911 taught Americans all law enforcement federal, state, and local must cooperate to keep us safe. Local and state enforcement of immigration laws including visa overstays may have prevented 911. I doubt our military would be in Iraq today had 911 been prevented with vigorous enforcement of immigration laws by all local and state agencies. American citizens, Europe, and the Middle East cannot afford for American local and state law enforcement agencies being prevented or refusing to eforce immigration law. The consequences for this failure are tragic and potentially devastating for the world. Small actions or lack therof ( good police work ) can have huge impacts on history. Politics demand action. No matter the political party if we are attacked the President will respond with aggression and there will be collateral(civilian deaths) damage. Only prevention of the terrorist attack by enforcing the only tool civilization has, the law will keep American citizens safe and secure.
- Sign in or Sign up to post comments
- send to friend
- report as spam
I agree with a lot of what you said. I would add that had President Clinton taken bin Laden when Sudan offered him, 911 possibly would not have happened. I believe Clinton declined, because we didn't have "proof" that he was behind the 1st WTC bombing, etc. Unfortunate choice on his part. 911 might have occurred any way, but it would have been nice to get this guy out of circulation.
Unfortunately, the terrorists only have to be right one time, whereas our security resources have to be right 100% of the time. I am so grateful we have not had a repeat of 9-11. With Homeland Security, I feel pretty certain many plots have been foiled. My biggest fear about the 08 election is the winner (if a Democrat) will cut defense and Homeland Security, which will leave us wide open for another attack. Given the opportunity, 911 could look like a picnic if we are attacked again.
At times, I feel helpless -- I live in such a great country, but who knows when another attack could happen? And as much as I'd love to travel outside the US, as an American, I'd be afraid. There is such hatred towards us in so many areas of the world; plus there are terrorists everywhere who would think nothing of taking out Americans given the chance. Yes, 911 taught us -- to be alert and more careful than before.
by John V. Denson
A new book entitled The Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable by George Victor and published by Potomac Books Inc. of Washington, D.C. is well researched and gives a very clear picture of how and why the Pearl Harbor myth was created. This "patriotic political myth" states that the attack by the Japanese was unprovoked and was a surprise to the Roosevelt administration, as well as, the key military personnel in Washington; but the commanders of Pearl Harbor were at fault for not being ready. Based on a good summary of the up-to-date research the author, who is an approving admirer of Roosevelt, concludes that Roosevelt deliberately provoked the attack and that he and his key military and administrative advisers clearly knew, well in advance, that the Japanese were going to attack both Pearl Harbor and the Philippines. Roosevelt wanted to get into the European War but he had been
unsuccessful in provoking Germany; therefore, he considered the sacrifice of Pearl Harbor and the Philippines as the best way to get into the European War through the back door of Japan. The cover-up of this strategy started immediately after the attack and continues to this day. The author concludes that this information of the coming attack was intentionally withheld from the military commanders because it was known that the Japanese were depending upon the element of surprise and if warnings had been sent to the commanders of Pearl Harbor and the Philippines, their preparation for the attack would have caused the Japanese to cancel their plans.
The losses and damages at Pearl Harbor are described by Victor as follows:
"In the Pearl Harbor attack, the United States lost twenty-four hundred troops along with a quarter of her fleet. Many military leaders and Knox, Hull, and Roosevelt had underestimated the harm Japan could do, even by a surprise attack. And U.S. losses were much increased by two unlikely events. A Japanese bomb penetrated the battleship Arizona’s armor at an odd angle, reaching her magazine and causing her to explode. And the torpedoed battleship Oklahoma capsized. The explosion of the Arizona and the capsizing of the Oklahoma resulted in the drowning of sixteen hundred sailors."
The rest of the story: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson8.html
911 was eerily similar and much more sinister.
The Revolution is not being televised but it is being youtubed!
Join the Ron Paul Revolution and heed our founding father's advice to stay out of entangling alliances!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Mitchell
William "Billy" Mitchell predicted the attack and war with Japan in a 324 page report to the navy. He published it in the book "Winged Defense" in 1925. But the navy pretty much ingored it.
Browncoats Unite!
That is some poor history HC. The reason that the Navy believed that harbor safe from air attack has everything to do with the shallowness of the harbor. They knew of no torpedoes that would be effective at that depth. Therefore, they thought they were safe from such an attack. The Japanese developed the torpedoes secretly. To think that Roosevelt would sacrifice a good portion of his Pacific fleet, and suffer such a catastrophe to initiate our entrance into the war is ridiculous. After all, Roosevelt was undersecretary of the Navy at one time, it was something he was very proud of. It is like saying he sacrificed a beloved son.
If he knew of an attack, why would he leave the fleet totally defenseless. Why not allow the attack, and then fend it off. We would still have entered the war but not from a weak stance. This conspiracy theory, and your 911 conspiracy, is a lot of bunk. You do a disservice to Ron Paul as one of his operatives here.
