The Blowhard
09-11-2001, 10:49 PM
The worst, single most tragic day in the history of America has just passed.
Tuesday more Americans likely died than all the casualties of the Battle of Antietam on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 1862.
Already the media spin on yesterday's events is relentless.
The talking heads are pushing several themes, including:
Now is not the time to point fingers at responsible parties in America, i.e., political figures like Clinton or our own security agencies.
The events of Tuesday are the "worst-case scenario" - the worst is over.
Osama bin Laden is the culprit.
On these points of spin, the first one is baloney. Of course we need to find why our security failed. This is basic.
And unless the big media are consulting a psychic better than the one I use, no one knows what the future days, weeks and months may yield.
This is not the worst-case scenario. A worst-case scenario is a 25-megaton nuclear bomb detonated in New York or a full-scale attack against the U.S.! These should not be ruled out.
These dangers can be avoided, we pray, but only if we stop listening to the media idiots that feed us a diet of blow-dried nonsense. Is Katie Couric going to say how bad she feels for the terrorists who were driven to these cowardly acts?
It is the big media and the hack politicians that led us to this nightmarish day.
Smart to Examine Who Failed Us
We are Americans, so let's get our feet back on the ground and use common sense.
The media say we shouldn't point fingers. (Funny, isn't it, how the media have spent 30 years pointing fingers at Richard Nixon for his alleged crimes, but when one of their liberal favorites is due for some blame, they feed us the mantras like "Let's move on!" and "No time to point fingers!")
Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us - that is, our national security agencies.
Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.
Intelligence Agencies Failed Miserably
Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as "Harry":
Here's what Harry said:
"... Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!"
He continued: "There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we've heard over the past eight years or so are hollow."
Of course, it's obvious why the media doesn't want any finger pointing.
Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years?
Yes, you got it, Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband.
Clinton Responsible for Unpreparedness
The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.
During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so.
I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton's personal corruption w
Tuesday more Americans likely died than all the casualties of the Battle of Antietam on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 1862.
Already the media spin on yesterday's events is relentless.
The talking heads are pushing several themes, including:
Now is not the time to point fingers at responsible parties in America, i.e., political figures like Clinton or our own security agencies.
The events of Tuesday are the "worst-case scenario" - the worst is over.
Osama bin Laden is the culprit.
On these points of spin, the first one is baloney. Of course we need to find why our security failed. This is basic.
And unless the big media are consulting a psychic better than the one I use, no one knows what the future days, weeks and months may yield.
This is not the worst-case scenario. A worst-case scenario is a 25-megaton nuclear bomb detonated in New York or a full-scale attack against the U.S.! These should not be ruled out.
These dangers can be avoided, we pray, but only if we stop listening to the media idiots that feed us a diet of blow-dried nonsense. Is Katie Couric going to say how bad she feels for the terrorists who were driven to these cowardly acts?
It is the big media and the hack politicians that led us to this nightmarish day.
Smart to Examine Who Failed Us
We are Americans, so let's get our feet back on the ground and use common sense.
The media say we shouldn't point fingers. (Funny, isn't it, how the media have spent 30 years pointing fingers at Richard Nixon for his alleged crimes, but when one of their liberal favorites is due for some blame, they feed us the mantras like "Let's move on!" and "No time to point fingers!")
Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us - that is, our national security agencies.
Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.
Intelligence Agencies Failed Miserably
Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as "Harry":
Here's what Harry said:
"... Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!"
He continued: "There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we've heard over the past eight years or so are hollow."
Of course, it's obvious why the media doesn't want any finger pointing.
Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years?
Yes, you got it, Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband.
Clinton Responsible for Unpreparedness
The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.
During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so.
I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton's personal corruption w