago today “changed life in America forever.” We know that’s so because the media and their battalions of commentators keep telling us it’s so — often in just those words.
Except that it really isn’t so.
The most striking thing about the attack of 9/11 is not how much it has changed life in this country but how little.”
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2011/09/the_striking_thing_about_911_n.html
Mike S.
I caught the piece about the Massachusetts initiative on the radio and they also talked about The Project For A New American Century
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
And this also:
How 911 Really Happened
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to Rense.com
5-7-6
http://www.rense.com/general71/d333m.htm
“Some time after the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) composed their manifesto, referring to a “New Pearl Harbor” attack on America, an ultra-secret group of powerful government insiders outlined a series of plans that would attempt to fulfill every facet of their agenda.”
“The striking thing about 9/11 not how much it’s changed, but how little”
Eniobob,
Excellent point. I can remember being glued to the TV during that day and its’ aftermath listening to the blather about “How this changes everything” and cringing. Yelling back at the TV that they were forgetting Pearl Harbor, with thousands dead and the US Pacific Fleet near destroyed. Because of work location I spent a lot of time at the WTC through the years, perhaps three times weekly. I retired from that job in 1999 and so was spared the terror, but being so familiar with it and loving it, the effect of its destruction was personally quite moving. Nevertheless, it changed nothing except for the excesses and wars prosecuted without benefit of Constitutional oversight, merely because of this emotional falsehood spread by the chattering classes.
You have a typo in there in which you say “Obama” instead of “Osama.” Please fix. Thanks.
Thanks. Sorry for typo. I am driving back to dc after a wedding in Chicago with the kids and dog. I did not catch the typo this morning.
Obama is not a “Natural Born Citizen.”
Mario Apuzzo, Esq. excerpt: … because Obama was not born to a father and mother who were both U.S. citizens when he was born (he was born to a father who was a British citizen), he is not and cannot be a “natural born Citizen.” He is therefore not eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.
Dr. Edwin Vieira excerpts: … If Obama is not “a natural born Citizen” or has renounced such citizenship, he is simply not eligible for “the Office of President” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 4). That being so, he cannot be “elected” by the voters, by the Electoral College, or by the House of Representatives (see Amendment XII). For neither the voters, nor the Electors, nor members of the House can change the constitutional requirement, even by unanimous vote inter sese (see Article V). If, nonetheless, the voters, the Electors, or the members of the House purport to “elect” Obama, he will be nothing but a usurper, because the Constitution defines him as such. And he can never become anything else, because a usurper cannot gain legitimacy if even all of the country aid, abets, accedes to, or acquiesces in his usurpation.
Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4).
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=321969
Obama has been using a stolen Social Security number for 25 years.
Obama committed fraud and forgery in his Selective Service registration.
Obama is an illegal alien. It was criminal for him to hold office in Illinois and criminal for him to take that salary and other compensation.
The US wars are illegal just like Hitler’s Wars of Aggression. To vote funding for a War of Aggression is a war crime. Obama voted for funding Wars of Aggression many times as a US senator. Each vote is a war crime.. a felony. Obama is guilty of many war crimes before and after the election. Obama is a major War Criminal.
Obama’s criminality before and after his illegal election is massive. He is one of the biggest criminals in world history.
BWM,
We better have your status checked as well… How do we know you are here legally…Just because you say so does not make it so, right? We need proof….or you to Poof…..
BVM:
I hear you ranting again. Saying it fifty times won’t make it so, but, just for the record, what are your opinions on Big Foot?
mespo,
My opinions on big foot are, he does not have to use water skis or snow skis…..I bet the people from Heelys’ are not paying Big Foot royalties ….
eniobob 1, September 11, 2011 at 8:56 am
Toronto and Massachusetts
Kinda reminds me of this:
“Buffalo Springfield – Stop, hey what’s that sound”
===========================================
Me too.
I am further concerned that these very revealing hearings may generate another “deep event” such as “9/11 II” (nine eleven the Second).
These people are not human in the sense that we generally use that word, so they will not hesitate to do so.
I hope I am mistaken about that.
Anonymously Yours 1, September 11, 2011 at 10:28 am
Dredd….For What Its Worth…
=======================================
Yes, an incredibly talented band.
Dredd,
Agreed….too bad they were only together for about 25months….but the was the 60′s the beginning of Love the One Your With…
Your=You’re
Dredd,
I appreciate the articles on 9/11 you’ve been running on your blog. Isn’t it curious how people forget the suspicious burning of The Reichstag and how through it Hitler and the NAZI’s took complete control of the German government. I have no certainty of a 9/11 internal conspiracy, but I certainly am suspicious, particularly in light of PNAC.
Mike,
They say follow your gut instincts and it will take you to your truths…I think your truths are the same as lots of other folks….
Mike Spindell 1, September 11, 2011 at 10:36 am
Forgive me but I can’t keep from my mind on this day the manifesto of the
Project For The New American Century from 1997, of which two signatories were Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.
============================================
I was listening to the presentation of Peter Dale Scott this morning at the Toronto Hearings.
He calls 9/11 a “deep event” (a term of art I think) and says that they typically precede our wars and some other events, elections, etc. going back even to Vietnam.
He had an “Above Secret” clearance as a junior diplomat and is very concerned about SOCOM and the secret spy agencies.
He says they are very eager to shed blood.
He has written the book “The American War Machine”.
“They say follow your gut instincts and it will take you to your truths…”
AY
As a trained Gestalt Psychotherapist, who personally practices it in his own life, following ones’ gut feelings is known as listening to the wisdom of ones
organism.
“He calls 9/11 a “deep event”
Dredd,
“Remember the Maine!”
Mike Spindell 1, September 11, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Dredd,
I appreciate the articles on 9/11 you’ve been running on your blog.
================================
I had to overcome some fear of my own to do so.
But I tried to do it in a way that focuses in on evidence, not personalities, not hate, in an attempt to snap myself and others out of the trance that set in on us all to one degree or another this past decade.
Looking at the evidence is my intent … not whodunnit … that is for a grand jury and a petite jury.
I will accept their conclusions following a fair trial for all concerned.
What I like about Toronto is that it gives us a glance at what that presentation might look like, and can then perhaps open us up to such a thing without distortion.
I have been involved in very difficult cases where jurors were petrified, outraged, wanted to puke, and the like, just on the reading of the indictment.
I know they were that way because each juror was asked “what were your first thoughts on the hearing of the indictment” …
Mike S.,
So I won’t have to google it…what does that mean…I am studying Albert Ellis at present…Pretty hefty reading…if I think about it…
Photograph from September 11
A Poem by Wisława Szymborska
Translated By Clare Cavanagh and Stanislaw Baranczak
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/178603
Excerpt:
They jumped from the burning floors—
one, two, a few more,
higher, lower.
The photograph halted them in life,
and now keeps them
above the earth toward the earth.
Each is still complete,
with a particular face
and blood well hidden.
Nal1, September 11, 2011 at 10:28 am
The Years of Shame
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful.
————————————————–
I think that what happened after 9/11 was deeply human. Shock fear and grief are a damaging axis of emotions that allow people to be controlled. Ask any healthy amygdala. But if we are to remain humanist in our dealings, and Just, then we must retain our abiltiy to experience these emotions. That means we must have the strength to remain vulnerable. That very important moment when we could remain human without wildly acting out our grief as anger came and went when President Bush succumbed to whatever little voice told him to invade Iraq. The goons that use shock doctrine are not leaders….they are underminers. There is a healthy response to attacks of terrorism that do not necessarily contain ‘corporate initiatives’ or ‘transfers of wealth’. In acts of terrorism it is important that Law is our first response…so we can correct terrorists and not become them.
And it is not too late to correct our course and regain our terra firma for the people of this Country. And there is absolutely no shame in that.
“So I won’t have to google it…what does that mean…I am studying Albert Ellis at present…Pretty hefty reading…if I think about it.”
AY,
Albert Ellis was a great man and I was in a group he led once. His Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy was genius. Gestalt Therapy was
developed by Fritz Perls and I studied at the institute of one of his main disciples. They both fall under what is known as Existential Therapy, which turned from the emphasis on past history favored by Freud, into
trying to treat people by grounding them in the present. There are many similarities in approach in both methods, I preferred Gestalt because it favored “Drama Queens” like me. :=). Good stuff for you to read. The most accessible and quickest road to Fritz Perls and Gestalt Therapy is his autobiography “In and Out of The Garbage Pail”. Fun reading and gives an excellent overview of his approach without the ponderous portentousness so favored by those who write about psychology. In that sense, Ellis too eschewed a lot of the scholarly claptrap.
Thank You Mike,
I really do mean it…I will look into the book recommended, I can say that I am an avid reader….So far am comfortable with Ellis’ approach….I specifically like the ABC’s….I have deduced that for my simple mind a rational approach….
Activating event= Shit happens, Beliefs= are they Rational or Irrational, shaped by the Shit you learned to believe….(Your own personal spin on the Shit), Consequence= Shit happens, what are you going to do about it, just deal with it….
So far that is my basic understanding of Ellis….
“So far that is my basic understanding of Ellis….”
AY,
By George I think you’ve got it. Beats hell out of trying to figure out if you wanted to kill Daddy and screw Mommy. When in my teens I first began to read Freud, because even then I knew I’d have to work on my personal strangeness/alienation, I found some of his theories, like Oedipal and female penis envy, hard to find credible. Ellis, Perls, Carl Rogers and other existentialists seem to have a better handle on it. By the way Perls started out as a Viennese Trained Psychoanalyst and in his book his section on meeting his idol in Paris in the 30′s is a hoot and says much about Sigmund.
Louis Farrakhan on Obama: ‘That’s a Murderer in the White House’
Whistleblower ‘Bunny’ Greenhouse wins settlement near $1 million
After years of fighting the government, Bunnatine (Bunny) Greenhouse, a whistleblower who was demoted after exposing problems with a sole source contract related to the invasion of Iraq, has won an almost $1 million settlement.
The U.S. District Court in Washington on Monday approved awarding Greenhouse $970,000 in full restitution of lost wages, compensatory damages and attorneys fees, said her attorney, Michael D. Kohn.
http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1264&Itemid=140
The most striking thing about the attack of 9/11 is not how much it has changed life in this country but how little.”
—————————————————
I disagree, I think it made this possible without the probable bringing to light resistance that would normally have occurred without the event.
http://underthemountainbunker.com/tag/transfer-of-wealth/
Mike S. have you read ‘Denial of Death’ by Ernest Becker ?
W=c:
“When President Bill Clinton was elected, the national deficit was at $300 billion. While he ended his term with a surplus (the first in decades), he still participated in the transfer of wealth, specifically in his “ending welfare as we know it.”
“As Senate Republicans blocked a bill designed to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” even the man who put the controversial policy in place says he wishes he hadn’t.
“Do you ever regret it as a policy?” CBS News Anchor Katie Couric asked former President Bill Clinton on Tuesday, hours after a GOP filibuster prevented Democrats from advancing a defense spending bill tied to repealing the ban on openly gay soldiers serving in the military.”
“Billionaire Sanford I. Weill, who according to Louis Uchitelle made “Citigroup into the most powerful financial institution since the House of Morgan a century ago,” has what I call the Wall of Me leading to his office, which he has decorated with tributes to him, including a dozen framed magazine covers. A major trophy is the pen Bill Clinton used to sign the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a move which allowed Weill to create Citigroup. Fittingly, Citigroup is a major contributor to guess which current Democratic Presidential candidate?”
At least people thought they were being kissed.
“The basic premise of The Denial of Death is that human civilization is ultimately an elaborate, symbolic defense mechanism against the knowledge of our mortality, which in turn acts as the emotional and intellectual response to our basic survival mechanism.”
Woosty,
I haven’t yet but this first line from his Wiki article is something I can believe in. Human knowledge of their own mortality must be coped with or disaster mentally beckons those unable to do so. Last summer when I was close to death for a while, I went into a state often that psychologists describe as “reverie”. I was conscious and I was constantly in thought, but my reactions to outside stimuli slowed down significantly and I would ponder the simplest questions endlessly. For instance if my wife asked me a question I might think of what to answer her, but I would be wrapped up in thought and not follow through in my intention to reply, until she had to ask me again.
I was aware that I was dying but somehow this state of “reverie” kept fear at bay. It probably is an innate human defense mechanism that kicks in as the bodies systems fail. It was almost like being an observer of my own demise, with interest, but little emotional turmoil. So much of ourselves is perforce invested in our life and the lives of our loved ones, that it is hard to conceive of our non-existence. Yet at the same time we all know it is inevitable. Death is the ultimate unknown and therefore is so frightening that to just get through our lives we must ignore the fate that will engulf us all. My guess then is Becker takes off from there.
“I was conscious and I was constantly in thought, but my reactions to outside stimuli slowed down significantly and I would ponder the simplest questions endlessly.” Mike S.
____________________________________________________
Yes, but is this not the ultimate of creative self-preservation in the face of gross physical impact….Merlins Crystal Cave, or a time out of time…
Becker takes it a step further I think when he talks about the use of creative projection.
@eniobob1, September 11, 2011 at 6:00 pm , but didn’t it also happen that all boats rose in Clintons tide??? and if it happened then, why would anyone want to disrupt that?
Following the horror of 9/11 came the anthrax letters. Biosecurity expert Jonathan B. Tucker’s mysterious death at age 56(7?) happened earlier this year.
http://www.thebulletin.org/content/media-center/announcements/2011/08/03/jonathan-b-tucker-noted-biosecurity-expert-1954-2011
W=c
That’s true,but now a lot of the boats that rose or sinking fast and a lot of the life preservers that were available then,Clinton had a hand in making the lines to those preservers shorter. Again it made it easier for you thought you were being kissed first.
Obama’s Birth Certificate is a Forgery!
Fraud has been committed against your county elections. Contact your sheriff for an investigation.
