REAL STORIES
BY REAL PEOPLE Search
Tuesday, December 12, 2017

Remembering 9/11

by D. E. Carson (writer), , September 12, 2007

Sitting here in the waning hours of this, the sixth anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil I reflect on the events of today and of six years ago.

September 11, 2001 and September 11, 2007 have many things in common. For one thing, they both happened on a Tuesday. Most people have forgotten that September 11, 2001 was on a Tuesday morning. It happens once every six years that a specific date will fall on the same day of the week. Therefore, this being the sixth anniversary, we have come back around to Tuesday.

But there is one huge difference between September 11, 2001 and September 11, 2007 and that is the attitude of the American people. In 2001, America was a strongly united nation. In 2007, America is a deeply divided nation. It is absolutely amazing how over the course of six years Americans have turned on Americans. Brothers fight against brothers. Families are strained by long terms of separation. Children are losing fathers and brothers. And people have resorted to name-calling and lying. It is as if America is engaged in a second Civil War.

Traditional media outlets such as America’s newspapers besmirch the good name of people who are doing everything in their power to keep terrorists from returning to the shores of America. Filmmakers are outright lying to the people about what is going on in Iraq by undermining soldiers’ efforts. During the Congressional hearings featuring General Petraius, the Los Angeles Times actually had to unmitigated gall to refer to the general as “General Betray-us” – a sentiment echoed by other deeply liberal-biased newspapers. Film director Brian DePalma, known for The Untouchables has created a film that has but one intention – undermine the efforts of every soldier fighting in Iraq. DePalma himself actually admitted to this and it has been picked up by talk radio host Bill O’Reilly who has actually said that he, personally, will never again spend money to see a film made by DePalma. According to O’Reilly, this movie’s purpose is solely to incite further hatred against Americans.

How did this nation get to this point? When did it become acceptable for us as a nation to divide itself in this way? America wasn’t this divided during the Civil War. And when our Navy was bombed back into the stone age by the Japanese in 1941, no one dared to publicly oppose President Roosevelt’s decision to go after those who attacked us. Yet now, no one can say anything in support of the war without George Soros and his pack of lemmings coming up with every possible smear campaign conceivable.

It seems that with the help of George Soros and the left-wing liberal media Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorists have won.


About the Writer

D. E. Carson is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

4 comments on Remembering 9/11

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Rose Mountain on October 30, 2007 at 12:48 am
DE Carson, everyone agrees that 9/11 was tragic, but most Americans across the political spectrum know that Iraq was not responsible. Here's the website of Iraq Veterans Against the War ttp://ivaw.org Here's the British BBC News Investigation on why & when the Bush Admin decided to go into Iraq. BBC News "Secret US Plans for Iraq's Oil" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm Revealed by insiders & 400-pgs of secret documents, that just weeks after Bush entered office in Jan 2001, the Bush Admin, State Dept, neoconservatives in the Pentagon, and Big Oil created secret plans to steal Iraq's Oil. (excerpts) "The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks, sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed". "Iraqi-born Falah Aljibury says US Neo-Conservatives planned to force a coup d'etat in Iraq." "In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists". "Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants. Insiders told Newsnight that planning began "within weeks" of Bush's first taking office in 2001, long before the September 11th attack on the US. We saw an increase in the bombing of oil facilities and pipelines [in Iraq] built on the premise that privatisation is coming. An Iraqi-born oil industry consultant, Falah Aljibury, says he took part in the secret meetings in California, Washington and the Middle East. He described a State Department plan for a forced coup d'etat. Mr Aljibury himself told Newsnight that he interviewed potential successors to Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Bush administration. The industry-favoured plan was pushed aside by a secret plan, drafted just before the invasion in 2003, which called for the sell-off of all of Iraq's oil fields. The new plan was crafted by neo-conservatives intent on using Iraq's oil to destroy the Opec cartel through massive increases in production above Opec quotas." If you're interested I have more research articles at the San Francisco Newspaper. Take Care, Rose Mountain
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -1
By D. E. Carson on November 21, 2007 at 06:34 pm
Ah, yes, the San Francisco Chronicle. That bastion of fair and balanced reporting. I'm sorry, but the moment that you offered the Chronicle as the main source of your arguments, you immediately lost credibility with me. The Chronicle is widely known as one of the most liberally slanted newspapers not only in the United States but in the world. In fact, it falls in lock step with the liberal agenda right behind The Democrat Times of New York (The NY Times) and The Democrat Times of Los Angeles (The LA Times). In other words, the SF Chronicle cannot be trusted to give the correct direction in which to look for the sunrise. Perhaps you should go back through the archives of this publication and read my story "Hussein Verdict To Come Down Today, Pt II (or Can The Oil Connection Ever Be Dropped?" in which I have pointed out that the amount of oil that America actually obtains from Iraq is about 5% of our total comsumption. We import twice that amount from Venezuela and I don't see our troops setting up shop just off the beaches of Caracas to depose Hugo Chavez (although that wouldn't be a bad idea simply based on the humanitarian aspect). The very idea that America wanted to take over Iraq's oil fields is about as absurd an idea as saying that the reason we stormed Normandy in 1944 was to take over France's vineyards. America has enough of its own oil reserves that we really don't need Middle Eastern oil. We could use our own oil and at the same time mandate development of alternative fuel sources and we could go back to gasoline at $1 per gallon and not have to scream and holler when the price jumps. Problem is, tree-hugging, bong-smoking, Birkenstock-wearing, thumb-sucking, America-hating hippie freaks won't let America drill for it. They seem to think that some stupid frog is more important than America remaining a strong world economy. The technology used to drill for oil is greatly improved since the 1960's and drilling in ANWR could benefit America without causing the whole world to collapse. Thank you for your offer, but considering the Chronicle's liberal slant, I'll pass.
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Rose Mountain on November 27, 2007 at 01:16 pm
DE Carson, the investigation above is from the British BBC News which airs worldwide. When I wrote you can see my articles at the SF Paper, I meant Broowaha. By the way the SF Chronicle has been censoring & distorting news on the Bush Admin just like all dutiful corporate-owned papers,which is why--when the British news does investigations and leaks documents they always make reference to the silence of the US media & how the US media refuses to air their reports.
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -1
By D. E. Carson on December 01, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Oh please. The Chronicle is one of the WORST liberally slanted papers in the nation! Especially considering the liberal tilt of the city it serves! If the American media is so tight-lipped, why is it that Bill O'Reilly consistently beats every other television news program? Because he tell the truth with no spin. I would trust him before I would ever trust any other "mainscream" media outlet -- including the BBC.
 Report abuse



Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.


Rate This Article


Your vote matters to us



x


x