Sunday, September 16, 2007

Another Heston "Planet of the Apes" moment

James Brolin appears last Tuesday on a New Jersey radio talk show to promote his upcoming movie. This appearance happens to be on the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 mass murder committed by Al Qaeda. One of the radio DJ's makes note of this during his conversation with Brolin who responds by saying: "Oh yeah, happy 9/11". After being politely chastised by the DJ for the obviously insensitive remark, he follows by saying "celebrate the day, right?'

For those who don't know, James Brolin is currently married to Barbara Streisand, and that alone suggests the man has poor judgment, and a far-left mentality. But for anyone, even a far-left loon, to say "happy 9/11" is beyond insane. I think this comment, even if it's a dumb foot-in-the-mouth gaffe, says a lot about how the Left lunatics view 9/11. For them, it seems to be a punchline and a reason all of us gullible righties use to justify war.

I don't need to remind Brolin of the thousands who died that day, not that he would really care. But I did feel the need to post his words on this blog. Brolin, for this alone, is clearly a man of idiotic mind. Can you imagine someone saying "happy Katrina day" or "happy Pearl Harbor day"? I don't think so.

I think Brolin owes the victims of 9/11 an apology, and if it doesn't come then we are clearly living on a planet ruled by apes.


Allisoni Balloni said...

I am not going to defend James Brolin, but I feel it completely necessary to point out that what the left sees 9/11 as, 6 years later, IS a political talking point. I am able to remember the victims of 9/11, and where I was that morning, without at all relating it to politics or war. All of my conservative friends, instead of just remembering the day, are fueled with outward disgust for the enemy and use it as a way to justify the war in Iraq. It is hard for me to place any higher value on the day when those who claim to "care" the most about it are those who consistently use the victims as an excuse to kill even more people. I do not see it like that, but I think you are nearly blind if you cannot see how much conservatives abuse a day that is a national tragedy, not a strategical political move.



Talking Point? Not at all; we remember 9/11, and some also will never forget Dec 7th, 1941. Our people died, the Left of Center Lied. We need to confront them! reb


Now that you've effectively eliminated your spineless competition, you really need to adjust your on-camera image for the rest of the population.

Just tell us that you mis-spoke before the United States Senate on 9/11/2007, with...

"The Willing Suspension Of Disbelief!"

Now then, you really didn't mean to call our honorable General,
David Petraeus, a Liar, did you?

We certainly hope not. reb

Anonymous said...

I agree with Allisoni. 9/11 is used by the right far more than by the left; it is used to support their pro-Iraq agenda, despite the fact that 9/11 and Iraq are completely unrelated. And I think that's more disrespectful than some radio guy saying some ambiguous comment.

John Washburn said...

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I think it's a huge mistake to say that the two were unrelated. I think the Iraq invasion had everything to do with 9/11. No, we didn't go in to avenge the 9/11 attack. But we did go in to avert a second, more deadly attack. Hussein had WMDs, and if he didn't have them then he was getting close to having them, which means that any number of terrorist groups would have had access to them. That would have led to something much worse than 9/11. So, yes, the two were very much related.

It seems to be a common Left talking point that Bush misled the people into thinking that Iraq played a role in 9/11. Actually, the administration never made such a connection. Hussein did have ties to al qaeda, but did not have a hand in the 9/11 attack. I don't think anyone disputes that. But, I think we can all agree that if Saddam had been allowed to acquire nukes, like Ahmadinejad is trying to do now, then we would be dealing with a nuclear Al Qaeda. Denying this is foolish.

I don't see how the Right exploits 9/11. They remember it, and they constantly remind people of the attack (and it's pretty sad that people have to be reminded of this)as a way of keeping focus. We need to remember how horrible that day was so that we take whatever measures necessary to avoid another. But exploit it? That's a stretch. People like myself don't ever want to see another attack like that, and if it means reminding people on a daily basis of 9/11 then so be it.

The Loop Garoo Kid said...


Perhaps you know something that I don't, which is that Saddam Hussein either had WMD or was close to acquiring them. I am pretty sure that I have been awake for 2/3rds of the time since 9/11 and I cannot recall evidence of WMDs in Iraq in the time immediately prior to teh invasion.

Secondly, is it your position that the Bush administration did not attempt to link Saddam Hussein w/ the events of 9/11? Check out Linda Feldman's article in the March 14, 2003 Christian Science Monitor. In that article, she cites President Bush's press conference the prior week in which he mentioned 9/11 eight times, often in te same breath as Saddam Hussein. Ms. Feldman refers to a NY Times/CBS poll in which 45% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks.

As for Saddam Hussein's links w/ al Qaeda, I remember Osama bin Laden denouncing the president of Iraq. What is the basis of your contention that had Saddam Hussein acquired nuclear weapons al Qaeda would be nuclear?



When one has been born into freedom, few enough realize that others have paid a price for it. So, rather than pick up the banner
of responsibility to maintain it, the weak-willed choose to whine...and complain.

The president is a very convenient "Straw Man" to throw verbal stones at; that's what we see happening today!

George Soros is merely the 'enabler'. He creates a Hate-group, and now has two million members.

Is "Peace" So be purchased at the price of surrender?

Voters will decide. reb

Anonymous said...

There's no proof Saddam had such weapons. And by invading Iraq we provoked Iran into building one.

As for the president, whether he mislead the people or not, there was no reason to go in.

I feel the right politicizes the event more than the left. I don't think you do, or that all Republicans do. I just see more "memorials" turned into pro-war speeches than anti-war speeches.


Talking Points, Left & Right!

So we bicker and fume at each other, and we are Ignor-ant of
the mind-set of the clear intentions of Global Jihad. They wish to impose an ancient, brutal
Theocracy on the entire world, and
Holy Imams instill these ideas with
five daily mandatory prayers. They justify, and claim Piety. They train adults to fly planes into buildings, they wrap bombs on their young Shahid Children. They drive truck bombs into open markets; they detonate bombs in buses, train stations, and cafes in "infidel" nations. They bomb foreign Embassies in many nations.
The dummies ignore it!

Suiciders are tough, insane warriors. Saudi Arabian Oil dollars have built Mosques in a hundred nations, including the USA. Allah Akbar!!! Your children will live under Sharia Law! Keep on, MoveOn! We'll put your women in Black Bags, with peek-out holes. Burkha! Keep arguments going,

we have Allah!

We Americans have...anti-American "Talking Points"! If you
don't have enough jabber, skilled propagandists like "MoveOn" will supply you with fresh boxes of them. Would you like to Donate?

Be a puppet-activist! Pretend you are on the 'good side' build a "grass-roots movement in your neighborhood, or University campus; fight military recruitment or R.O.T.C. in your school, or college campus. Who needs an Army,
Navy, or Marine Corps? Stop the War!

Burn baby, burn! Hate everything!Your parents are the Establishment, anyway. Who needs an education? Not me! All I need is my Cell-phone, GameBoy, and Rap-Crap! We're all gonna have a
musical "group" and make millions!
Education is for dummies!

Mailings, leaflets, "peace" rallies, 'Impeach Bush' bumper-stickers, anything you'll need to
continue with "Talking Points".
Become an Itellectual For "Peace".
I Hate Rules and Laws. I'm a
Libertarian Peace Activist!

These chumps will fall like a ripe fig! Listen to them rattle. reb

The Loop Garoo Kid said...

robert m,

I think it is simplistic and erroneous to believe there is a cause and effect relationship between Iran's nuclear ambitions and the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

No doubt Iran's program had already started b/f the invasion.
Certainly, an unintended consequence of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein has been the empowerment of Iran and an increase in its influence in region.

I was always against the invasion of Iraq b/c any student of history could predict the current state of that country once its dictator was removed. In addition, Saddam Hussein, however evil and despotic he was, served a foil to Iranian power in the region.

That said, I continue to wonder how Saddam Hussein would have responded to Iranian nuclear ambitions and my conclusion is that he would have responded in the same way as other regional powers have responded. He would have attempted to develop his own nuclear capabilities.

I have always agreed w/ reb that the some of denizens of this particular area of the planet are not the most rational of people and it is in the best interest of the all of us that none of the powers in the region develop nuclear capabilities.

I have yet to hear a hue and cry about the Israeli raid into Syria that occurred, as reb reports today, earlier this month. North Korea is responsible for exporting nuclear technology to Syria.

In addition, I have concerns about the current state of affairs in Pakistan, a nuclear power, that is infested w/ radical Islamists.


John Washburn said...

I think it's quite a stretch to say we provoked Iran into nuke ambition. Ahmadinejad is a bona fide psycho, and he would pursue nukes regardless of what we did. Remember, he wants Israel wiped off the map. Our invasion didn't change that. Plus, by eliminating Saddam we eliminated Iran's closest enemy. If anything, it should have led to a drawdown of military ambition. Iran's nuke ambition is hardly our fault.

John Washburn said...

Loop, it is absolutely my position that the administration never once alluded to Saddam being involved with 9/11. Yes, 9/11 was important in that invasion, and my previous response explains why. Bush noted multiple reasons for war, but revenge for 9/11 or Saddam's involvement in 9/11 wasn't one of them.

Holding the president accountable for what 45% of Americans mistakenly believe is unfair and reflects your own superficial bias against the man. I think similar percentages believe in bigfoot, is that Bush's fault as well?

The Loop Garoo Kid said...


On the contrary, if anything, my prejudice--bias usually indicates feelings for while prejudice indicates feelings against--is hardly superficial. It is deep seeded and well thought out. I speak, of course, of his policies for the most part. It is nothing personal except to the extent that his personal traits are related to his implementation of policy.

Whereas it is true to some extent that the neither the president nor anyone else is entirely responsible for what 45% of Americans believe, if you take the position that the Bush administration did not attempt to linlk Saddam Husssein w/ 9/11 you are being deliberately obtuse.

Until a few months ago, I would have disagreed w/ your contentionthat 45% of Americans believe in bigfoot but since the inception of the ad campaign by that beef jerky company, maybe not.