On 9/7/11 former AZ Sheriff Richard Mack stated, “My good friend and colleague, Sheriff Arpaio from AZ, is now investigating Obama re. the birth certificate. It is entirely proper. Should charges develop, then yes, he would file the charges. The President is not above the law.”
The Surprise, AZ Tea Party has assembled and presented to the sheriff’s office the published reports of 20 experts with established credentials who conducted a forensic examination of the computer PDF file published on the White House website and the Xerox copies of the Obama birth certificate handed out by the White House to the press during the April 27, 2011 press conference.
The analysis of the 20 experts suggests the Obama document is a forgery!
Obama can be Arrested – No Impeachment is necessary
eniobob1, September 11, 2011 at 9:21 pm
————————————————
if I thought I was ‘being kissed first’ so that I could be deceived, it would only serve to make it easier to return the violence.
I don’t normally do violence but even I could muster a good swift kick to the balls….
A sad day remembering a tragic day. I had time to think about 9/11 during my 6 hour drive home from a college reunion in southern Illinois. Mike S., that PNAC statement haunts me to this day.
W=c:
:=)))
“Mossad – The Israeli Connection To 911″
“U.S. investigators and the controlled media have ignored a preponderance of evidence pointing to Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, being involved in the terror attacks of 9/11.”
http://www.rense.com/general64/moss.htm
Is Barack Obama an Illegal Alien?
U.S. Government’s E-Verify System Verifies Potential Employees as LEGALLY Available to Work. Barack Obama’s Social Security Number DOES NOT MATCH Government Records!
According to the government’s own system Barack Obama does not qualify to legally hold a job in the U.S.
According to affidavit, the SSN number that Barack Obama is using is 042-68-4425. That is the same number that appears on the fraudulent Selective Service Record, and doesn’t match his name in E-Verify. Now he has used it on an IRS document.
http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/barack-obama-doesnt-pass-e-verify-system/
Sherman Alexie on 9/11 (2007)
Great clip Elaine.
September 11, 2011, 8:41 am
The Years of Shame
By Paul Krugman
New York Times
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/the-years-of-shame/
Excerpt:
Is it just me, or are the 9/11 commemorations oddly subdued?
Actually, I don’t think it’s me, and it’s not really that odd.
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.
Paul Krugman 9/11 Blog Post Stokes Controversy
Huffington Post
9/12/2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/12/paul-krugman-911-blog-pos_n_958137.html
Excerpt:
Paul Krugman drew conservative outrage on Sunday when he wrote that the anniversary of 9/11 had become a marker of “shame” for the U.S.
The New York Times columnist wrote a blog post called “The Years of Shame,” in which he said that “what happened after 9/11″ was “deeply shameful.” Krugman castigated people like Rudy Giuliani and President Bush as “fake heroes” who exploited the attacks for their own personal, political or military gain. He also said that many in the media had “[lent] their support to the hijacking of the atrocity.”
Krugman concluded, “the memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And, in its heart, the nation knows it.” He said he had turned off the comments on the post “for obvious reasons.”
Conservative commentators quickly seized on Krugman’s post. Blogger Michelle Malkin called him a “smug coward.” Writer Glenn Reynolds called the post “an admission of impotence from a sad and irrelevant little man.” A writer at the Big Journalism site called Krugman “vile.” And former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that he was cancelling his subscription to the Times.
However, some progressives defended Krugman. Blogger Glenn Greenwald vociferously backed the post on Twitter.
“Michael Moore & The Dixie Chicks were just as right back then as Krugman is today – but today the taboos (& their enforcers) are much weaker,” he wrote.
the taboos (& their enforcers) are much weaker,” he wrote.
And, on Crooks & Liars, Nicole Belle said that Krugman was simply telling the truth. “That day was the impetus for us to attack and invade Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with the attacks and posed no threat to us,” she wrote. “To date, we’ve lost 4,752 allied service members in Iraq and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. How is this not a black mark of shame on the legacy of 9/11?”
September 12, 2011, 2:37 pm
More About the 9/11 Anniversary
by Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/more-about-the-911-anniversary/
It looks as if I should say a bit more about yesterday’s anniversary.
So:
The fact is that the two years or so after 9/11 were a terrible time in America – a time of political exploitation and intimidation, culminating in the deliberate misleading of the nation into the invasion of Iraq. It’s probably worth pointing out that I’m not saying anything now that I wasn’t saying in real time back then, when Bush had a sky-high approval rating and any criticism was denounced as treason. And there’s nothing I’ve done in my life of which I’m more proud.
It was a time when tough talk was confused with real heroism, when people who made speeches, then feathered their own political or financial nests, were exalted along with – and sometimes above – those who put their lives on the line, both on the evil day and after.
So it was a shameful episode in our nation’s history – and it’s one that I can’t help thinking about whenever we talk about 9/11 itself.