--Think also of the comfort and rights of others
If you want to know more about HC's views, then please see this thread:
http://unity08.com/node/1382#22921
If you read down, you will see he is supporting a known Neo-Nazi, Ernst Zundel. And when asked about this, he replied that he "may or may not agree" with Zundel's views.
Jeff C
leikec@yahoo.com
No wonder I hear the voice of Tony Snow whenever I read his posts. Thanks for the info Jeff.
--Think also of the comfort and rights of others
I always thought that it was mighty convenient that our Aircraft Carriers happened to be gone from Pearl Harbour when the attack came,
That was one of the theories by revisionist Historian Charles Tansill in his Book "Back Door To War". He theorized that FDR was looking for a way to get involved in the European War to help out his disstant cous and Brits, but to do that we would have to goad the Japanese into a Big Attack on us in the pacific that would overwhelmingly propel us into the global fray to rescue the Brits and all. He didn't prove anything with his disconnected mish mash of "evidence" but the theory kicked around and was the "Kennedy Assaination conspiracy" of its time for the American Isolationists (esp the Robert Taft Repubs after WWWII) and German sympathizers during the war. Oh Well! Hey people will believe what they want to believe - and will not let the preponderance of facts ruin a good story. What CAN you do!!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
no offense but why be afraid? to me that is not the american way. unfortunately the current administration has made damn sure to play on americans fears. the list of how is too long. guilliani is running a campaign almost solely geared to playing on americans fears. what ever happens to us as individuals is gods (or whatever you believe) will. sitting around fearing that the shopping center you are visiting is going to be attacked just seems unamerican. but it shows we have become a soft country.
politicians kn ow this and play to our softness. whoever is elected will have protecting our homeland as a priority. i think it is wrong to think dems will be weaker than repubs. i agree there is much hatred towards us but it has exponentially increased because of the missteps of our current administration. in my opinion they have made us more of a target than we were prior to 911.
maybe he will write a book explaining how George Bush planned the implosion of the twin towers. cover ups, plots, secrecy, i dont believe any of it.
I don't buy those conspiracies either, but unlike Beth, I am not scared, and I go into Manhattan, which will always be target # 1.
I do not feel we are any safer - I feel Homeland Security is a joke - if we were serious about security, we wouldn't have an open border, we'd be inspecting every ship instead of taking away nail clippers and frisking old ladies at airports.
Remember, they're killing us in Iraq so they don't have to kill us here.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
I get so sick of reading your ignorant final sentence:
"Remember, they're killing us in Iraq so they don't have to kill us here"
Do you realy think that they have had the chance to hit us on our soil and instead prefer the few casualties they are inflicting in Iraq? Most of your statements are thought provoking and intelligent, even when I disagree, but this regular statement of yours is just plain stupid.
manhatten and DC are probably still the number one targets. However, no city is safe and i agree i dont have much faith in homeland security. look at the TSA in the airports, what a joke. they shut down the scanning machines in Phoenix airport at mindnight and have one guard that falls asleep. now thats homeland security.
they would like to kill us in Iraq and here.
Not to steal Silver's thunder, but there must be some truth there. First, if by "they" we mean Al-Queda, then we have to believe that the front of this war on terror is in Iraq. We do know from previous intelligence that the Number 1 mission of Al-Queda is to extract the infidel from sacred soil. After all, our boots in Saudi-Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War was the springboard for Osama's subsequent actions. I wouldn't be hesitant to surmise that the remainder of the radical Muslim world feels the same. I'm sure that getting westerners out of the Middle East/Gulf ranks up there with the dissolution of Israel, as far as "they" are concerned.
This certainly does not mean that given an opportunity similar to that of 911, "they" wouldn't hesitate to act again. But, since Americans are in their backyards, and since that is where the vast majority of radical Muslims reside and are recruited, then, yes "they" are killing us in Iraq, rather than in Philadelphia or Baltimore.
i think the slogan we are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here is propaganda at its very worst. almost all government reports and military experts say we have strengthened al queda by invading iraq. common sense dictates that it is so.
to use the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11/2001 as proof is pure folly. lets look at the time frame. the first attack on the towers was 2/26/1993. it took al queda 8 years to attack us again on american soil. i am sure they are planning another attack but to think that because we are in iraq it wont happen is naive. my opinion is that our invasion of iraq has probably increased the probabilities of success since so much of our military is overseas instead of perhaps guarding our ports, railways, and airports to name a few strategic spots.
i would also like to ask all those who support the war in iraq what have they as individuals and their families sacrificed?
i think if we reinstated the draft which should include women, which previously it did not, peoples views and attitudes would change quickly.
you can call it forced sacrifice.
i hope at least one (vp or pres)on the ticket who will be elected to run our country has served in the military because chicken hawks should not be taking this country to war as is the current situation.