|
Edited on Sun Feb-28-10 07:39 PM by 20score
If the reaction to an attack is smart, forward looking and takes into account all the causes of the attack as well as any long-term goals that are beneficial, the terrorists will have failed. The first big thing the government did after the 9-11 terrorist attacks to ensure the terrorists were going to receive maximum effect for their efforts, was the PATRIOT ACT. A less than half-assed attempt to bring in Osama bin Laden and the actual perpetrators of the attacks, economic policies that hurt the middle class, programs that encouraged burning more fossil fuel and a war in Iraq soon followed. And of all these reactions, only the capturing of perpetrators is gaining any ground and heading in the right direction. (With caveats, of course.)
When the PATRIOT ACT was signed into law in October of 2001, there were millions of sentient beings, and one senator, who saw this for what it was - an over-reaction and a selling out of our ideals with the oxymoronic rational that we needed it to remain free. But even then, in 2001, a few weeks after the attacks, when most were still in shock, people knew there were sections of the bill so awful that they needed a sunset provision. Like the infamous Section 215, known as the Library Provision. Provisions that were just renewed under a different government - a government full of people that for years told us how bad these aspects of the bill are for the country.
As weak as the excuses were in 2001, the people that pushed the USA PATRIOT ACT through this time don’t even have those insulting pretexts to fall back on. And those pretexts were insulting. No one in a leadership position should be able to get away with pretending that they didn’t know of a historical pattern of over-reaction after a national tragedy. Now the outcry is muted compared to what it was years ago, and people don’t seem to be interested in justifying this renewal. Maybe after years of war crimes, attacks on the middle class, and the draining of our treasury, people are just on outrage overload. Or, maybe people just “get used to” almost anything.
Back in 2001 we happen to have been saddled with arguably the worst president in our history. Even a mediocre leader could have kept the country together, captured bin Laden, and gained alliances. And that leader could have easily pushed through programs that simultaneously helped our economy while weaning us off of fossil fuel. There is no telling where a great leader would have been able to take the country. Instead, we took the low road with Bush at the helm, and in the process we seem to have forgotten that it is our duty to improve society. We should not settle for whatever the banks, energy companies and various lobbyists let us have. After the attacks of 2001 we could have, and should have, made the country better. Now we’re finding it impossible to even bring the country back to the standards of the 1990’s. It is a very good thing that we are not trying to found a country in this environment.
A year ago many people were excited at the possibility that we could change the direction of the country. We were no longer going to have greed, stupidity and cruelty take the lead as our guiding principles. Circumstances have gotten better, but it is not even close to our potential. We should be demanding that trade policies be crafted to benefit all and not just multi-nationals. We should be demanding that people do not die due to a lack of health insurance, or go bankrupt due to scandalous practices by the insurers covering them. We should be demanding that green technology is given its proper place. And we should not let a reprehensible moron co-opt the 9-11 attacks to further division and push mean spirited programs.
What was true back in late 2001 is still true today. We can be so much better than we are now.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