Now, I should have said that the American people behaved remarkably well in the weeks and months after 9/11: There was very little panic, and much more tolerance than one might have feared. Muslims weren’t lynched, and neither were dissenters, and that was something of which we can all be proud.
But the memory of how the atrocity was abused is and remains a painful one. And it’s a story that I, at least, can neither forget nor forgive.
Elaine,
I have to agree with Krugman. The war in Iraq and the torture campaign do stain the memory of anyone who died in the 9/11 attacks. Rumsfield and Bush and Cheney should be ashamed of themselves.
rafflaw,
“Rumsfield and Bush and Cheney should be ashamed of themselves.”
One thing is for sure–Cheney certainly isn’t ashamed of himself. Remember how he said heads were going to explode in Washington when his book was published. Too bad his head wasn’t one of them.
Elaine,
You are right that Cheney has no shame!
Krugman was right back then and he is right now. On Sunday I literally could not watch any of the memorial services because this entire episode was shameless in the aftermath of a great loss. For the sake of honesty I must admit that I did not at first have Krugman’s prescience and my reasons were deeply personal. Saddam Hussein’s dropping Scuds on Israel during the first Iraq war angered me. He did it to specifically provoke Israel to attack and thereby split the Arab world, since Israel was specifically requested to sit out the war.
My anger at Iraq was short sighted in retrospect and I must admit that I suspected the whole of the Bush claims of weapons of mass destruction at the time and supported the War. I’m not proud of my thoughts back then and I am even less proud now in the clear hindsight of history. The Bush Administration’s response was murderous, shameless and motivated by greed and lust for power. All who perpetrated this madness should be prosecuted, especially for misusing our innocent troops and causing the death of probably a million or more innocent civilians.
Krugman is the real hero and The Bush/Cheney mob, along with the Giulianni/Kerrick, mob cashed in on the rage of a stunned public to perpetrate war crimes. Shame on anyone who would besmirch him for his bravery and foresight.
“If you want to help the world, read the poetry of the people we are bombing….”
Thank you for that clip Elaine!
Barry, Barry we’ve got your number – 042-68-4425
Well said Mike S. A lot of Americans were duped into believing the crap that Bush/Cheney were spewing at the time.
The meaning of political rituals like 9/11 Day
BY GLENN GREENWALD
Salon, 9/13/2011
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/13/rituals/index.html
Excerpts:
On 9/11 Day, Paul Krugman provoked a wave of petulant, angry condemnation for pointing out just some of the valid reasons that day is now inextricably linked with the shameful acts done in its name by the U.S. Though I continuously defended Krugman on Twitter, I had no intention of writing about this pseudo-controversy because it was little more than what Digby describes as a standard formulaic “hissy fit” from right-wing warmongers who long ago ceased having the power to stigmatize people for such heresies (the apex of this absurd spectacle occurred when the man widely admired around the world as The Nation’s Moral Conscience — Donald Rumsfeld — announced that he was cancelling his subscription to The New York Times in protest of Krugman’s “repugnant” post).
But then yesterday, I read what is one of the most self-evidently inane posts the Internet has ever produced: this must-be-read-to-be-believed sermon from Mother Jones’ Rick Ungar condemning Krugman and demanding that other progressives join with him and the Right in these denunciations. Just for sheer entertainment, I really encourage you to read the whole thing; my favorite part is when Ungar decrees that 9/11 Day is “a day when Americans of all stripes should have been giving thanks to both President Bush and President Obama for doing whatever it is they do that has protected us from a tragic repeat of the events of September 11, 2001.” On so many levels, that’s just the funniest sentence ever (and we now bow our heads in reverent gratitude toward our Leaders, George Bush and Barack Obama, and solemnly thank them for doing whatever it is they do — no matter what that might be — to Keep Us Safe).
But there is a point raised by Ungar’s finger-wagging that I do actually think is worth addressing. He writes that while he agrees with the substance of Krugman’s criticism, it was his timing that was so offensive, because 9/11 Day “was decidedly not a day that needed to be about politics.” This notion — that 9/11 Day was nothing more than an apolitical grieving ceremony, akin to a private funeral, and Krugman’s sin was one of etiquette: it just wasn’t the day for politics — is a common one. But it’s completely wrong, and quite destructive to accept.
Everything about 9/11 Day — like all political rituals — was deeply politicized to its core. It was imbued with political meaning, political messaging, and controversial claims, both implicit and explicit. Almost every speech given that day made claims about the meaning and “legacy” of 9/11, what caused it, and what the nature of the American response was. President Obama proclaimed that “our character as a nation has not changed,” that “these past 10 years have shown that America does not give in to fear,” that “these past ten years have shown America’s resolve to defend its citizens, and our way of life,” and that “these 10 years have shown that we hold fast to our freedoms.” Vice President Biden boasted that “The terrorists who attacked the Pentagon . . . sought to weaken America . . . But they failed,” and that Al Qaeda “never imagined the sleeping giant they were about to awaken.” Those are all highly politicized claims. I happen to disagree with each of them. Others of course agree. But there’s no denying that all of that — and much more in those speeches — is consummately political.
**********
Krugman’s sin wasn’t that he inappropriately politicized what was otherwise an apolitical day. His sin was the opposite. He deviated from the approved, mandatory political script for that day: by pointing out that it isn’t only the Terrorists but also ourselves who engaged in deeply shameful crimes. He didn’t politicize an apolitical day; to the contrary, he subverted the most politically propagandistic day that now exists in American political culture. It’s unsurprising that the American Right wants to demonize him for that; they’ve long viewed themselves as the Owners of 9/11 who, as such, can dictate how we talk about that event. But to watch a writer at a liberal journal demand that progressives join in the bashing — based on this blatantly false pretense that these types of propaganda rituals are devoid of politics — was ultimately too extreme to ignore.
“Those are all highly politicized claims. I happen to disagree with each of them.”
——————————
me too.
Elaine M., brava!
Woosty,
Bravo to Glenn Greenwald!
Elaine,
Great Greenwald link!
“Krugman was right back then and he is right now.” -Mike S.
Agreed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/about-that-paul-krugman-allegation-of-911-shame/2011/03/03/gIQAdwBMNK_blog.html
Excerpt:
Here’s top McCain adviser Charlie Black, during the 2008 campaign:
A top adviser to Sen. John McCain said that a terrorist attack in the United States would be a political benefit to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a comment that was immediately disputed by the candidate and denounced by his Democratic rival.
Charles R. Black Jr., one of McCain’s most senior political advisers, said in an interview with Fortune magazine that a fresh terrorist attack “certainly would be a big advantage to him.”
By the way, as some on the left have conceded, the “politicization” of national security issues isn’t necessarily a bad thing — the parties should be presenting sharply contrasting visions about these issues. And I wouldn’t tar all Republicans with this brush, either. During Obama’s presidency, current GOP leaders have for the most part kept the debate clean on topics such as Guantanamo Bay and terrorism. But as Dave Weigel notes, to deny that terrorism was used as a wedge issue after 9/11 is tantamount to “denying a few years of political history.” There’s no denying that in the wake of 9/11, and in the four elections that followed, some Republicans and conservatives viewed the terrorism debate as a way to gain political advantage and to sow gut-level fear of the opposition. This isn’t a controversial assertion. To parahprase Weigel, what’s controversial (in addition to his language) is Krugman’s timing in making it.
UPDATE: Krugman weighs in again. I second his recollection of the post-9/11 environment being a “terrible time in America — a time of exploitation and intimidation, culminating in the deliberate misleading of the nation into the invasion of Iraq.”
And it’s worth remembering the crucial point that Krugman is saying nothing now that he didn’t say at the time. (end of excerpt)
“PNAC’s successor organization is the Foreign Policy Initiative”, according to Wikipedia.
http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/
(McCain had ties to PNAC: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080612_john_mccains_chilling_project_for_america/)
A must-watch:
The Interrogator
An interview with Ali Soufan, the FBI agent at the center of the 9/11 investigation.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2126849422
Soufan’s book:
The Black Banners: The Inside Story of 9/11 and the War Against al-Qaeda
The Black Banners: The Inside Story of 9/11 and the War Against al-Qaeda
“Krugman’s sin wasn’t that he inappropriately politicized what was otherwise an apolitical day. His sin was the opposite. He deviated from the approved, mandatory political script for that day: by pointing out that it isn’t only the Terrorists but also ourselves who engaged in deeply shameful crimes. He didn’t politicize an apolitical day; to the contrary, he subverted the most politically propagandistic day that now exists in American political culture.”
Elaine,
Thanks for Glenn’s article. As in most things Glenn again speaks truth to power, as does Krugman. That 9/11 is used to drive political narratives of a certain kind is a truth, though those who use it as such are despicable.
What should have been a moment of solidarity among the American people was usurped in the service of political gain. It takes courage to publicly state that since the myth builders have worked so hard to make it a shrine to American Jingoism, while simultaneously lauding and betraying those who were heroes of that day. Heep’s of praise are laid on the heads of those who selflessly volunteered to work in the rubble to find survivors, but when the ailments caused by that heroic work arise, the necessary care and it cost are denied them. This is true to of our troops who are so self-servingly glorified by these political scoundrels, but have their Veteran’s Benefits cut or denied when they return from harm’s way. Rather than a fitting memorial rite that brings common union to us all, it has become an event used to promote a political agenda and hide the mistaken excesses committed in its name.
anon nurse,
Countdown with Keith Olbermann 09-13-2011
The Tortured Truth, with Ali Soufan
Well put Mike. If the Bush Administration had worked apolitically and openly without taking us to war in Iraq on lies, the Republicans would have had a solid hold on the White House and the Congress. Instead, he lied us into a war that cost the lives of thousands of our best and brightest and emptied the coffers at the same time.
anon nurse,
From 2009:
On Countdown, Keith O & Richard Wolffe Talk About Ali Soufan’s Testimony Against Dick Cheney
Elaine,
That is one great Olbermann clip. I have to get that book.
