Anachronisms (Open Thread)
2 hours ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
DON'T PANIC! This blog is authored by Seniors at Aragon High School, San Mateo, CA.
Don Roll
-
-
-
-
-
-
In Defense of Mistakes1 day ago
-
-
-
Anatomy of a Media Hit1 day ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
April 17, 20247 hours ago
-
-
Donald Trump Faces His First Criminal Trial3 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
Republican Dysfunction8 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(260)
-
▼
December
(50)
- Drill, baby, drill!
- Low gas prices not good for anyone . . . really
- So much for change . . .
- Potential Trouble in China
- So, how about that Poverty?
- Tell 'em the Good Stuff
- An Unexpected Fire
- Zimbabwe blames west
- Show thrown at Bush
- Bad Computers Deny Money to Veteran Widows
- Europe Continues WIth Plan, Wants Obama to join
- American Car?
- Rape by both sides in the Congo (whyyyyyy?)
- Senate doe NOT pass auto industry bailout
- Billion Dollar Fraud
- Obama and the Internet
- Postelection Fatigue
- The country is doing bad as a whole, but Californi...
- Wow, this does not seem like a good idea
- Mugabe: "Cholera epidemic is over"
- Hilary Clinton ineligible?
- This is really disturbing
- Olberman Commentary on Bush's Legacy
- China is doing poorly
- Final Evil Gasp Of Bush
- New Russia-US treaty
- How Goes the Bailout
- Anti-Gay Vatican
- Venezuela, how is it going down there?
- Saving the Big Three
- Efficiency or Survival?
- Canadian Fat People
- What goes up must come down
- Marine Conservation In the Pacific
- Are parking meters going to end the recession?
- Newspapers down for the count?
- College....Unaffordable?
- Shinseki to be appointed VA Secretary
- Catholic Bishops dish the scoop on level of involv...
- Oslo-Convention on Cluster Munition
- Should DC become a state?
- "Dont expect big changes in foreign policy"
- Should we start to downsize?
- America helps Mexico
- Bailout v2.crap
- Sarah Palin is STILL popular....
- Politics in the time of Cholera
- World AIDS Day
- It's official....
- Remembering Harvey Milk
-
▼
December
(50)
22 comments:
Keith Olberman always has something interesting to say and he's always really accurate in his sentiments, even if Jesse's right that he can get a little harsh sometimes. It's obviously true that Bush made a lot of mistakes in office and just in general, what with all of the quotes we have of him saying completely ridiculous or uncomprehendable things and I think that Olberman is right in his critic of Bush.
~Kimiya Bahmanyar
Way Biased.
But what a speaker he is. Olberman is really amazing. No doubts there.
Sure I don't like Bush. I don't like many of his policies. I think he could have handled tons of situations better. But Olberman's speech was just soaked, no Drenched in one sided bias.
Blaming Bush for the Mumbai attack? What the heck.
Accusing Bush for evacuating Bin Laden's family from the U.S. after 9/11? Hell if we're going to just let people get torn apart for the actions of their relatives. I'm sure we all agree that the Japanese Internment during WW2 was wrong. This is similar. Nobody should be seen as guilty by association.
Saying that Bush did not keep us safe from the shoe bomber...? How is Bush supposed to do anything in regards to that?
Bias bugs me. I can say that I don't like how Bush handled a lot of these things, but the clear Bias and even hate towards Bush really bothers me. It's never fair to only present one side of any argument. But whatever. Bias will always exist.
*The montage of sort of depressing images playing in the background as he talked was also well used... Olberman knows what he's doing.
I my perspective, Bush is more liable to be labeled stupid rather than being a evil bastard. He's just an idiot caught up at the wrong place in the wrong time. While i believe that he should be blamed for some of the things on that video, I admit that Olberman was being just a bit biased there. Truly Bush did think that some of his decisions were good and it's not that he had bad intentions, but just a reaaaaallly bad way of trying to attain his goal... so i don't think we should run up to ruin George Bush, instead we should just recognize that he was just at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Wow. That was like a rush of totally negative, anti-Bush material. I guess it was somewhat harsh, but there is truth in there. I just have to say I feel bad for McCain. He had a great disadvantage in the election because of retrospective voting and how people connected the Republican Bush to the Republican McCain. Yikes.
I noticed that Olberman mentioned one of the quotes that I posted in a comment a while back...the working three jobs one. It makes me cringe, but I can kind of tell that Bush was trying to make the woman feel better; it just didn't work, for obvious reasons.
Ever since we watched that Bush documentary in class, I'm always befuddled about the disparity between the president Bush and the average person Bush. It's just so different that it's scary.
To Jeff Yeh
About the whole evacuating the Bin Laden family, the family was not that far apart from him and they might have known something worth investigating. I mean the Japanese internment, quite a few were born in the US so that is a different because those people likely knew nothing. After all, I'm am almost certain no one would have complained if say, the Japanese emperer's family was detained at the time instead of every japanese person.
Further, yeah Mumbai was clearly not Bush fault but the point Olberman is trying to make though is that the world really dangerous (due to various causes) now and that he has not made the world safer.
This Article is on the Bin Laden Family Evac.
Click Here For Article
The Bin Laden family is huge, Jesse, and I mean HUGE. Chances are, they knew nothing. Even if he was close to the evacuated family members, if Bin Laden was organized enough to get planes into the twin towers, I'm sure he would not have told his family to at least keep them safe.
Many of those evacuated that day were high school and college students. There's just no way that the FBI would let them leave without having first tried to get information and there's no way we would (or should) have detained innocent people.
And no, I don't think detaining the Japanese Emperor's family would have been a good idea either. Besides, Japan during WWII was basically run by the military. The emperor himself held little power and was more of a figurehead than a leader.
In the article:
"I understand now that when you are innocent, in the face of emotion, nothing, not even common sense, can help argue your case."
And that is so true. If his family stayed... yeah. Nothing good would have come from it.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/6322.shtml
Only eight days passed after 9/11 remember and ultimately, these people were not thoroughly interviewed and even a tiny clue is worth holding them for a few more days. Now, they clearly wanted to be safe and be evacuated but ask yourself this, is our government so weak and incapable that they cannot provide safety to a handful of people to find out more information? These people are family and some of them could have known something and to immediately say that it was fine was not a good idea. Oh and by the way, the people that are defending these people are all rich princes who are close to them so assuming that they are innocent because of what they say wouldn't be the smartest thing to do
Second, with Japan, he is not "just a figurehead" he was practically a god amongst his people. If he wanted anything, he would have got it so saying that they wouldn't know anthing without any investigation would is not true because his generals were incredibly loyal to him. Like, if they were trying to do a coup or something maybe they would have left him in the dark or they thought he was useless and annoying then maybe but if that was the case, why did they try so hard to protect him? Therefore, he definitely knew something and his family probably knew something so releasing them would have been a bad idea.
Judicial Watch is a nice website that keeps tabs on the government's actions but the entire nature of the website (to find flaws and mistakes that the government commits) instantly makes the source extremely biased against the government, in my opinion.
Men, Women, and Children. I'm sure Bin Laden would not have trusted any potentially vital information to his family to keep them (and himself) safe, considering how easy it would have been for us to capture them.
I also think that holding his family for a few more days would not have made any difference. Unless we resort to torture, I doubt we would have found any more than whatever information we managed to gleam from a family that soon after disowned him.
More info on his family
Osama Bin Laden "is one of 54 children born to wives of the late Mohammed Bin-Awad Binladin". 53 brothers and sisters. It's a huge family, and I think there is little chance that Bin Laden would have trusted his relatives, much less his relatives currently living in the US,with any critical information...
as for the "rich princes who are close to them"... What does it matter if they are rich? the bin laden family is huge and yes it is wealthy. But wealth does not instantly mean corrupt or evil. And regardless of whether or not they were wealthy or royalty, they were close to them. If I ever found out my family was potentially in danger, I'd try to do something to save them too.
Again, Japan's emperor was a figurehead. A symbol of their nation, yes, but still a figurehead.
World War II Database
As emperor, he was not like a typical king. Quoting a handout McGlashan gave us last year,
"The main difference was that the Japanese government was not led by one man like Germany under Adolf Hitler and Italy under Benito Mussolini. Japan was led by a small group of military commanders...[The Emperor] had great popularity in Japan but the military commanders made most of the decisions about how to run the country"
He was a god amongst his people, yes. He had great influence, yes. But he did not ultimately make the huge decisions.
*There actually was a military coup in which several military commanders tried to assassinate the Emperor (and in the Emperor's name, believe it or not) so they could continue the war, since the Emperor was encouraging the nation to surrender near the end of the war.
And i doubt very much that any emperor in that time would have trusted their wives and children with vital information pertaining to their nation's future military decisions.
Just because it is judicial review's job is to find things that the government does not make them inaccurate and biased. It's there job and someone has to do it. Furthermore, they have the actual documents so no, just because they may or may not be biased has no real significance.
"If I ever found out my family was potentially in danger, I'd try to do something to save them too."
Yeah exactly, including lie so therefore, you can't trust what they say about them being innocent. Second, you don't neccessarily have to outright tell family members information for them to figure something out. AFter, all they, have seen him, they could have seen people he was with what they looked like. They could know for example, being a part of a wealthy family, people to investigate, people who might be giving him money anything. Furthermore, torture, these are rich people meaning that they are much more cooperateive than say, a guerilla soldier who has nothing to lose and if we did find a name, person, or a lead, we could have saved many lives and furthermore, wouldn't have to do the horrific torturing the Bush administration is doing now.
Yes they could lie, that is definitely true. But what would you propose we do about it? They've been questioned, and they supposedly know nothing. Would we deem it right to lock up these potentially innocent people?
as for who was funding Osama... Well we already know he's already rich and that our own nation had supported him with weapons and funds.
"Final Rule: Be Skeptical, but Not Cynical" (UnSpun, p175)
We can't just hold them because they might know something. Anybody can have a motive for lying and we can't always assume they are lying just because they are trying to accomplish their goals.
And being rich does not necessarily make you any more or less cooperative than if you were "a guerrilla soldier". We're all humans in the end. But assuming that they are in fact more cooperative than the average person, then why would we need to detain them longer? If they were more cooperative, then shouldn't we have gotten any if not all the information that they might have had?
Actually, I was wrong in my previous comments. The Bin Laden family disowned Osama Bin Laden in 1994, severing ties with him years before the 9/11 attacks. Many members of his family barely even knew him.
From the article I had previously linked:
Osama's brother who was interviewed by USAtoday lived in America whereas Osama Bin Laden was living in Afghanistan. The brother being interviewed has not even seen Osama since 1988 during one of their other brother's funerals.
"I felt sad, that this is a tragedy for humanity," he said. "And I felt, this is a tragedy for our family. How will people look at our family?"
you know, I'm actually having fun debating here. =D
Let's get this straight: Bush is not retarded, Bush is not stupid and Bush is not the worst president ever. He could be ranked in the worst 5 presidents, but not the worst. He misspeaks occasionally (with millions of people watching him, judging) and he couldn't handle the tons of stress put on him. I noticed Bush got grumpier and grumpier in his second term. And why shouldn't he be? When things didn't go to plan everybody turned on him. People lusted for him to make a mistake so they could prove how stupid and evil he was. ANYTHING he did became the "stupid" decision. I can't imagine having to wake up every morning knowing that so many people hate you and everything you stand for so much. Bush honestly thought he was leading the country to it's brightest possible future. And when his own countrymen showed so much passionate loathing and negativity towards him, he got even more grumpy and bitter. That's why the negativity Olbermann shouts from behind his la vie en bleu glasses discourages me. Radical hatred does not bring truth or a sense of right or wrong. There were a lot of things in that video that were true. But there were also a lot of points Olbermann brought up just to be hateful. Many of them were only bad in retrospect. Honestly, how should Bush have prevented the death of Bhutto or stopped the attacks on Mumbai? He increased the security in airports, but how could he decrease security guard incompetence about shoebombs before we knew anything of such things? And there has not been a terrorist attack on United States' soil since September 11, 2001. He appointed the first black man and hispanic man to hold top cabinet positions. I realize Bush made far more mistakes than good deeds. True, Bush should never have been president. But when he made a mistake, we should have reasoned with him, not shouted obsceneties at him and threatened to end his life. Anger and fear only isolate the president more from his people and split the divide even greater between his loyalists and his critics in our country. Bush's administration serves as a stark example of what a president and his advisors shouldn't do as a government and an example of what the people of the United States shouldn't do to our president as citizens. Because no matter how much you disagree with someone, specifically the president, blind hatred will only make it worse.
I agree with Ian. ^
Beautifully written argument, that was.
I am too, but anyway, the point of the whole thing is that they have not been questioned thoroughly as the article from Judicial review shows, it was done sloppily and George Bush easily could have detained them for even a few days at least to get down the facts straight
"Moreover, the documents contain numerous errors and inconsistencies which call to question the thoroughness of the FBI’s investigation of the Saudi flights"
Like really? We just attacked and no one looked at this thoroughly?
Plus, it is hard to believe that his family does not have "any information of investigative value"
at all
Really in the end, too little time was spent asking these people questions because after all, if they could not even figure out how many people were interviewed, they probably missed a lot more
funny how it's titled
"Olberman's Commentary"
than
"Olberman's Criticism"
At 1:43 , Olberman just released a numorous amount of facts in attempting to prove that Bush is our main lead towards Defeat rather than Victory. And in some sense, I do agree that Bush has been somewhat slacking off throughout his entire campaign, and even if he wasn't, his proposals "seem" to have a crucial affect, yet was just a complete failure in humility and shame. I do believe that he maybe one of our most inane and preposterous president in American history due to his quixotic and idealistic foolishness. Go 0Bama?
Judicial Watch notes that there were a few people who left on the flight that were not questioned thoroughly enough. But being biased against the government and all, They didn't mention who in particular was left out. Was it another one of Osama's brothers or sisters? Or maybe they were children ? We may never know. Also, according to the Judicial Watch article, it wasn't only Bin Laden's family that was evacuated but also many Saudi Royals. Perhaps they were not questioned (and rightfully so) as they would know any of Bin Laden's plans.
The disorganization of the FBI is a bit unsettling, but we did just experience the largest-scale terrorist attack on our nation to date, after all.
“Eight days after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Osama bin Laden possibly charters a flight to whisk his family out of the country, and it’s not worth more than a luggage search and a few brief interviews?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton
First off, there is no way, and i emphasize no way that an "evil mastermind", who is capable of sending planes into the twin towers and world trade center, would decide to evacuate his family (or informants) after he committed the crime and openly admitted to it. If he's been capable of evading us for so long, I'm sure he would not have left traces or information within his own family for the FBI to examine.
Also from the Judicial Watch article:
"Judge Richard W. Roberts ordered the FBI to resubmit “proper disclosures” to the Court and Judicial Watch."
The articles that Judicial watch have apparently are not the entire original reports that the FBI made. Rather, it seems that all Judicial watch is using to base their conclusions off of has been what the FBI chose to disclose to them. Sure there were errors but it appears that they are judging too early without all the evidence.
And it was not George Bush's responsibility to ask these people questions nor is it his responsibility to detain them further for a few days. That would be the FBI.
"Judge Richard W. Roberts ordered the FBI to resubmit “proper disclosures” to the Court and Judicial Watch."
Why would they keep information that justifies them from going out? It's been 6 years and they ONLY decided to show them how incompetant they were? Furthermore, even if the country was reeling from an attack, that makes such questioning even more important and vital.
"Many of those evacuated that day were high school and college students."
ANd i think that George Bush would have mentioned if the ones who were not interviewed were children so that is not likely. Furthermore, it was not just the FBI decision to evacuate those people, after all George Bush should be informed about evacuating a handful of people during a crisus. He should have worked around the clock to help and yet,
http://www.slate.com/id/2098861/
he spent 40% of time on vacation, not at the white house. It is the FBI that does the real work but they work and report to him for him to check and make critical decisions
Oh and furthermore
"I'm sure he would not have left traces or information within his own family for the FBI to examine."
Well, as I said before, being a rich and power family, they can know things without neccessarily being told directly by hussein. They also know people who could be worth investigating or anything and Bin Laden can't exactly stop them without killing them. Second, he is the mastermind and he is a covert terrorist in hiding, you NEVER disregard any possible lead you can get to find these people because they try to cover everything so you have to check everything. Second, holding them for a few days in a safe and ammodable location is not exactly that hard especially considering that they should not be allowed to leave the country at all since all airlines were shut down at that time. George Bush decided to give these people a ride home although all airlines were shut down and his cabinet member who he hired is responsible for looking over these things and if he did such a thing poorly, then George Bush made an error in hiring him just like with Brown
http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2007/Saudi%20Docs%202.pdf
Ok, I skimmed the document that the Judicial Review had (it was really long so i didn't want to read it) but anyway here are some things. First, there were NO children in the Bin Laden family at this time (pg 31). Second, on page 216
"At the time, the Saudis who had assembled for departure tried to get the planes to leave before the FBI had even identified who was on them"
then on page 217
"In the end, the FBI decicided it was simply not practical to conduct full-blown investigations 'they were identified,' says Dale Watson 'but they were not subject to serious interviews or interrogations.' The bureau has declined to release their identities"
They say that their relations did not constitute investigation but
"A number of experienced investigators expressed surprise that the Saudis had not been interviewed"
Ok, so, someone was on that plane who was not interviewed (family of his or not) and considering that investigators expressed surpirised suggests that it probably was not a great idea to do so. Anyway, it MIGHT be possible for all of the Saudis (including the family) to know absolutely nothing but i guess we will never find out will we because they were all sent home.
Also, pg 213, "they left the US without being interviewed by the FBI"
By the way, i have a new-found appreciation for cut and past function and does anyone know how to cut and paste with pdf?
I agree that Bush made numerous more mistakes than successes, but in the end, I feel bad for Bush, I mean, he will always be remebered by the war in Iraq, recession, soaring gas prices, home foreclosures, etc... Although many of the things Olberman said were true, there were a few things that were not his fault, such as the shoe bomber and the recent Mumbai attacks. Also we can't forget 9/11. He successfully brought our nation together and made sure American interests were protected. Don't get me wrong, Bush is easily on my top 10 worst Presidents list, but to be honest, this video was a little harsh.
I don't think this was too harsh--maybe a little biased--but not too harsh. And he's right.
Well, i personally think he was very harsh. Yes he has poor decision skills, and doesn t always know what to say(which is kind of funny). But we have to understand that he had to deal with the September 11 incident, which changed his plans, and the whole format of his presidency.
Post a Comment