Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: 'A House Divided Cannot Stand'

  1. #1
    Scatter, Senbonzakura... DocFrance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    The high, untrespassed sanctity of space
    Posts
    2,805

    Default 'A House Divided Cannot Stand'

    http://miller.senate.gov/floor/03-30-04sept11com.html

    Quote Originally Posted by The Honorable Senator Zell Miller
    U.S. Senator Zell Miller
    Floor Statement: 'A House Divided Cannot Stand'
    Remarks as Delivered on the Senate Floor

    After watching the harsh acrimony generated by the September 11 Commission – which, let me say at the outset, is made up of good and able members – I’ve come to seriously question this panel’s usefulness.

    I believe it will ultimately play a role in doing great harm to this country, for its unintended consequences, I fear, will be to energize our enemies and demoralize our troops.

    After being drowned in a tidal wave of all who didn’t do enough before 9/11, I have come to believe that the Commission should issue a report that says: “No one did enough in the past. No one did near enough.”

    Then thank everyone for serving, send them home and let’s get on with the job of protecting this country in the future.

    Tragically, these hearings have proved to be a very divisive diversion for this country. Tragically, they have devoured valuable time, looking backwards when we should be looking forward.

    Can you imagine handling the attack on Pearl Harbor this way? Can you imagine Congress, the media and the public standing for this kind of political gamesmanship and finger pointing after that “day of infamy” in 1941?

    Some partisans tried that ploy, but they were soon quieted by the patriots who understood how important it was to get on with the war and take the battle to America’s enemies, and not dwell on what FDR knew when.

    You see, back then the highest priority was to win a war, not win an election. That’s what made them “The Greatest Generation.”

    I realize that many well-meaning Americans see the hearings as “democracy in action.” Years ago, when I was teaching political science, I probably would have had my class watching it live on television and using that very phrase with them.

    There are also the not-so-well-meaning political operatives who see these hearings as an opportunity to “score cheap points.”

    Then, there are the Media Meddlers who see this as “great theater” that can be played out on the evening news and on endless talk shows for a week or more.

    Congressional hearings have long been one of Washington’s most entertaining pastimes. Joe McCarthy. Watergate. Iran Contra. They all kept us glued to the TV, and made for conversation around the water coolers and arguments over a beer at the corner pub.

    A Congressional hearing in Washington, D.C. is the ultimate aphrodisiac for political groupies and partisan punks.

    But, it’s not the groupies, punks and television-sotted American public that I’m worried about. This latter crowd can get excited and divided over just about anything. Whether it’s some off-key wanna-be dreaming of being the American Idol, or what brainless bimbo The Bachelor or Average Joe will choose or who will Donald Trump fire next week.

    No, it is the real enemies of America that I’m concerned about.

    These evil killers who right now, right now are gleefully watching the shrill partisan finger pointing of these hearings and grinning like a mule eating briars.

    They see this as a major split within the Great Satan America. They see anger, they see division, instability, bickering, peevishness and dissension.

    They see the President of the United States hammered unmercifully. They see all this and they are greatly, greatly encouraged.

    We should not be doing anything to encourage our enemies in this battle between good and evil. Yet, these hearings, in my opinion, are doing just that.

    We are playing with fire. We’re playing directly into the hands of our enemy by allowing these hearings to become the great divider they have become.

    Dick Clarke’s book and its release coinciding with these hearings have done this country a tremendous disservice, and someday we will reap its whirlwind.

    Long ago, Sir Walter Scott observed that revenge is “the sweetest morsel that ever was cooked in hell.”

    The vindictive Clarke has now had his revenge, but what kind of hell has he, his CBS publisher and his axe-to-grind advocates unleashed?

    These hearings, coming on the heels of the election the terrorists influenced in Spain, bolster and energize our evil enemies as they have not been energized since 9/11.

    Chances are very good that these evil enemies of America will attempt to influence our 2004 election in a similar dramatic way as they did Spain’s. And to think that could never be in this country is to stick your head in the sand.

    That is why the sooner we stop this endless bickering over the past and join together to prepare for the future, the better off this country will be. There are some things - whether this city believes it or not - that are just more important than political campaigns.

    The recent past is so ripe for political second-guessing “gotcha” and Monday morning quarter-backing. And it is so tempting in an election year. We should not allow ourselves to indulge that temptation. We should put our country first.

    Every administration from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush bears some of the blame. Dick Clarke bears a big heap of it because it was he who was in the catbird’s seat to do something about it for more than a decade. Tragically, it was the decade in which we did the least.