As one of America’s greatest judges, Learned Hand, once cautioned, “Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.” -David Cole
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/sep/29/after-september-11-what-we-still-dont-know/?pagination=false
After September 11: What We Still Don’t Know
David Cole
September 29, 2011
Excerpt:
But most disturbing, from the standpoint of resurrecting the rule of law, the administration has refused to confront honestly the nation’s past wrongs. As President Obama entered office, he sought to make a clean break with his predecessor. But at the same time, he has insisted that we look forward, not back. His administration has refused to conduct the criminal investigation that the Convention Against Torture requires wherever there are credible allegations that a person within our jurisdiction has committed torture. His Justice Department vetoed the recommendation of its own Office of Professional Responsibility that lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee be referred to their bar associations for disciplinary action in view of their having failed to provide candid legal advice in drafting the “torture memos.” The administration has sought to derail efforts in Spain to investigate US responsibility for torture of Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo. And President Obama continues to oppose even a high-level commission to investigate and report on the nation’s departure from the rule of law and descent into torture, abduction, and disappearances.
Obama appears to believe that such an investigation would be divisive, and might undermine his efforts to portray himself as above partisan wrangling. But division is a fact of life in Washington these days. And being above the fray is not an unmitigated good; some things are worth fighting for. A legal and moral accounting of the wrongs we have done should be high on the list.
Because so much was done under the veil of secrecy, much remains unknown about the extent of the illegality. Mark Danner’s publication in these pages of the Red Cross’s report on the abusive interrogations of “high-value” detainees provides a glimpse at the horrors US agents inflicted.4 But we do not even know how many people US officials have abducted, rendered, disappeared, tortured, or killed. We do not know the extent of the injuries suffered, and still being suffered, by those we abused. We still know relatively little about the mistreatment of most of the Guantánamo detainees. We have not apologized to even a single victim—not even to those, like Canadian citizen Maher Arar and German citizen Khaled al-Masri, who were targeted for renditions and torture based on misinformation, and have been cleared of any wrongdoing themselves.
Meanwhile, our former president in his memoir has proudly proclaimed that he personally authorized waterboarding—a practice we prosecuted as torture in the past when it was used against our troops. The former vice-president recently replied affirmatively when asked whether waterboarding should “still be a tool” of interrogation. Failing to condemn such blatant wrongdoing in some official way leaves an open wound both for the victims and for the integrity of our system, and implies that the tactics were neither lawless nor immoral. The rule of law may be tenacious when it is supported, but violations of it that go unaccounted corrode its very foundation.
All of which only underscores the continuing need for an engaged civil society committed to the ideals of liberty and law. The past decade suggests that the rule of law may be stronger than cynics thought. It teaches that adherence to values of liberty, equality, and dignity is more likely to further than to obstruct our security interests. But it also illustrates our collective reluctance to confront our past, a reluctance that threatens to erode our most important values. As one of America’s greatest judges, Learned Hand, once cautioned, “Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.” (end of excerpt)
Former Senator Bob Graham Urges Obama to Reopen Investigation into Saudi Role in 9/11 Attacks
Democracy Now, 9/15/2011
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/9/15/former_senator_bob_graham_urges_obama
Summary:
Former Florida governor and senator Bob Graham is calling on President Obama to reopen the investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks after new information has emerged about the possible role of prominent Saudis in the 9/11 plot. According to recent news reports, a wealthy young Saudi couple fled their home in a gated community in Sarasota, Florida, just a week or so before Sept. 11, 2001, leaving behind three cars and nearly all of their possessions. The FBI was tipped off about the couple but never passed the information on to the 9/11 Commission investigating the attacks, even though phone records showed the couple had ties to Mohamed Atta and at least 10 other al-Qaeda suspects. Graham joins us to discuss the news he’s called “the most important thing about 9/11 to surface in the last seven or eight years.” As the former chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a post he held on September 11, 2001, Graham chaired the Congressional Joint Inquiry into the attacks. He’s just written a novel called “Keys to the Kingdom,” which follows a fictitious former senator and co-chair of the 9/11 congressional inquiry who is murdered near his Florida home after he uncovers an international conspiracy linking the Saudi Kingdom to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Graham says he chose to write the novel after his 2000 non-fiction book, “Intelligence Matters,” was heavily censored.
