POLITICIZING 9/11 AND THE WAR ON TERROR
POLITICIZING 9/11 AND THE WAR ON
TERROR—PUULLEEASE!!
by
Ken Eliasberg
On December 7, 1941, a day, according to FDR, that will live in infamy, we lost about 2,800 people in Japan’s sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, a port area in Honolulu, Hawaii, a then American possession (territory). The attack, while sneaky, was aimed at our fleet docked in Pearl Harbor and our military installations on Oahu. We declared war on Japan on the following day, December 8th (and on Germany shortly thereafter). The war continued for some 4 years, during which time we lost hundreds of thousands of our best and brightest. Of small consolation was the fact that we visited significantly “disproportionate” devastation on our enemies. Isn’t that the way war is supposed to be conducted—by killing many more of them than they do of us? Recall Patton’s statement that the goal is not for you (our soldiers) to die for your country; the goal is to make as many of our enemy as possible die for their country. I guess those were simpler times, when even our academics were merely absent minded, as opposed to their current state of total mindlessness. You win wars by devastating your enemy—by destroying his will to fight. That’s what ends a war.
We understood that in 1941, and we banded together to bring our enemies to their knees. Do any of you who lived through that period recall any one—particularly any Republican—saying that FDR was “politicizing the war” when he called attention to Pearl Harbor on the many occasions on which he did so (even if it occurred around November of 1942 or 1944, i.e. election time)? To ask the question is to answer it—we probably would have lynched any s.o.b. who would have the unmitigated gall to challenge Roosevelt’s efforts to rally us to a common cause. This was America at the time of our greatest generation, and a horrible injury and indignity had been visited on us; and we were united in our resolve to punish the bastards who had done this to us.
Now contrast that with today and the conduct of the Democrats and the mainstream media. This attack did not occur on some remote island possession of ours that was aimed principally at our military. This attack occurred very much on the mainland of America, was aimed at our financial and military centers, (and was visited almost exclusively on civilians—innocent civilians, notwithstanding the idiotic proclamations of some of our academic airheads). And it killed more of our people right here in the heart of New York and Washington D.C.—again, the centers of our financial and military capacity—than did Pearl Harbor. Now remember, Pearl Harbor was, almost right up to the present time, an anthem reminiscent of Remember the Alamo. Now why. if remembering the Alamo and Pearl Harbor indicates respect for those who gave all that they had for our country, should we forget 9/11? And why is calling attention to 9/11 “politicizing” the occasion? No reason at all—other than that it calls attention to what many perceive as an obvious failing of the Democrats - our fundamental disbelief in their willingness, let alone resolve, to properly provide for the country’s national security.
Beyond the absurdity and mendacity of the Democrat’s position is the ridiculous extent to which they take hypocrisy—the Democrat’s never (and I do mean never) miss an opportunity to politicize any occasion, no matter how sacred and regardless of the fact that it frequently redounds to their disadvantage. Such as? How about a pair of funerals? Did any of you happen to catch Paul Wellstone’s funeral? The Dems turned that one in to a political pep rally. And it was silly for 2 reasons: (1) it dishonored his memory, and, while I never agreed with Wellstone’s politics, I think he was a reasonably decent man and deserved better treatment, and (2) the Dem’s tacky behavior backfired—rather than inspire their base, their demonstration of poor taste had the opposite effect (it reminded Republicans of just why they could not afford to let the Dems take back Congress).
How about Rosa Park’s funeral? Rosa Parks was a woman who belonged to America in that her heroic behavior went a long way to restore some measure of racial integrity to the country. It was certainly inappropriate to politicize such an event. Yet, the Dems could not resist. With George Bush sitting on the podium, there was Jimmy Carter (whose incredible ineptitude as president is exceeded only by his even greater ineptitude as an ex-president) discussing the war in Iraq. Ted Kennedy followed suit. And, Bush, to his credit, did not say a word.
But the Dems didn’t stop there; they even politicize natural disasters. To listen to them, Bush was not merely slow to respond to Katrina—he caused it. Now there is no question but that FEMA was slow—too slow—to respond to this disaster, but their inefficiency took a gigantic back seat to the City and State authorities of Louisiana. Mayor Ray Nagin, who has recently been re-elected, was quite simply a monument to dereliction, and the State’s governor, Kathleen Blanco, was little better. And, after all, aren’t these guys supposed to be “first responders” ? Nonetheless, that doesn’t slow the Dems down one bit—George Bush is the guy that they look for to explain any sort of disaster. However, when he calls attention to a man-made disaster—i.e. 9/11—and takes every step he can to deal with it, there they are either doing anything and every thing to obstruct his efforts, or, just as bad, attacking him for calling attention to the underlying event. That is, not only do they do all that they can to prevent coming up with any solution, they attack him for calling attention to event that gave rise to the problem. You’ve gotta love these guys.
What’s operative here is a psychological mechanism known as “projection.” Projection is the process of attributing to someone else your baser inclinations, and no one does it more consistently and viciously than the Dems (and no one does a better job of letting them get away with it than do the Republicans).
As noted, the reason for the technique’s use by the Dems in the calling-attention-to-9/11 situation is that the Dems know that much of the country does not trust them with matters of national security, and, to them, reference to 9/11 is like holding up a mirror in which the country can see the Dem’s inadequate image. We’re at war, and calling attention to what one might consider the seminal event, is hardly politicizing the obvious; it is an understandable and completely reasonable way to try to rally the troops behind an effort to save our civilization. For the life of me, I can’t understand why the Dems can’t drop politics for a moment and get behind this critical effort. But then again that might be a gesture of patriotism, and loving your country is almost as unacceptable to some Dems as any display of support for God.