9/11: Through the years
>
by Ken
I suppose we really need to take note of the day. And I think these guys can help us remember. (All of these cartoons should all be click-enlargeable. I think I've got the attributions and dates more or less right; apologies for any errors. Note that some of the links aren't to actual sources, but merely to other bloggers who've appropriated the cartoons.)
On his blog, Chan Lowe, creator of our final cartoon tonight, from September 1, 2009, has this to say about it:
We were deep into 2002, probably five or six months after 9/11, before my editor would even entertain the idea of my drawing a cartoon that did not portray George W. Bush in anything but a favorable light.
"We're not ready for that yet," I remember him saying. He was probably right, as far as the sentiments of our readers were concerned.
The terror was still fresh, the country had rallied around its president, and unbeknownst to us, Dick Cheney was quietly machinating behind the scenes to exploit our national myopia and expand executive power to unheard-of levels.
It was a failure on the part of the media as much as anyone else, but consumers of news weren't ready yet for hard-nosed reporting, or commenting for that matter, about our leaders.
These are different times, and the man who used to condemn the Bush naysayers as unpatriotic didn't even wait for the inaugural platform to be disassembled before he began loudly trashing the new president. It's his right. Too bad he didn't see it that way when he was on the receiving end.
As for setting himself up as the world's authority on keeping us safe, let's remember that clever locution Cheney and his supporters like to use to justify their excesses: "The terrorists haven't hit us again since 9/11."
As I recall, Dick Cheney had been running this country for almost eight months when the terrorists did hit us on 9/11.
#
Labels: 9/11
posted by KenInNY @ 6:00 PM
6 comments
|
Reddit
6 Comments:
The apparent government apologist Noam Chomsky was at it again (paraphrase): "I am a professor of language.
I don't know what happened to building 7. Therefore "truthers" can't know physics and what they say about building 7 must be false. "
John Puma
John, I have heard Chomsky say things akin to this before, for example, exonerating the US government / CIA of any role in the assassination of John Kennedy because, (like you, paraphrasing) 'Kennedy ran the CIA and there is no evidence Kennedy killed himself, therefore the CIA cannot be implicated.'
While Chomsky is excellent on a number of subjects with regard to government malfeasance, I think he may be weak on management span of control issues, to wit, understanding that no leader ever is in complete control of a large bureaucracy, public or private, and there is always room for some free-lancing; and where secrecy, compartmented information and conniving evil people like Allen Dulles and George Tenet are concerned, the latitude for free-lancers from inside a bureaucracy can get pretty wide.
To Anon @ 8:44 AM
My conclusion about Chomsky is less nuanced.
He's somewhat like the comedian who bemoaned the end of the tenure of J. Danforth Quayle (who, by the way, wasn't worthy to pump Jack Kennedy's political septic tank.) When the likes of JDQ leave the limelight, the comedian's life gets a lot harder.
Chomsky's current fame derives from his revealing some disturbing facts about our government, the exposure of which, he presumably assesses as uncritical to the continued existence of that government and, hence, not a threat his career.
The possibilities for the yet to be revealed full truth of 9-11, however, could destroy that government and, thus, threaten his career. So he (rather poorly) tries to quash any and all inquiry besides that of the very government he has been questioning for quite a long time. (I'm sure he and his supporters, if pressed, would spout something to the effect "we are protecting you and the country because you can't handle the truth !!!")
John Puma
John, oh how I wish it were as easy to destroy the malefactors who use the US government as their sword and shield as it was to sink Dan Quayle. BTW, Chomsky is long since retired from his real job as one of the great linguists of the 20th century.
Um, er, Noam Chomsky?
Nothing at all to say about Rick McKee, Chan Lowe, Tom Toles, Bruce Plante, Adam Zyglis, Pat Bagley, or Nick Anderson -- or any of the points they tried to make?
Oh well, who am I to say? I'm just the person who put this post together. Carry on. (And I'm afraid I do mean, carry on.)
Cheers,
K
To KenInNY:
Among the cartoonists whose work you presented, I am only familiar with Toles.
I know he has been consistent. He and the other cartoonists seem to "get it."
Chomsky, on the other hand, has not ... even though he should.
The cartoons shown are from the past, Chomsky on THIS anniversary of 9-11 was still using poor logic and ad hominem attacks to continue his abrupt 180° gyration from his previous, well-established position on the perfidy/ mendacity/potential destructiveness of the US government.
I feel no need to rehash the messages of those with whom I agree.
They have made their point in their way.
The particular mystery I mention here and challenge, in general, is to point out the fallacies of those on the opposite side of the issue. It is NOT to chirp "me, too, ... me, too."
I hope that is clear and sufficient explanation for going a few micrometers OT.
John Puma
Post a Comment
<< Home