    We did nothing after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, killing six and injuring more than 1,000 Americans.

    We did nothing in 1996 when sixteen U.S. servicemen were killed in the bombing of the Khobar Towers.

    When our embassies were attacked in 1998, killing 263 people, our only response was to fire a few missiles on an empty tent.

    Is it any wonder? Is it any wonder that after that decade of weak-willed responses to that murderous terror, our enemies thought we would never fight back?

    In the 1990's is when Dick Clarke should have resigned. In the 1990's is when he should have apologized. That is when he should have written his book. That is, if he really had America’s best interest at heart.

    Some will say, “We owe it to the families” to get more information about what happened in the past and I can understand that. But no amount of finger-pointing will bring our victims back.

    So, now we owe it to future families and all of America now in jeopardy not to encourage more terrorists, resulting in even more grieving families, perhaps many more over the ones of 9/11.

    It’s obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into two camps: the wimps and the warriors.

    The ones who want to argue and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to our enemies and kill him them before they kill us. And, in case you haven’t figured it out, I proudly belong to the latter.

    This is a time like no other in the history of this country, and this country is being crippled with petty partisan politics of the worst possible kind. In time of war, it is not just unpatriotic; it is stupid, and it is criminal.

    So, I pray that all this time, all this energy, all this talk and all this attention could be focused on the future instead of the past.

    I pray we would stop pointing fingers, assigning blame and wringing our hands about what happened on that day David McCullogh has called “the worst day in our history” more than two years ago.

    And instead, pour all of our energy into how we can kill these terrorists before they kill us - again.

    For make no mistake about it. They watch these hearings. They are scheming and smiling about the distraction and the divisiveness they see in America. And while they may not know who said it years ago in America, they know instinctively that a house divided cannot stand.

    There is one other group that we should remember is listening to all of this - our troops.
    I was in Iraq in January and one day when I was meeting with the 1st Armored Division, a unit with a proud history known as Old Ironsides, we were discussing troop morale, and the Commanding General said it was top notch.

    And I turned to the Division’s Sergeant Major, the top enlisted man in the division, a big, burly, 6-foot-3, 240 pound African American and I said, “That’s good, but how do you sustain that kind of morale?”

    Without hesitation he narrowed his eyes, and he looked at me and said “The morale will stay high just as long as these troops know the people back home support us.”

    Just as long as the people back home support us. What kind of message are these hearings and the outrageously political speeches on the floor of the Senate yesterday sending to those marvelous young Americans in the uniform of our country?

    I say Unite America! Before it is too late! Put aside these petty partisan differences when it comes to the protection of our people.

    Argue and argue and argue and debate and debate and debate over all the other things – jobs and education and the deficit and the environment – but please, please do not use the lives of Americans and the security of this country as a cheap-shot political talking point.
    Thought you all might like something new to talk about.
    ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
    (1) Eric Clapton is God.
    (2) Therefore, God exists.

  2. #2

    Default

    More or less I'd agree that we need to progress. There is a saying that far too often people "Look backwards when moving forwards" and that can hinder or even stop progress from occuring. However, on the flip side, in order to understand where we are going, we must understand our past as well. This may sound cryptic, but I don't think 9/11 will be the last major terrorist attack America sees. We witnessed it in Spain, it's almost impossible to completely defeat terrorism, no matter what Bush says, (Anyone else catch his press conference?).

    I think part of that statement came because Republicans may be on their heels, but perhaps it was a sincere attempt at sanity. I don't know much of this Senator, so I cannot say what his intentions are. I'll go on the assumption that he really just wants to make America safe and isn't just trying to help his party.

    Still, I do think America and the world should know as much about what happened as possible. What we don't need is another JFK, where speculation never dies and theories are always debated. An actual clear answer for a change would be great. However, if this commission just boils down to party bickering, I will begin to grow tired of it myself. We want truth, not a winner and loser. I could care less of the Democrats or Republicans look good or bad due to this. I'd rather know that the government is capable, who ever is in power. I've grown very uncomfortable with the current Administration's flippant way of telling the truth, so if this Commission finally lays the law down and makes them tell the truth, then I'd say its served its purpose.

    Take care all.

  3. #3
    A Big Deal? Recognized Member Big D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    8,370
    Contributions
    • Former Cid's Knight

    Default

    The upshot of that ...article seems to be that political leaders should be immune from public or formal criticism and due process, that they should retain power, authority and respect regardless of their actions. Not a good sign. Also quite unpleasant to see the tired old "if you disagree with me then you're agreeing with the terrorists" routine - [quote]No, it is the real enemies of America that I’m concerned about.

