once again, my man matthew good (http://www.matthewgood.org) says it better than i ever could:
Six years ago today we all know where we were and what occurred. In fact, we will never forget, and efforts will be made to ensure that. What happened six years ago today opened the flood gates, and we are, all of us, now up to our necks in it. For today, the 11th of September, is the Bush administration's 4th of July.
Does it seem timely that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker's testimony before Congress with regards to the supposed success of the surge in Iraq is taking place on and around this day of days? Do the terrible events that transpired on this day six years ago numb us to what is transpiring elsewhere, or perhaps even soften us somewhat as to the goals of those that used the tragedy to embark on one of the most reckless and illegal undertakings in recent history? Has the clock been reset on our patience and outrage?
Mere days ago, the very man that stood at ground zero six years ago and swore before the world that those responsible for 9/11 would be made to pay claimed that the man singled out as the architect of the attacks is now of little importance to him. Six years after the fact, the capture of the crime's ringleader has become a secondary notion, and nowhere near as important as US efforts in Iraq. Yet, during his testimony yesterday, General Petraeus went on at length about the terrible threat posed by al-Qaeda in Iraq, and that a direct relationship exists between it and what he referred to as 'al-Qaeda leadership'. Of course, that shouldn't come as a surprise to any of us. Over the last six years, one of the administration's objectives has always been to link the events of 9/11 to Iraq, no matter how unbelievable, nor matter how baseless. Ironically, by invading the country, they helped introduce the organization into certain segments of Iraqi society, and have since overblown their importance to such a degree that many believe al-Qaeda in Iraq to be America's foremost enemy there.
One wonders if Iraqis mark the invasion of their country with the same somber reflection that we afford September 11th? True, they lived under the rule of an oppressive dictator prior to their 'liberation', but ironically even that dictator offered them more stability than those currently occupying the country. Were that not the case then there would be no need for surges, or anything else for that matter.
Today, while we remember the loss of just under 3,000 people, what becomes of the ghosts of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis sacrificed in the name of a lie? Who possesses the right to greater outrage - the people of the United States, the majority of which have no clue as to the history of their country's complicities, or the people of Iraq, who have lost vastly more because of an event that transpired a half a world away that had nothing to do with them?
Two major conflicts now rage, undertaken because of what occurred on this day six years ago. One of them finds Canadians being sacrificed in the name of vengeance, though we have done our best to categorize it as anything but. The other, predicated on falsehoods, has cost more American lives than were lost on 9/11, and produced tens of thousands of maimed young men and women besides.
But today is not a day to dwell on numbers, nor even common sense or reasonable argument. That is, given the hour, blasphemous. Today is the day for remembering why we are afraid, not what that fear has allowed others to do in our name. Today, the 11th of September, is the Bush administration's 4th of July.
There has been a great deal of speculation as to how the Presidency of George W. Bush will be remembered. Some claim that twenty years from now he'll be regarded as one of the great Presidents due to what some view as his unwavering leadership in the War On Terror and the initiatives undertaken by his administration. On the other hand, many believe he will be remembered as one of the worst and most damaging Presidents in US history.
In twenty years I will hold with neither outlook. I will, at the age of fifty six, believe what I believe now. That, quite simply, he got away with it.
Six years ago today we all know where we were and what occurred. In fact, we will never forget, and efforts will be made to ensure that. What happened six years ago today opened the flood gates, and we are, all of us, now up to our necks in it. For today, the 11th of September, is the Bush administration's 4th of July.
Does it seem timely that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker's testimony before Congress with regards to the supposed success of the surge in Iraq is taking place on and around this day of days? Do the terrible events that transpired on this day six years ago numb us to what is transpiring elsewhere, or perhaps even soften us somewhat as to the goals of those that used the tragedy to embark on one of the most reckless and illegal undertakings in recent history? Has the clock been reset on our patience and outrage?
Mere days ago, the very man that stood at ground zero six years ago and swore before the world that those responsible for 9/11 would be made to pay claimed that the man singled out as the architect of the attacks is now of little importance to him. Six years after the fact, the capture of the crime's ringleader has become a secondary notion, and nowhere near as important as US efforts in Iraq. Yet, during his testimony yesterday, General Petraeus went on at length about the terrible threat posed by al-Qaeda in Iraq, and that a direct relationship exists between it and what he referred to as 'al-Qaeda leadership'. Of course, that shouldn't come as a surprise to any of us. Over the last six years, one of the administration's objectives has always been to link the events of 9/11 to Iraq, no matter how unbelievable, nor matter how baseless. Ironically, by invading the country, they helped introduce the organization into certain segments of Iraqi society, and have since overblown their importance to such a degree that many believe al-Qaeda in Iraq to be America's foremost enemy there.
One wonders if Iraqis mark the invasion of their country with the same somber reflection that we afford September 11th? True, they lived under the rule of an oppressive dictator prior to their 'liberation', but ironically even that dictator offered them more stability than those currently occupying the country. Were that not the case then there would be no need for surges, or anything else for that matter.
Today, while we remember the loss of just under 3,000 people, what becomes of the ghosts of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis sacrificed in the name of a lie? Who possesses the right to greater outrage - the people of the United States, the majority of which have no clue as to the history of their country's complicities, or the people of Iraq, who have lost vastly more because of an event that transpired a half a world away that had nothing to do with them?
Two major conflicts now rage, undertaken because of what occurred on this day six years ago. One of them finds Canadians being sacrificed in the name of vengeance, though we have done our best to categorize it as anything but. The other, predicated on falsehoods, has cost more American lives than were lost on 9/11, and produced tens of thousands of maimed young men and women besides.
But today is not a day to dwell on numbers, nor even common sense or reasonable argument. That is, given the hour, blasphemous. Today is the day for remembering why we are afraid, not what that fear has allowed others to do in our name. Today, the 11th of September, is the Bush administration's 4th of July.
There has been a great deal of speculation as to how the Presidency of George W. Bush will be remembered. Some claim that twenty years from now he'll be regarded as one of the great Presidents due to what some view as his unwavering leadership in the War On Terror and the initiatives undertaken by his administration. On the other hand, many believe he will be remembered as one of the worst and most damaging Presidents in US history.
In twenty years I will hold with neither outlook. I will, at the age of fifty six, believe what I believe now. That, quite simply, he got away with it.