- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Owen: I notice you thank paul for his "polite and well reasoned response," but you don't actually refute any of his arguments, or defend your own against his responses. All you do, in fact, is fall back on the same old "they're so big and we're so small" victimhood rhetoric that every demagogue, charlatan and conspiracy-buff uses to excuse their total lack of a solid case or useful results. I've heard it from the creationists adn Holocaust-deniers, and you're no different.
So now we have proof that you can't defend your arguments in polite and well-reasoned debate.
The PATRIOT Act, a 1000 page piece of legislation, was tabled about a month after the attacks. That's mighty fast law writing. They were ready. They knew.
That kind of law is what authoritarians specialize in, and has nothing to do with any particular crisis. The far-right authoritarians who wrote it did not need any foreknowledge of 9/11 to write it. If you actually kept up on the news, you would know that they've been talking about sacrificing freedom for "security" ever since 1980.
And they have been brilliant, absolutely brilliant, at shutting down the constitution, the apparatus of government, and controlling the press and the debate. I think that they were superb at getting their mission accomplished. They got Afghanistan, they got Iraq, and yes, it was a bit more than they could chew, but they are still there, the bases are built, and the oil is flowing...
Establishing dictatorship doesn't require any real brilliance -- that's why so many moronic bullies are able to do it. The fact that you consider Bush & Co. "brilliant" only proves your own mind-bogglng stupidity. And no, the "bases" are not built; and no, the oil is not flowing. Our presence in Iraq has given us no added power in that region, and the oil can't even pay for the occupation, let alone profit anyone. If that's your idea of "brilliance," then you can't be considered a realiable source on any subject. Your word is as worthless as a flat-Earther's.
