Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Chris, sometimes when I write a particularly effective letter and I just know it's going to get deleted, I copy it to an email and send it to myself.
This time, I didn't. Why?
Because I honestly didn't think that this particular letter would get yanked.
I admire most of the editors at Salon and try to accommodate them as they try to accommodate me, a Premium Member. But there is one, perhaps two, people at Salon who wield the editorial knife with a very subjective and arbitrary hand.
I appreciate the complements I sometimes get. It lets me know that I'm not just talking to empty space. It also lets me know that while there might be one staffer who is on a personal quest to monitor my letters and delete the ones she feels are inappropriate, there are Salon readers who like straight talk and no mincing around.
Thank you.
for raising the subject of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman. They present an excellent contrast. Here are two young people who really did show courage and sacrifice, not only in their military service, but in the way they (Lynch, by herself; Tillman, in memory, through the tenacity of his family) stood up to those who misrepresented and twisted the facts of their honorable service to advance their own political interests.
That doesn't sound like anybody running for political office, least of all Giuliani.
We should totally sing this every time Rudy appears in public.
“What useful work could he (or any other politician) have done to make a difference down in that smoking hole in the months following the collapse? A highly visible public figure who needs security protection, like Il Duce, or Hillary, or any politician, is only going to halt or limit the recovery effort while they prance around in front of cameras. They really have no business down there other than a photo op. Neither one of them could lift as much as a 25 lb. chunk of concrete. What do you expect them to do there?”
-Garry Owen@ Saturday, August 18, 2007 07:43 AM
Garry, I agree and didn’t miss your point in your first post on the subject.
For the sake of argument, let’s just accept Rudy’s fraudulent assessment of his time clocked at GZ at face value. What does that say for his ability to manage and make priority judgments about what was truly needed? What possible actual value added could his on-camera presence at GZ have represented? Perhaps something could be said in defense of his visibility for morale and solidarity purposes. But given his questionable prior relationship with the rescue workers; I doubt that many of them were inspired by his posturing, while they were working around his security detail nuisance impediment and trying to rescue survivors. This had to be a problem for these workers, regardless of how much time he spent there, as they breathed the toxic air that both the federal government and Giuliani KNEW was a problem.
“Ground Zero Toxic Death Fumes Covered Up From Day One”:
http://www.infowars.net/articles/September2006/080906toxic.htm
If nothing else, it should be obvious that Rudy is trying to have it both ways. There’s no doubt he KNEW about the toxic air problem, so it was in his personal interest to actually spend as little time there, photo-ops aside, as possible. But as the duplicitous fascist weasel that he has shown himself to be, he can’t resist any opportunity to cast himself in what he thinks is a favorable and exculpatory light. He is confident that no real scrutiny will ever be applied regarding what he SHOULD have been doing while claiming that he:
“was at ground zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers. ... I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them."
We don’t need to be clocking any time validating or discrediting Rudy’s “hardhat time card”. Rather, these are JUST SOME of the questions he should now be asked:
1. Why did you spend as much time as you claimed at GZ knowing what you knew about the toxic ambient conditions?
2. Other than photo opportunities, what was the value of your presence to the task at hand?
3. Why did you, under pressure from wealthy building owners, allow the reopening of Lower Manhattan so quickly despite clear warnings about residual toxicity there?
4. Why did you permit rescue workers at GZ to be without protective suits, boots or full face masks when all the evidence indicated they should have had this protection?
5. Could your time have been better spent mobilizing the municipal agencies under your direction to assure the safety of workers and the general population against these known hazards?
6. Why did you ignore the warnings about the safety of workers and the general population?
7. Why do you presume that falsely presenting yourself as evidence there was “no toxic danger” will not be recognized for the cynical canard that it is?
8. Why do you presume to be a candidate for higher office and greater responsibility in light of your egregious past failures and continuing dishonest representations?
It’s time to get past sound bite analyses of the bullshit uttered by people like Benito Giuliani and concentrate on the real worms that always lurk underneath.
I wonder what difference it would have made if everyone ran around with their underwear on their heads screaming about the poisoned air at ground zero? I don't see them closing all of lower Manhattan for health reasons. Ever.
”I wonder what difference it would have made if everyone ran around with their underwear on their heads screaming about the poisoned air at ground zero? I don't see them closing all of lower Manhattan for health reasons. Ever.”
Very cogent evaluation of the issue, anonymouse.
You should send it to Benito. He could use it as a response to any questions about how he handled this public safety matter. He could also cleverly preface it with a “such is life” remark. That, of course, would reveal him to be just as intellectually challenged, insensitive and stupid as you. It wouldn’t surprise me if you actually think that running “around with their underwear on their heads screaming about the poisoned air” was the only alternative.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
