FDR, Truman, Johnson, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, You and Me
President Bush's Speech About September 11, 2001
Leonard Pitts' Editorial, September 12, 2001
My post yesterday got me to thinking about September 11 again. I’m going to make a small effort to not refer to it as 9/11.
I mentioned in the post that President Bush made one of his few compelling addresses to the nation on September 11, 2001. That got me thinking about Leonard Pitts’ piece the next day in The Miami Herald. I remember tears as I read it.
Leonard Pitts is no George Bush; and, George Bush is no Leonard Pitts. Our President is a privileged white, Anglo-Saxon, right-wing, religious-right guy. Leonard Pitts is a now privileged, but not always, black, left leaning, moderate at best, religious guy who doesn’t insist you and I live his religion.
Having now reread the speech and editorial, it strikes me as to how wrong, in many ways they both were.
Both were, understandably and rightly outraged. Both extolled the resilient nature of the American people. Who said what?
"These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed; our country is strong.
Did you want to make us fear? You just steeled our resolve.
When roused, we are righteous in our outrage, terrible in our force. When provoked by this level of barbarism, we will bear any suffering, pay any cost, go to any length, in the pursuit of justice.
Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature. And we responded with the best of America -- with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.
As Americans we will weep, as Americans we will mourn, and as Americans, we will rise in defense of all that we cherish.
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.
As Americans we will weep, as Americans we will mourn, and as Americans, we will rise in defense of all that we cherish."
The quotes alternate between the two pieces. There’s a bit of a difference in style, but the tone is the same. If you care, go to the links to the speech and the editorial and find out who said what.
Here’s some Charlie Daniels for you:
In America
We'll the eagle's been flying slow, and the flag's been flying low, and a lot of people's saying that America's fixing to fall.
But speaking just for me and some people from Tennessee, we got a thing or two to tell you all.
This lady may have stumbled but she ain't never fell. And if the Russians don't believe that they can all go straight to hell.
We're gonna put her feet back on the path of the righteousness and then God bless America again.
And you never did think that it ever would happen again In America, did you? You never did think that we'd ever get together again.
Well we damn sure fooled you. We're walking real proud and we're talking real loud again in America.
You never did think that it ever would happen again.
From the sound up in Long Island out to San Francisco Bay, and every thing that's in between them is our home. And we may have done a little bit of fighting amongst ourselves, but you outside people best leave us alone.
Cause we'll all stick together and you can take that to the bank.That's the cowboys and the hippies and the rebels and the yanks.
You just go and lay your hand on a Pittsburgh Steelers fan and I think you're gonna finally understand.
And you never did think that it ever would happen again In America, did you? You never did think that we'd ever get together again.
Well we damn sure fooled you. We're walking real proud and we're talking real loud again in America. You never did think that it ever would happen again.
Daniels wrote the song in the early Eighties, after the Iranian hostage crisis, at the height of the Reagan resurgence of patriotism. And of course, before September 11, 2001.
In yesterday’s post, I quoted from FDR’s “infamy” speech.
What do these four men say about us as a people?
Well, we seldom start fights; though some would argue that our peace-time activities foment fights.
We do fight back.
When the fight is life and death, so far we’ve won.
When the fight is far away, and in the near and middle term, not one that will destroy us, we wander away. Korea, Vietnam, Iran of Charlie Daniels fame, Iraq the first time, and it looks like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, this time around.
We talk big, we meddle. Then we seek the current version of “peace with honor.”
The terrorist attack against us on September 11 was barbaric. Without vigilance and action to prevent its recurrence, we will see another attack.
But, we tend to misdirect our anger. Korea in the Fifties, Vietnam in the Sixties, Iran in the Seventies, Afghanistan and Iraq in the Nineties and Iran now, do not threaten our way of life.
We fought Korea,Vietnam and Iran as surrogates for the Soviet Union. We fight with Afghans, Iraqis and Iranians as entities that substitute for the non-nations, the groups, that try to harm us. The new Soviet Union is Al Quada, Hamas, etc.
I think it’s time we identified the enemies we have and figure out how to deal with them.
7 comments:
Oh yeah, BTW - Leonard Pitts is a contemptable liar:
Mainstream News Media Reveals its Contempt for Americans
By Curt Maynard
This article is in response to an article published earlier today, July 26, 2007, by the Olympian, a liberal newspaper out of Olympia Washington, the Capital of Washington State, by Daryl Lamont Jenkins, a black writer from Philadelphia. Jenkin’s article is provocatively entitled “Minority columnists won't be silenced by bigoted threats,”[1] and seeks to elicit sympathy for another black journalist by the name of Leonard Pitts, who recently informed white Americans that he cries them a river, in respect to their concern over the growing number of black on white crimes in this country. Oh surely you jest Mr. Maynard, a mainstream syndicated columnist could never get away with such a thing, that borders on a racist statement and is insensitive to say the least.
I’m not kidding dear reader, I’m very serious, Leonard Pitts’ said exactly that and he said it in a column he wrote about a crime so horrifying that words cannot adequately describe what happened to two white youth, a male and a female named Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, at the hands of four blacks [including a black female] last January in Knoxville Tennessee[2] – how it is that Pitts’ can suggest that the crime wasn’t a “hate crime” is far beyond my ability to comprehend, other than to say he was put up to it to explain how it was that the media ignored this crime while at the same time overemphasizing the nonexistent Duke Lacrosse rape case.
Now I’m about to do something radical, something that Jenkin’s and Pitts’ never do; I’m going to provide sources. Yep, I’m not kidding, I’m going to provide the reader with irrefutable proof that I’m telling the truth and that Jenkin’s and Pitts’ aren’t. The truth is; Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Leonard Pitts, in an article published by the Miami Herald on June 3, 2007, entitled “'Oppressed' whites? Give me a break,”[3] said exactly what I’ve paraphrased above, his exact wording was as follows, and remember; it was in fact written to whites in general, not as Pitts’ attempts to convince us after the fact, to white supremacists:
“… let me add that I am likewise unkindly disposed toward the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them [crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists] AND any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized… Cry me a river.”
The word "and" is inclusive and the words "any other white Americans," means exactly that, any other white Americans [If you're white, Pitts was including YOU]. Could Pitts' have written this accidentally? No, Pitts' is a Pulitzer Prize recipient, he knew EXACTLY what he wanted to say, he just never expected to be held responsible for it.
Immediately after writing the above words Pitts and the Miami Herald were inundated with letters, emails and phone calls from outraged readers across the country, as they should have been. Pitts himself claimed in a later article that he had received more than 400 critical emails, which he insinuated were from white supremacists alone as if only white supremacists [whatever that term is suppose to imply] would find his words insulting. Pitts attempted to mitigate what he wrote, or more accurately “lie,” about what he had written, in another article entitled “Neo-Nutsies bring frustration, anger -- and joy,”[4] by stating that he did not tell whites in general to “cry me a river,” but only neo-nutsies. This is a bald faced lie as you can see for yourself simply by reading his article – I’ve used Pitts’ own words and provided you the reader with citation/sources, Pitts’ didn’t provide his readers with any mitigating evidence, only lies, innuendo, and condemnation for his critics – unlike myself, Pitts’ just expects you to believe him.
In respect to Daryl Lamont Jenkin’s article, it’s nothing more than another example of one brother helping another. Jenkin’s wants us to believe that an unnamed someone has threatened Leonard Pitts’ but doesn’t want to provide us with that someones name, nor tell us what that someone actually said. Since he won’t I will. What Jenkin’s is referring to is the fact that a self admitted “neo-nazi” named Bill White posted Leonard Pitts’ physical address on the Internet after he became incensed over Pitts’ article “'Oppressed' whites? Give me a break, which White along with tens of thousands of others found to be offensive – is that such a wonder? When White was asked by a representative of the Miami Herald to take Pitts’ home address off the Internet he replied “We have no intention of removing Mr Pitts' personal information… Frankly, if some loony took the info and killed him, I wouldn't shed a tear.”[5] There you have it and as you can clearly see, it isn’t a threat, it’s merely a statement, and that is why neither Leonard Pitts, nor Daryl Lamont Jenkins bothered to provide it for you. If it had been a threat you can bet your last dollar the FBI would have responded to it by arresting Bill White.
Read the rest here
http://pcapostate.blogspot.com/2007/07/mainstream-news-media-reveals-its.html
When September 11 happened, I thought (even as a Democrat) that we had an awesome President. We were going after Bin Laden just as we did the Japanese after Pearl Harbor.
But within weeks, all we heard about was Saddam.
Saddam is dead. Bin Laden is still out there. My son was physically and mentally injured because of one man's personal vendetta against Saddam. I believe that.
Our veterans in their twenties are being cast aside...missing limbs, brain injuries, PTSD, blindness. They are now being threatened with jail and court martials for every little action in Iraq. It doesn't matter that the same action brought death to a comrade days before.
I thought the Dixie Chicks were out of line? I thought Cindy Sheehan was out of line?
I think I was wrong.
I have no respect for the man in the white house...and it's because HE has no respect for the men and women he sent to war. He's proven it time and time again. He starts a Commission after the Walter Reed scandal and vetoes every suggestion that commission makes.
Two words come to mind: hypocrite; murderer.
Yeah, those are strong words aren't they? I enjoy being able to tell people he isn't REALLY from Texas...THANK GOD.
Let's not forget about the far right religious whackos that are ruining this country from within. There is a division happening in America and I see them as an emnemy too. They are not my bretheren, nor will I fight for them and their psychotic agenda. In fact, I will fight against them to defend not only the original ideas that America was founded on, but also to defend my faith from those that try to represent it falsely.
Every now and again, I get a comment from a pcapostate.
I went to the site to try to figure out how Jews were involved in any way with what happened on September 11, or how Jews have any complicity with our current inability to deal with the aftermath, other than the fact that "they" are part of "you and me."
I couldn't slog all the way through the post; but, here's a reference to Jews and 9/11, you be the judge:
"Goebbels’ was of course correct, contemporaneously and in a modern sense as well, organized Jewry has in fact become desperate, they exposed themselves completely on 9-11, and if the media were in other hands, their Fifth Column would long ago have been neutralized and the war on terror ended. If it were not for the fact that the entire media apparatus was kosher, Americans would know that 150 Israelis were arrested in the United States following 9-11 for espionage and then quietly deported without informing the American public by the Jew and dual Israeli citizen Michael Chertoff, who was at that time Assistant Attorney General under the flunky John Ashcroft. If it weren’t for the fact that the media is in a virtual and very Jewish stranglehold, Americans would know that five Israeli’s were arrested on 9-11 after they were witnessed filming the impacts of the airliners into the World Trade Centers while laughing, joking and clapping one another on the backs in a congratulatory manner. These Israeli Jews were also deported back to Israel without informing the American people that they had even been arrested, let alone what their behavior was purported to have been. If it weren’t for the complicit media and government, not to mention the corrupt judicial system, Americans would be familiar with the empirical fact that on January 2, 2004 an Israeli Jew named Asher Karni was arrested for having sold [past tense] more than sixty nuclear weapon detonators to Pakistan, the world’s most unstable Islamic Republic and a country in which “Osama,” as in Osama Bin Laden, is the most popular name for a male child. If the American media wasn’t under the direct control of Jews, the American people would know that an American Jew named Yehuda Abraham was arrested in 2003 for conspiring to sell Russian made surface to air missiles to undercover FBI agents posing as Al Qaeda operatives with the understanding that these missiles would be used on American civilian airliners in the continental United States."
I went so far as to Google some key phrases, I admit not a true investigation. No 150 Jews hits. No five Israelis arrested after filming and laughing as planes hit the towers.
I then read the next comment about Leonard Pitts. The author doesn't like him, but doesn't call him a liar, contemptable or otherwise. Pitts wrote a column dissing white people that thought that the black people arrested recently in Tennessee for killing white people should be charged with a hate crime.
So, I'm left with a WTF moment. Pcapostate, I welcome all views here; but, you've really got to make some sense. If I'm missing something, let me know. But please, facts and logic, not rant.
WTF is right! I tried to follow along but maybe the captioning didn't translate well on my screen. :) It appears that not everyone can express themselves without debasing others' opinions.
The incidents that took place on September 11th are a sore spot for all. As one of your other posters mentioned, 6 years after that dreaded day, there are still families divided (mine included) over what occurred, whose fault (as someone else is always likely to blame) it is and how to understand it in today's context of lies in the White House, presidential debates and when the heck are the troops coming home (not counting those brave souls who come home in a bag).
You know, when a friend of mine (who is a Cpt at WRAMC) came to visit me, we would discuss how angry she'd get at the Cindy Sheehans of the nation: everyone with the yellow magnetic ribbon on the back of the car telling the driver behind them how they feel about the war... and she'd tell me that if they REALLY supported the war, they'd enlist and see what it is like to battle the enemy.
Every day, I say my prayers that my friend risked her life, willingly, for my ability to sit here and type my thoughts.
These kinds of emotions (both hateful and spited) will never change, I'm afraid.
FAW, I'm too lazy to Google WRAMC. It means?
I've gone back and forth in my head about what we, and I mean we, because we are allowing the elected people to do what they are doing, to do.
I could live with, an interesting line, given that there's no chance of me being sent to the front to die, a war that had even the slightest chance of accomplishing something good. I don't see that in the even remote outcomes of our current adventure.
Katirina, I love your phrase. I've done that. I've even, like the drivel I quoted, read it a couple of times and found that my mind won't let me take it in without a lot of mental effort. Defense mechanism?
WRAMC is Walter Reed Army Medical Center...you know...the same one hiding injured soldiers in pathetic conditions during PR stunts?
I support the TROOPS not the war. The troops are the ones losing out while the VA is patting itself on the back with 33,000 bonuses.
Post a Comment