Excerpt from the Democracy Now program that I provided a link to in my previous comment:
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk, Senator Graham, about the 9/11 Commission and the suppressed pages of that commission, what you believe is in them, and if it links to the Saudi royal family?
BOB GRAHAM: The suppressed pages were in the Congressional Joint Inquiry. We worked diligently throughout 2002 to gather as much of the information as we could and to make recommendations. We had an 800-plus-page report, one chapter of which, which related primarily to the role of the Saudis in 9/11, was totally censored. Every word of that chapter has been denied to the American people. One of the reasons that I wrote a novel, Keys to the Kingdom, was because I felt that that was a means of beginning to tell the American people some of the things which they have not been able to be told because of the degree of cover-up that has surrounded the Saudi activities in the United States prior to 9/11.
http://www.truth-out.org/september-11-day-death-and-decade-constitutional-crisis/1316020847
September 11: A Day of Death and a Decade of Constitutional Crisis
Thursday 15 September 2011
by: Shahid Buttar, Truthout | Op-Ed
While our nation’s founding fathers were imperfect beings and left much to be desired, they anticipated our contemporary constitutional crisis. Nearly 250 years before our politicians began trading “essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety,” the founders did their best to prevent future crises from destroying the republic they created. But in the decade since the 9/11 attacks, our political leaders have done precisely that, leaving the contemporary United States a pale shadow of the “land of the free” we continue to hail at baseball games.
It is the sub par work of our current leaders – including Presidents Bush and Obama, the justices of the Supreme Court and Congressional leaders from both major parties – that has unraveled our constitutional fabric before our eyes. But it is we, the people, who have allowed fear to drive our political decisions. As the checks and balances between our divided powers have eroded, the executive branch continues to grow more powerful, regardless of who holds the White House.
In the “Federalist No. 10,” James Madison explains the diffusion of power across multiple institutions to enable checks and balances among them. His theory was that a democratic republic cannot legitimately suppress political differences, but can at least prevent them from undermining the system by encouraging enough “factions” that no one could dominate. Madison envisioned political factions as crabs in a bucket, dragging each other down before one could oppress the rest.
But checks and balances routinely fail today.
Courts defer to executive claims that old news already reported by journalists could undermine national security if discussed in a court. Congress has not only abdicated its oversight responsibilities by passively failing to check executive power, but actively reinforces it at nearly every turn. And where local jurisdictions have tried to protect the civil rights of their residents from a long-secret FBI scheme to create a national biometric ID system, the federal juggernaut has rolled on, dividing and conquering a confused public by vilifying vulnerable communities (in this case, undocumented immigrants).
Among the federal and state executives, legislatures and judiciaries and the executives and legislatures of local municipal entities, there are at least eight branches of government that govern the lives of any given American. Yet, just two political parties hold (for all intents and purposes) a duopoly on the thousands of offices across those eight branches.
How are branches of the federal, state and local governments supposed to check each other when many are composed of individuals who share the same political allegiances? Few admissions reflect greater fecklessness than hearing Democratic members of Congress repeatedly decline to reintroduce civil rights legislation they have long supported, simply because the Obama White House opposes it. And fewer judicial decisions reek of corruption more than the ruling by Supreme Court justices appointed by Republicans – who were responsible for placing the Bush administration in office in the first place – insulating Cheney’s energy task force from statutorily required disclosures that could have stopped the disastrous war in Iraq.
Congress holds a constitutional responsibility to check and balance the executive branch. But rather than use its oversight tools to correct overzealous policies, Congress has reinforced executive abuses at nearly every turn.
Bipartisan Congressional votes amid little debate hid evidence of detainee abuse in fall 2009, authorized dragnet domestic surveillance by the National Security Agency in 2008, entrenched the FBI leadership in summer 2011 and reauthorized the Patriot Act three times over the past two years despite a rising tide of civil rights violations. Even where courts have been outspoken – for instance, defending the rights of detainees jailed without trial – Congress has gone out of its way to statutorily reinforce a regime of arbitrary detention incompatible with the nearly thousand-year history of habeas corpus.
Instead of independent institutions exercising their checks and balances, our government is composed of parties combining forces across those institutions to block those checks and balances. And while our leaders have paved the way for today’s constitutional crisis by endorsing executive privilege and power, we, the people, have fallen asleep at the wheel by accepting the corruption that now passes for business as usual. The legacy of 9/11 is far more terrifying than terrorism: it is the perversion – in only ten short years – of a 200-year-old republic once hailed as “the land of the free.” (end excerpt)
I believe this is one of the so much important info for me. And i am happy studying your article. However should remark on some general issues, The website style is wonderful, the articles is in point of fact excellent : D. Good activity, cheers