PDA

View Full Version : NY Post op/ed piece about Sept 11th



SLY WILLIAMS
09-13-2009, 07:35 PM
10:39 AM, September 11, 2009

Ralph Peters

Eight years ago today, our homeland was attacked by fanatical Muslims inspired by Saudi Arabian bigotry. Three thousand American citizens and residents died.

We resolved that we, the People, would never forget. Then we forgot.

We've learned nothing.

Instead of cracking down on Islamist extremism, we've excused it.

Instead of killing terrorists, we free them.

Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.


Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America, whose idea of freedom is the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil -- and who counts among his mentors and friends those who damn our country or believe that our own government staged the tragedy of September 11, 2001.

Instead of insisting that freedom will not be infringed by terrorist threats, we censor works that might offend mass murderers. Radical Muslims around the world can indulge in viral lies about us, but we dare not even publish cartoons mocking them.

Instead of protecting law-abiding Americans, we reject profiling to avoid offending terrorists. So we confiscate granny's shampoo at the airport because the half-empty container could hold 3.5 ounces of liquid.

Instead of insisting that Islamist hatred and religious apartheid have no place in our country, we permit the Saudis to continue funding mosques and madrassahs where hating Jews and Christians is preached as essential to Islam.

Instead of confronting Saudi hate-mongers, our president bows down to the Saudi king.

Instead of recognizing the Saudi-sponsored Wahhabi cult as the core of the problem, our president blames Israel.

Instead of asking why Middle Eastern civilization has failed so abjectly, our president suggests that we're the failures.

Instead of taking every effective measure to cull information from terrorists, the current administration threatens CIA agents with prosecution for keeping us safe.

Instead of proudly and promptly rebuilding on the site of the Twin Towers, we've committed ourselves to the hopeless, useless task of rebuilding Afghanistan. (Perhaps we should have built a mosque at Ground Zero -- the Saudis would've funded it.)

Instead of taking a firm stand against Islamist fanaticism, we've made a cult of negotiations -- as our enemies pursue nuclear weapons; sponsor terrorism; torture, imprison, rape and murder their own citizens -- and laugh at us.

Instead of insisting that Islam must become a religion of responsibility, our leaders in both parties continue to bleat that "Islam's a religion of peace," ignoring the curious absence of Baptist suicide bombers.

Instead of requiring new immigrants to integrate into our society and conform to its public values, we encourage and subsidize anti-American, woman-hating, freedom-denying bigotry in the name of toleration.

Instead of pursuing our enemies to the ends of the earth, we help them sue us.

We've dishonored our dead and whitewashed our enemies. A distinctly unholy alliance between fanatical Islamists abroad and a politically correct "elite" in the US has reduced 9/11 to the status of a non-event, a day for politicians to preen about how little they've done.

We've forgotten the shock and the patriotic fury Americans felt on that bright September morning eight years ago. We've forgotten our identification with fellow citizens leaping from doomed skyscrapers. We've forgotten the courage of airline passengers who would not surrender to terror.

We've forgotten the men and women who burned to death or suffocated in the Pentagon. We've forgotten our promises, our vows, our commitments.

We've forgotten what we owe our dead and what we owe our children. We've even forgotten who attacked us.

We have betrayed the memory of our dead. In doing so, we betrayed ourselves and our country. Our troops continue to fight -- when they're allowed to do so -- but our politicians have surrendered.

Are we willing to let the terrorists win?

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/betraying_our_dead_H6T95r1BTCnkC1UbEdUfsO

ARMIN12NBA
09-13-2009, 07:46 PM
What an amazingly racist and hyperbolic (not to mention inaccurate) piece of writing.

dbroncos78087
09-13-2009, 07:51 PM
Yea this post appears to lump all people who are from Saudi Arabia and more generally all Muslims together. Similar ironically, to how the ones we are fighting do us. I dont know why i have to keep saying you dont fight fire with fire and you dont fight pure hate with pure hate. If Democracy and human rights are the best we dont have to shove it down their throats.

DenButsu
09-13-2009, 08:36 PM
I remember that excellent speech Obama made on the campaign trail, when he promised us that he would fight for "the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil". It was truly inspirational.

^Just one of the many ways in which that piece is factually inaccurate.

Here's another:


Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.

I guess whoever Ralph Peters is, he hasn't noticed the steady buildup of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and the continued drone bombing campaigns.

CubsGirl
09-13-2009, 10:01 PM
Troll harder, NY Post.

abe_froman
09-14-2009, 03:22 AM
"We've forgotten the shock.."

yes,for most of us we have forgotten the shock,and its good that we have,because in shock you dont think clearly

fear,confusion,sadness,anger..all emotions that shock of traumatic events bring,why does he want us to live that way?

The Schmooze
09-14-2009, 08:31 AM
nice, partisan, ignorant piece...

dbroncos78087
09-14-2009, 12:28 PM
Sly it isnt you. But this piece is poorly written and excretes bias and in my view hatred of Muslims trying to lump them all as terrorists. I feel that this writer would be in favor of deporting all Muslims out of our country.

BroadwayJoe
09-14-2009, 02:32 PM
ny garbage post ftw!

ari1013
09-14-2009, 07:04 PM
Troll harder, NY Post.
Rupert Murdoch's just not giving up. I wonder what Obama did to him in a previous life.

AllTheWay
09-14-2009, 10:33 PM
Wow. That is horrible.

The end.

DodgersFan28
09-15-2009, 06:31 AM
Sly it isnt you. But this piece is poorly written and excretes bias and in my view hatred of Muslims trying to lump them all as terrorists. I feel that this writer would be in favor of deporting all Muslims out of our country.

Where does the article try to lump all Muslims as terrorists? The facts are that the hijackers were all fanatical Muslims. That doesn't mean all Muslims are fanatical & would hijack airplanes & fly them into buildings, but none the less the hijackers were who they were.

DenButsu
09-15-2009, 08:52 AM
You can take practically any sentence from that piece and do this, but just as an example:


Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America

Oh, really? Those were our two choices? We had a John McCain out on the campaign trail saying "radical Islam is the problem" and we had a Barack Obama out on the campaign trail saying "I blame America"?

I guess I missed that part.

DodgersFan28
09-15-2009, 10:04 AM
Yes, Obama blamed America when he kept hailing how he was going to "restore America's good name around the world." Obama further blamed America in speeches that he's given in Europe and the Middle East. Moreover, it is a tradition of liberals to blame America first for pretty much anything.

Den, I read that quote as simply an illustration of a disapproval of the change of attitude that the Obama Admin has brought, most noteably to how the DHS/White House won't even use the word "terrorists" to describe those who attacked America on 9/11.

I read this thing many times & while I didn't agree to everything in it, I didn't really hear racism. I heard someone who angrily voiced a disapproval with how Obama & the Dems have governed vis a vis the War on Terror since taking over full power in January.

dbroncos78087
09-15-2009, 10:15 AM
Where does the article try to lump all Muslims as terrorists? The facts are that the hijackers were all fanatical Muslims. That doesn't mean all Muslims are fanatical & would hijack airplanes & fly them into buildings, but none the less the hijackers were who they were.


Instead of protecting law-abiding Americans, we reject profiling to avoid offending terrorists.

I would go with this one as how it lumps them all it. Profiling is good somehow?

DenButsu
09-15-2009, 06:11 PM
I heard someone who angrily voiced a disapproval with how Obama & the Dems have governed vis a vis the War on Terror since taking over full power in January.

You mean like how under the Obama administration's stewardship of the war on terror, Al Qaeda senior leaders have recently been killed in Pakistan (http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/09/senior_al_qaeda_lead_6.php) and Somalia (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/world/africa/15raid.html?bl&ex=1253160000&en=4a6d3f6f9f183e9c&ei=5087%0A)? Or how Obama is sending more troops (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/afghanistan/la-fg-afghan-troops12-2009sep12,0,5177238.story) to Afghanistan, where they're gearing up for a new surge (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/obama-struggles-to-gather-support-for-afghan-surge/article1287580/)?

Yeah, I'm sure conservatives would have had a real problem with how the war on terror is currently being conducted if a Republican was in office running it the exact same way. :rolleyes: When you look at the facts of what Obama is actually doing, all that crap about "blaming America" is revealed as the sham it is - nothing but a thinly veiled excuse for bashing him. What they really want from him rhetorically is flag waving, fist-pumping rah rah "America is the absolute best country in every possible way!" cheerleading which turns a blind eye to the reality that, well, no it's not. We're not perfect. And the only way to make our country better is to acknowledge where we're falling short and recognize the need to do something about it. They call that "blaming America". I call it "understanding reality".

IndyFan
09-15-2009, 06:43 PM
yeah, what he ^ said.

:clap:

DodgersFan28
09-16-2009, 06:09 PM
Yeah, I'm sure conservatives would have had a real problem with how the war on terror is currently being conducted if a Republican was in office running it the exact same way.

False comparison. A Republican would not be conducting the war in the same manner. Also, there's a reason why I said Obama and the Dems because the Dems are all pretty much unanimously opposed to more troops & any kind of new surge, just like Obama was against the surge in Iraq. The Obama Admin refuses to even call it a War on Terror, or even use the word 'terrorists' to describe who we're fighting against. Yes, there's a stark contrast between then & now in how Afganistan is being conducted.


When you look at the facts of what Obama is actually doing, all that crap about "blaming America" is revealed as the sham it is - nothing but a thinly veiled excuse for bashing him. What they really want from him rhetorically is flag waving, fist-pumping rah rah "America is the absolute best country in every possible way!" cheerleading which turns a blind eye to the reality that, well, no it's not. We're not perfect. And the only way to make our country better is to acknowledge where we're falling short and recognize the need to do something about it. They call that "blaming America". I call it "understanding reality".

It's not a sham when it's the very words Obama has spoken in speeches.

There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that we're not perfect, but being proud of the USA does not require blinders to the shortfalls. When Patriots fans are proud of their team, they don't feel a need to always bring up the losing seasons in the past. When Red Sox fans are proud of their team, they don't feel a need to always bring up how the team basically quit on the season a couple years ago when it was clear they were going to miss the playoffs. So why do Democrats always feel a need to constantly counter anyone who's proud of the USA with all the USA's shortfalls?

ari1013
09-16-2009, 06:53 PM
Right. There's no way the Republicans would let a liberal like Robert Gates run the Pentagon.

DodgersFan28
09-16-2009, 07:02 PM
Right. There's no way the Republicans would let a liberal like Robert Gates run the Pentagon.

:facepalm: Yeah ari...that's exactly what I was saying...

DenButsu
09-16-2009, 07:59 PM
False comparison. A Republican would not be conducting the war in the same manner.

No, it is not a false comparison, it's a hypothetical illustration of why Republicans who are "angrily voic[ing] a disapproval with how Obama & the Dems have governed vis a vis the War on Terror" are being hypocritical because the Obama administration has in fact been conducting it in an aggressive manner in which many Republicans would not have a problem with were it not for the fact that the man conducting it is a guy who they happen to despise.

ari1013
09-16-2009, 08:53 PM
:facepalm: Yeah ari...that's exactly what I was saying...
Who do you think is running the war effort? Gates is still using the same procedures as he did under Bush. McChrystal and Petraeus are still doing their thing.

But somehow it's different?

DodgersFan28
09-17-2009, 01:37 AM
But somehow it's different?

Yes it is, unless you think Obama, his Cabinet excluding Gates who is obviously involved, and members of Congress have had absolutely nothing to do with the war effort since January.


...because the Obama administration has in fact been conducting it in an aggressive manner in which many Republicans would not have a problem with were it not for the fact that the man conducting it is a guy who they happen to despise.

You know, I am really starting to get sick of how the left is ignoring what people are actually saying and substituting it with something completely different. If you disagree with Obama's policies, you're somehow a racist & you can't handle the fact that there's a black President. If you disagree with how the Obama Administration has taken the reigns of the War on Terror, you just despise Obama & will not be in favor of anything he does. I'm fed up with this ridiculous marginalization.

DenButsu
09-17-2009, 01:45 AM
You know, I am really starting to get sick of how the left is ignoring what people are actually saying and substituting it with something completely different. If you disagree with Obama's policies, you're somehow a racist & you can't handle the fact that there's a black President. If you disagree with how the Obama Administration has taken the reigns of the War on Terror, you just despise Obama & will not be in favor of anything he does. I'm fed up with this ridiculous marginalization.

Did you not notice the quotation marks in my post - that were quoting what YOU said sounded like his argument? How is that ignoring what you/the author said? I was responding to it directly as possible.

DenButsu
09-17-2009, 01:46 AM
This part:

"angrily voic[ing] a disapproval with how Obama & the Dems have governed vis a vis the War on Terror"

DodgersFan28
09-17-2009, 03:29 AM
Did you not notice the quotation marks in my post - that were quoting what YOU said sounded like his argument? How is that ignoring what you/the author said? I was responding to it directly as possible.

:facepalm: Do I really need to explain the obvious here? Really?


Yeah, I'm sure conservatives would have had a real problem with how the war on terror is currently being conducted if a Republican was in office running it the exact same way.


False comparison. A Republican would not be conducting the war in the same manner. Also, there's a reason why I said Obama and the Dems because the Dems are all pretty much unanimously opposed to more troops & any kind of new surge, just like Obama was against the surge in Iraq. The Obama Admin refuses to even call it a War on Terror, or even use the word 'terrorists' to describe who we're fighting against. Yes, there's a stark contrast between then & now in how Afganistan is being conducted.


No, it is not a false comparison, it's a hypothetical illustration of why Republicans who are "angrily voic[ing] a disapproval with how Obama & the Dems have governed vis a vis the War on Terror" are being hypocritical because the Obama administration has in fact been conducting it in an aggressive manner in which many Republicans would not have a problem with were it not for the fact that the man conducting it is a guy who they happen to despise.

Did you read ANYTHING I wrote beyond the first sentence? Honestly? Because if you did, you would not have had to engage in the silly marginalization because you would have read some actual beefs that you could possibly answer. But no. Instead you ignore what I said in favor of your petty marginalization.

It's not because of anything that the Obama Admin has actually done. It's just because "they despise Obama." I'm sick of it, and I will not be drawn into a childish argument about it. When people are ignored and all there is is people just talking past each other, there is no forum.

DenButsu
09-17-2009, 05:40 AM
The only thing there that I see is that they're not calling it a "war on terror" anymore.

So? What's the big deal if they're still conducting the campaign?

And since Obama has actually escalated our efforts in Afghanistan, isn't that something that conservatives should be happy about? Whatever happened to fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here? Whatever happened to smoking them out of their holes? Because notions like that seemed to be the prevailing ones held by conservatives during the Bush years. Why would they not support similar actions now?

DenButsu
09-17-2009, 05:42 AM
Or more straightforwardly put, if you think I'm so wrong, then please outline for me all the big problems that conservatives have with Obama's Afghanistan policy that I'm missing.