Right Wing Nut House



Filed under: History, Homeland Security, War on Terror — Rick Moran @ 7:58 am

No 9/11 remembrance post for me this year. I’ve done four 2000 word articles about where I was when it happened, how it impacted my thinking, how the attacks changed America - I even wrote a 9/11 post on 9/10 Democrats.

In other words, I’ve said it all. I’ve got nothing original to add. About the only thing I feel on 9/11 anymore is a wearying sadness to the bone brought on by the realization that it is going to happen again because we haven’t learned a damn thing. The borders are still porous, the enemy is if anything, more determined to cause us pain (yes - even with Barack Hussein Obama as president). And I’m still waiting for an intelligent discussion regarding civil liberties and security. The absolutist position taken by both sides is depressing to me as we careen wildly between too much in the way of security that infringes liberty and not enough which invites disaster.

So we are going to get hit again - not because Bush isn’t president and Obama is. Not because liberals are in charge and not conservatives. Not because anyone wants it to happen. And not because one side or the other in our childish and destructive politics is incapable of protecting us.

It will happen because our enemies are determined to make it happen. They are willing to die to make us bleed. That makes them impossible to stop. We can foil their plans a hundred times. They only need to succeed once. Torture doesn’t make us safer. Phone taps won’t make us safer. Increased cooperation with other countries won’t make us safer. Prosecuting terrorists - if any survive - after the fact won’t deter them or make us safer. Bringing economic development to poor countries won’t create fewer terrorists or make us safer - not when most terrorists attacking the west come from well to do, middle class families. Negotiating with them won’t make us safer.

Using law enforcement and international cooperation to break up their cells may give us the illusion of safety but for everyone we bust, of how many are we unaware? How many take their place?

The temptation to say “kill them all” is great, despite the fact that we couldn’t do it, even if it was politically viable. And we’d only end up creating an even bigger problem when the inevitable civilian body count inherent in such a strategy skyrockets. For proof of that theory, I present Afghanistan/Pakistan where we are making more enemies daily by striking at the heart of the jihadis.

For the time being, we just have to get used to the idea that there are some things beyond our control in this world and one of them is the timetables and plans of terrorists. It’s either that, or sacrifice our liberty in ways that aren’t necessary to survive as a nation - yet. Once the terrorists get their hands on weapons of mass destruction and use them on us - something almost every expert is predicting will happen - that will almost certainly change.

This may be pessimistic but I think it is well justified. We can’t kill them all, we can’t realistically stop them, and we can’t trade liberty for security in any way that might actually matter. We refuse to guard our own borders, or treat them enemy as “the enemy,” or prevent nations like Syria, Iran, Yemen, or Pakistan from harboring the very terrorists that might strike us at anytime.

If you can come to any other conclusion except we will be hit again, I’d be interested in hearing it.

Please take a moment today to remember the fallen. The least we can do is recall their deaths and vow never to forget how it felt to be an American that awful day.


  1. I have come to the same conclusion as you, and I posted something similar today (albeit shorter). Some may say “pessimistic”, but I say “realistic”.

    Comment by Crush Liberalism — 9/11/2009 @ 8:07 am

  2. Rick,
    With THE WON in office and doing what he is doing, aren’t they winning now. I think they would be awful stupid to do a major attach at this time; that might be a game changer.

    Comment by David Obst — 9/11/2009 @ 8:16 am

  3. I agree with your conclusion. I can only pray that those on the ground in the attacked area act as those in New York City did, as Americans coming to the aid of other Americans, risking their lives for their fellow citizens, even when they were perfect strangers. I could never make it through the obituaries the NYT ran on some of the dead, especially those who died staying behind or walking slowly down the stairs with an injured stranger or company colleague they barely knew. That is what we have achieved as a civilization, when there are a great number of us who are willing to die to help each other, rather than run away and forget those left behind.

    Comment by Eddie — 9/11/2009 @ 8:52 am

  4. Atheism would make us safer.

    Comment by Chuck Tucson — 9/11/2009 @ 9:09 am

  5. “I just got married and was waking up to get off to college while finishing my last year in journalism. My wife called and said “turn on the television”. I did, and the second plane had not hit yet. When I got to college, as I walked up to the television studio in the Basket Ball Arena my professor walked out, and with the sun reflecting off the domed arena a shadow threw his hands up and hollered, “Go home and turn on the television…This is your Pearl Harbor” That is why I built this site. Joe Burns was his name.”

    I found this on http://pledgeamerica.org/blog/ pretty cool opinions there…


    Comment by cullen — 9/11/2009 @ 12:15 pm

  6. CT said: “Atheism would make us safer.”

    Oh yeah, like it did for victims of Stalin’s gulags and the Great Terror (28-30 million). Like it did for victims of Hitler’s little foray into world domination (6-7 million). Like it did for victims of Mao’s Cultural Revolution (30+ million).

    Atheist wackos can be murderous vermin just as easily as fundamentalist wackos can.

    Comment by MochaLite — 9/11/2009 @ 7:32 pm

  7. Oh yeah, like it did for victims of Stalin’s gulags and the Great Terror (28-30 million). Like it did for victims of Hitler’s little foray into world domination (6-7 million). Like it did for victims of Mao’s Cultural Revolution (30+ million).

    Correlation does not equal causation. Hitler was a theist, though it is a common falsehood that he was not, spread by theists who would do anything possible to dissociate their belief system/gods with his.

    Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). It contains no dogmas, rituals, actions, belief systems, tenets, etc. There is nothing about atheism which would provide a causal link between atheism and any action.

    Atheist wackos can be murderous vermin just as easily as fundamentalist wackos can.


    Hitler was actually a pagan. A lapsed catholic, he ended up with a muddled belief in the old Teutonic gods but never ritualized his beliefs.


    Comment by Chuck Tucson — 9/11/2009 @ 8:41 pm

  8. [...] QandO - "9/11" Disillusioned Words - "Remember" Right Wing Nut House - "Remember 9/11" Connecting.the.Dots - "Fear Factor: Pearl Harbor to 9/11" Pambie - "2996" [...]

    Pingback by Political Blog Weekly: 11 September 2009 | U.S. Common Sense — 9/15/2009 @ 10:11 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress