Archive through September 11, 2002
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archive: Sept. 11...: Archive through September 11, 2002

Nimtu

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 10:40 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Well, just have to step into the fray on two points:
1. Hate can be there with or without cause. There are countries that are anti-american therefore we must have done something to cause it - Wrong (there is racism, gender-bias, religious persecution (was the holocaust justified cause a whole bunch of people marched around stating that jews caused all evil? )).
2. Good discussion requires both parties to keep an open mind and not enter the discussion with the belief that nobody can change my mind. It is amazing what you can learn when you keep an open mind. JMO

Kaili

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 01:38 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Nimtu- in terms if discussing religion, for example, I don't think you can easily change a person's mind. In terms of emotions- and this is an emotional isue- I also think it's ifficult to change minds. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on what I say and I don't expect to change minds. I just wanted to put out an opinion that is diferent and give people something to think about. It's all about perspectives and i don't expect to change anyone's. BUT I do think it's good to hear the perspectives of others.

I personally feel that there is cause for hate because hate is a very strong emotion. To be willing to kill and die for something, you must hold beliefs about it. The reasons may not, in our opinion, be good ones but they are reasons. It doesn't justify anything though. Using your racism example, say someone hates black people because of the color of their skin. It's a bad reason, not justifiable in most people's minds, but it is a reason. Just not a good one. It's simple thinking on the part of anyone to hate everyone of any group- if I said I hated all Middle Eastern people because of the terrorists, then that is just dumb. For them to hate all Americans for whatever reason is also dumb. I don't agree with it, but it happens.

Maris- the connection between Iraq and Afghanistan is not that the reasons for the attacks are the same. I'm not trying to say that. My correlation is that both attacks are the decision of Bush (with the advice of his various advisors). Making the decision to go to war in Afghanistan is a foreign policy decision. There may have been less debate/question about it because of the reason but there is always a choice to be made in our actions. I'm not saying they are the same thing by any means but they are both issues facing this nation and the world right now and Bush happens to be the president right now. This is the correlation.

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 01:56 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Is there any American president who would not have done what Bush did? I (dont shoot me) was a big Clinton fan and I have no doubt he would have done the same. I take my hat off to Bush for actually getting a coalitition together and getting the cooperation of countries like Oman and Pakistan. We did not have a choice here. We had to respond.

The difference betwen Iraq and Afghanistan is a big one. Iraq is about our aggression and Afganistan is about our defense.

I am a die hard liberal democrat. To me this isnt about politics. It is about protecting ourselves. I will also say though, if the UN had asked for international troops to go in to protect the people of afghanistan from tyranny and massacres, I would have supported it. If the Un had asked for us to go in and save the women and young girls , I would have supported the United States going into that country whether we had been attacked or not on 9/11. I can remember very clearly when those buddhist statues were blown up and I was thinking why doesnt someone do something.

We did go in but we went in because we had been attacked. I think we should have done something sooner for those poor people. Instead we were doing for ourselves. That is ok too.

Kaili

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 02:27 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
maris- I would never shoot anyone- especially for loving Clinton. You love him or hate him- there's no in-between with that guy. I love him.

I think that something had to be done about Afghanistan. We were provoked in that instance and I cannot even imagine the outrage if nothing had been done, so yeah, I absolutely agree that something had to be done and any president would have done something. However, the way it was approached would probably differ with a different president. I think Clinton was a bit more level headed than Bush is. In one way, I think we should have done something sooner because we gave Osama so much time to escape. Bush did get a lot of world support but I think we would have had it no matter what.

The thing is, I wonder if his approach was the best possible. I understand the pressure he had and that he isn't the one out there directing the troops. It isn't personally his fault that mistakes were made and innocent people were killed by our troops. I cannot say what a better approach would be, because I don't have the answers. I could try to come up with ideas, but what's done is done so it wouldn't do a lot of good.

I don't trust Bush and I question his motives for a lot of the things he has done and said since he has been in office. He is a politician and behind every order he gives is the question of how will this benefit him in the next election.

Maris- I wasn't aware that you are a democrat. Can I ask if you plan on voting for Bush in the next election? I'm just curious- if you don't want to tell, or if it's too early to say, that's fine with me. I wonder how many of the Democrats who were outraged with the 2000 election are now supporting Bush and would be willing to re-elect him. Personally, and I don't want this statement to be taken wrong, I think that Sept. 11 was the best thing (politically) that could have happened to Bush. Still, I will hope there is a srong contender going against him in the next election because I would feel safer without him as president.

Resortgirl

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 02:32 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
http://turnbuckle.tv/america_attacked_911.html

I was sent this by my sister in law and thought it was a beautiful memorial to those who died in the tragedy on September 11th. I wanted to share it with all of you.

Resortgirl

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 02:48 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I have to say that I stepped away from my computer during the first couple minutes of this the first time I played it and did not realize until now that it showed some extremely disturbing pictures. I apologize if this is offensive to you. Sorry!

Max

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 03:05 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
This memorial flash presentation was used in my church on Sunday. Here's the sermon to go with it.

One little excerpt: "We can't cry hard enough for those who have died to hear us, but we are not powerless. We are not hopeless. We can remember and we can move forward with hope."

Resortgirl

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 03:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
That is a wonderful memorial Max.

As I said, some of the images on the other were too graphic and disturbing, and again I didn't see the beginning the first time I viewed it and shouldn't have posted it here for the fear of offending some.

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 04:18 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
No I would not vote for Bush. I have no problem with how he has handled 9/11 and I give him credit for having the right cabinet at the right time. I still believe he was not elected he was selected. I dont like his overall policies and lets not forget Enron, Cheney and Haliburton, O'neill and the list goes on and on.

Bridgetlovesbb

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 04:54 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
"I dont like his overall policies and lets not forget Enron, Cheney and Haliburton, O'neill and the list goes on and on. "

WOW I didnt realize President Bush was behind all of that! LOL

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 04:57 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Bridget, think back to President-elect Bush's meetings on energy policy. Who do you think he invited to those meetings????? And guess who refused to turn over the meetings of the minutes. SO yep Bridget, he is knee deep in it.

Goddessatlaw

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 04:58 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Bridget - he wasn't. And neither was Cheney. They'd all be roasting on a Democratic open fire if they had a single thing to run with. Now, when Maris shows up to beat me to death, I expect you to at least lob grenades from the periphery. HEY MARIS - I HATE CLINTON WITH A PASSION. BUT I LOVE YOU, MARIS, YES I DO!!

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:00 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Dont listen to her Bridget, turn away from the light.

Goddessatlaw

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:01 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
ROTFLMAO!!

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:06 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
pssst from ABC NEWS.COM - read it and weep(http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/enron011210.html)


The Houston-based company was among the first to back Bush when he ran for governor of Texas. Enron and its executives went on to become the largest source of financial support for Bush's gubernatorial campaigns, giving more than $500,000, according to a study by the Center for Public Integrity.
"Enron was the number one career patron for George W. Bush," said center director Charles Lewis. "There was no company in America closer to George W. Bush than Enron." Lewis says the company's goal in backing Bush and other politicians was to encourage further deregulation of the energy industry.

"Enron made a decision that they needed government to go their way and they put the money out to make sure that happened," he said.

Loyalty and Access
Congressional hearings open this week into Enron's financial implosion, which culminated in a Dec. 2. bankruptcy filing. The Labor Department, the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission are all investigating Enron. It's unclear to what extent the inquiries are examining the longstanding ties between administration officials and the company, which was once the seventh-largest U.S. corporation in terms of revenue.

Enron CEO Kenneth Lay has been a friend of Bush and the Bush family for years. When Gov. Bush ran for president, Enron gave him access to a company jet. (The Bush campaign reimbursed the company roughly $25,000 for the flights.)

In April 2000, when Enron opened a new baseball stadium named for the firm, then-candidate Bush sat right in front of Lay in the Enron box.

Since 1999, Enron and its executives have given more than $2 million to the Bush campaign and other GOP causes. Democrats got about a quarter of that amount.

As Bush assumed the presidency, Enron had unusual access to the new administration's deliberations about energy policy and appointments to important posts. Lay served on the Bush transition team and helped interview candidates for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees the gas pipelines and electricity grids that are key to Enron's business. Earlier this year, the commission's chairman, Curtis Hebert, who was being considered for reappointment by the White House, declared himself "offended" by Lay's lobbying efforts. Hebert later quit the panel.

When Vice President Dick Cheney drafted a new energy policy, he met with Lay and other Enron executives. Enron was reportedly the only company to be granted such a meeting.

Lay declined to be interviewed for this story.

Washington Posts
Enron alumni also fill prominent slots in the Bush administration. The president's chief economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, and the top trade negotiator, Robert Zoellick, both served as advisers to the company. Secretary of the Army Thomas White was an Enron executive before joining the administration. When he assumed the Army post, White was forced to sell more than $25 million in Enron stock, according to a financial disclosure form he filed.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D.-Calif., has been pressing Cheney to detail his contacts with the troubled company.

"There is a very intimate connection between Enron and the Bush administration. How could they not have known what was happening?" Waxman said in an interview last week. "I think we need to find out what people in the administration knew, many of whom used to work for Enron. We ought to find out whether they ignored warning signs."

In the past, the White House has resisted requests for information about its dealings with the energy industry. The General Accounting Office, the investigative and auditing arm of Congress, threatened to sue Cheney earlier this year after he declined to turn over documents about his meetings with Enron and others interested in the energy policy he was developing. After the Sept. 11 attacks, GAO said the effort to get Cheney's records was no longer a priority.

Despite the administration's numerous ties to Enron, the White House has deflected questions about the company's failure. Reporters who asked White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer about Enron were referred to the Treasury Department.

However, Fleischer said last week that Congress has grounds to investigate how Enron fell so far so fast.

"It's very understandable why people in Congress… charged with oversight of any implications of Enron's bankruptcy would seek hearings," he said.

Goddessatlaw

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:16 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Maris: I do not get my propoganda from ABC News or the Washington Post. They are two of the most notoriously liberal propaganda outlets of which I'm aware. Don't listen to a word she says, Bridget. She obviously has unresolved hots for Clinton. PS that article is from December 10, like one week after the Enron bankruptcy filing. I haven't seen a single allegation stick. PTTHHH! In an election year, no less. If they had it, they'd have used it with a hot poker.

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:19 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. I like my blue dress from the Gap, thank you very much.

Goddessatlaw

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:22 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Gotta tell you, my blue Gap dressed has never had political evidence attached to it. I was a Congressional intern, too, but Reagan only loved Nancy. Poor me. I feel I missed out on some real opportunities for experience there.

Maris

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:25 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ah hell Goddess, Ronald probably forgot where you worked, (ducking and running)

Goddessatlaw

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 05:28 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well, that's not out of the question as we now know. Poor fellow.

Lancecrossfire

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 12:23 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Peace on earth, goodwill toward mankind.

Sia

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 04:29 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I just saw a Verizon patriotic psa/commercial this morning on CBS, very moving psa using Josh Groban's "The Prayer" as the background music. On his album, Josh performs the duet with Charlotte Church, but that wasn't her. Groban became first drew public attention when he subbed for another tenor (Andrea Bocelli? man, my memory fails me) in an appearance with Celine Dion or (?), but who was the woman singing in the Verizon ad? Her voice is beautiful. There was a woman who sang the same song as a solo on "The Young & the Restless" this week as Victor and Nikki got re-married. Anyone catch that? I like her rendition of the song nearly as well as the girl I heard this morning. Josh has recorded with Sarah Brightman; it could have been her.

Goddessatlaw

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 04:38 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Morning, Sia. I saw that commercial with the Groban music a couple of days ago (he is a natural phenomenon). It was just lovely. I didn't recognize the female singing, either, though.

Sia

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 04:57 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Hi, Goddess. I did my OWN research for once, ROTFL! & verified that Josh subbed for Andrea Bocelli in a performance with Celine Dion. I thought that was the case. I've owned his CD since it came out & just love him. I gave a copy of the CD as a h.g. graduation gift to a singer in our family, but she hasn't said anything about it. (Kids these days!) Josh Groban's album is the ONLY CD I've copied in its entirety onto my hard-disk for playing in my Windows Media Player. It's that good!!! Y'all should check him out. He's amazing.

Sia

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 05:06 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Goddess, go take a listen at www.joshgroban.com & tell me what you think of the "pop remix" of "To Where you Are." I don't like it. Why water down such a powerful song to make it more palatable for the bubblegum crowd? It doesn't do anything for me. The song is perfect in the version which is included on his debut album. I don't like the pop-beat, I guess. What's your take? This is a tune that I love to belt out at top-volume. I'd better never be on BB 'cause I can't stop singing! Don't do weddings these days & don't even sing at church any more, but I still love to sing.