    These evil killers who right now, right now are gleefully watching the shrill partisan finger pointing of these hearings and grinning like a mule eating briars.

    They see this as a major split within the Great Satan America. They see anger, they see division, instability, bickering, peevishness and dissension.

    They see the President of the United States hammered unmercifully. They see all this and they are greatly, greatly encouraged.[/qutoe]If you criticise the President, or try to hold him accountable for something, then you're dividing the nation and encouraging terrorists. Hm.
    Congressional hearings have long been one of Washington’s most entertaining pastimes. Joe McCarthy. Watergate. Iran Contra.
    Iran-Contra concerned US citizens selling stolen US weapons to Iran in order to finance Central American terrorist groups. A matter of the most profound importance, I'd say - one that needed to be investigated at any cost. Watergate, too, concerned serious allegations directed at prominent politicians. It seems like this author is subtly proposing a return to a mediaeval level of immunity for political rulers, under the guise of 'protecting national unity'.

    It is true that today's media cares little for facts and justice, and more for sensation and gossip, but that doesn't change the unshakable importance of having an accountable government. The September 11 terrorist atrocity cost thousands of lives, if internal oversights led to important clues being missed, then it needs to be investigated, so that errors can be fixed and so the country can be left in the hands of those who are competent.
    We did nothing after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, killing six and injuring more than 1,000 Americans.
    The matter was fully investigated to determine who was responsible, and what could be done. It's not like they could justify invading other countries on that basis. You can't simply decide to kill somebody every time a criminal act takes place.
    When our embassies were attacked in 1998, killing 263 people, our only response was to fire a few missiles on an empty tent.
    US warship fired dozens of cruise missiles into terrorist training facilities and a suspected chemical weapons factory in Afghanistan; this author is deliberately lying in order to provoke the reader. What he seems to be saying is that the government should've ordered the full-scale invasion and annihilation of "the enemy" in response to every incident, and that their failure to do so somehow diminishes our responsibility for what's happening today.

    I'd be very much afraid if writings like this became the norm.
    La-li-lu-le-lo.





    Edit: That Senator's name is really 'Zell'?!?

  4. #4
    Flan-smiter Silent Warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Shh! I'm not here.
    Posts
    535

    Default

    Anyone who wants to kill thousands when no more than a few hundred (if not even just a dozen) want to return the favor is retarded.

    Anyway, I agree with the D.
    This Apple-software (QuickTime) is not meant to be used for controlling nuclear powerplants, aircraft-navigation, communication-systems, air traffic control-systems or lifesupportive machines, where errors and shortcomings in the Apple-software may lead to deaths, injuries or serious property- or environmental damage.

  5. #5
    Doc Skogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    A Land Down Under
    Posts
    1,452

    Default

    I guess we've come to expect that ploy of calling dissenters unpatriotic in American politics. However, if dissenting voices are quelled, then America will have turned away from the principles that it holds that makes it 'free'. Should this happen, terrorist will have achieved their goal anyway.

  6. #6
    ORANGE Dr Unne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,394
    Articles
    1
    Contributions
    • Former Administrator
    • Former Developer
    • Former Tech Admin

    Default

    I'm in favor of investigating, but not if it interferes with fighting the war(s). Question is whether all the investigating really does interfere. I don't know. I hope not.

    After being drowned in a tidal wave of all who didn’t do enough before 9/11, I have come to believe that the Commission should issue a report that says: “No one did enough in the past. No one did near enough.”

    Then thank everyone for serving, send them home and let’s get on with the job of protecting this country in the future.


    I agree with that. I don't think casting blame is going to solve anything. The article is right that the threat has been there for a long time. Everyone failed. Everyone, not just the Republicans, not just the Democrats. Are they just trying to find a scapegoat to blame everything on? Are they trying to demonize the Bush administration? If so, that's a load of crap, in my opinion. The investigation is a good thing insofar as it can show what the mistakes were in the past, and let us do better in the future. Nothing more than that.

  7. #7

    Default

    Exactly Unne.

    If this becomes another issue used to debate and create politics around, it's all been for naught. Attempting to find the truth in something shouldn't be tied in any way to a political point of view, but rather the safety, security, and well being of the citizens.

    Take care all.

  8. #8
    Unpostmodernizeable Shadow Nexus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Barcino, Hispania
    Posts
    987

    Default

    We should not be doing anything to encourage our enemies in this battle between good and evil. Yet, these hearings, in my opinion, are doing just that.
    I think I shouldn't bother with this article more. Sure, read through it, but I think such maniacheism brings down any credibility he may have.

    OK, going over it a little: He says he wants union, which sounds very nice and all, but seriously, that more or less means that the people and the opposition have to stand by the president's decisions because we are in times of war. In other words, it is asking for the supression of critizism and the reafirmation of absolutist power. Sorry, I can't respect that opinion. But I can laugh at it if you want

  9. #9
    Scatter, Senbonzakura... DocFrance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    The high, untrespassed sanctity of space
    Posts
    2,805

    Default

    He's not saying that nobody should disagree with the president - that would be totalitarian and obviously wrong. He's saying that in times of national emergency, we shouldn't be sitting around pointing fingers. Instead, we should be focusing on making sure that such a horrible thing never happens again. As long as we continue to bicker like this, those who would harm us will see our weakness.
    ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
    (1) Eric Clapton is God.
    (2) Therefore, God exists.

  10. #10
    Unpostmodernizeable Shadow Nexus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Barcino, Hispania
    Posts
    987

    Default

    He's saying that in times of national emergency, we shouldn't be sitting around pointing fingers. Instead, we should be focusing on making sure that such a horrible thing never happens again.
    I think all the discussion falls into the way on how to avoid that happening again. And it's not an easy discussion.

    Then again, I don't live in the US, I obviously don't know all the politicians, just Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Dean, Kerry and some more, the ones that are internationally...noisy? So I don't know most of the people he is refering to there, I guess secretaries of the Clinton administration, when he critizizes the whole past Al Quaeda attacks.

  11. #11

    Default

    The problem is Doc, that America is SO oppsessed with winning that whenever either side opens their mouth or expresses an opinion, it comes out as an attack on the other side. Even if it's not intended as such, it happens. We've became such a divided country that there realy is no more bi-partisan politics. Neither side seems capable of just putting aside differences and working through a problem and really, that's a shame. Of course, it doens't help that this is an election year either.

    Take care all.

  12. #12

    Default

    There all playing politics, and this nine eleven commision is one of them. Instead of finding a solution, such as "it happened, it just happened, learn from are mistakes'', that cant work out between these guys. All there doing is pointing fingers.

    An a couple of days ago I was watching channel one news, they asked this question "Who's more responsible, Bush or Clinton?" when really the question should be both are responsible? Its all political parties now, like blame a whole entire political party because of 9/11. Was it like this today back in the 1940s when pearl harbor hit ??
    Last edited by Casey; 04-17-2004 at 10:35 PM.

  13. #13
    Recognized Member Nait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Not the Abyss
    Posts
    1,377
    Contributions
    • Hosted EoFF Elections event
    • Contributions to Eizon project

    Default

    A chair with less than three legs is fated to fall.

    :jap:

  14. #14
    A Big Deal? Recognized Member Big D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    8,370
    Contributions
    • Former Cid's Knight

    Default

    Instead of finding a solution, such as "it happened, it just happened, learn from are mistakes'', that cant work out between these guys. All there doing is pointing fingers.
    IF somebody's negligence contributed to the catastrophe, then that's a pretty good lesson to be learned. The commission will undoubtedly report on whether or not blunders were made, and if so, then by whom.
    Was it like this today back in the 1940s when pearl harbor hit ??
    It's not like the commission is the only response to what happened. If they stopped the country in its tracks, ignored all other matters and just focussed on allocating blame, then that'd be a serious error. However, the current commission is not impeding ongoing operations, in fact it's been two and a half years since the crime, so it's a safe time to take a look at what happened and why.

    If a criminal escapes from custody, you don't just say "it was all the criminal's fault" and ignore the possibility of gaping flaws in the system; common sense demands and inquiry. I believe the same principle applies.
    I just really don't like the way that author was saying the executive should be above criticism if it'll "make the country look bad", that was the frightening part of the article for me.

  15. #15
    gdsgdsgdsgdsgdsgdsgdsgdsg
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    19th Century London
    Posts
    178

    Default

    I would agree withg this guy if the commission really did impede progress. But it doesn't.

    As Big D wisely put it, the commission started years after the attack.

    I know that its not what he's saying, but he's coming dangerously close to saying "We did nothing to investigate terror attacks in the past, so we shouldn't now."

    Also, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to compare 9/11 to Pearl Habor. 9/11 was a terrorist attack, but pearl Harbor was millitary. There's a difference.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •