Paul Krugman – The Shame of 9/11

by Ben Hoffman


Is it just me, or are the 9/11 commemorations oddly subdued?

Actually, I don’t think it’s me, and it’s not really that odd.

What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.

A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits — people who should have understood very well what was happening — took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity?

The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.

I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.

Source

Krugman is absolutely right. But what’s really shameful is the lack of interest by the media in how we were allowed to be attacked when there were plenty of warnings. Hell, Bush knew that an attack was coming. Why else would there have been surface-to-air missiles installed on the roof of his hotel in Florida? Why wasn’t the second World Trade Center tower immediately evacuated after the first plane hit? Why did the Air Force not do anything to intercept the hijacked planes? Why would Bush and Cheney only answer questions about the attack behind closed doors — refusing to answer under oath and under the conditions that there would be no transcripts?

There are too many unanswered questions about the attack. Congress spent some $60 million dollars investigating Clinton’s personal life. Compare that to the $3 million to investigate the most deadly attack on American civilians in our history.

Advertisements

3 Comments to “Paul Krugman – The Shame of 9/11”

  1. Well Ben, I have to agree with you on this. I posted a couple excerpts from Mr. Krugman’s piece and I’ve been blistered. If you get a chance, check out some of the action over at Cry and Howl.

  2. You hit the nail on the head. $60 million on “Pecker-Gate” and $3 million on 9/11. Pathetic.

  3. Did you see the story about the scientist who said that he had a new theory about how the towers collapsed, and he was basically told by his peers that the official story was the only story and that his theory was wrong. I can see there being a sort of defensiveness against wanting to change the official story, but any theory that could potentially save lives from future attacks of a similar nature should be worth investing money in exploring. Even if it leads to nothing significant, at least it would give the image of the government doing something, instead of spending money so I can get fondled at the airport when I fly.

    http://news.yahoo.com/twin-tower-collapse-model-could-squash-9-11-201204097.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: