From today's Wall Street Journal:
A myth has developed that Iraqi's are not grateful for their liberation from Saddam. So it is worth noting that the leaders of Iraq's new interim government have been explicit and gracious in their thanks...not that you have heard this from the US media.
First in Arabic and then in English, Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said in his Inaugural address to the Iraqi people last Tuesday that " I would like to record our profound gratitude and appreciation to the US-led international coalition, which has made great sacrifices for the liberation of Iraq. In his own remarks, President Ghazi al-Yawer said: "Before I end my speech, I would like us to remember our martyrs who fell in defense of freedom and honor, as well as our friends who fell in the battle for the liberation of Iraq."
Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told the U.N. Security Council much the same thing last Thursday: "We Iraqi's are grateful to the coalition who helped liberate us from the persecution of Saddam Hussein's regime. We thank President Bush and Prime Minister Blair for their dedication and commitment."
=====================================
A very astute comment was recently made that has helped me frame the War on Terror in a way that makes much more sense to me. The writer noted that "terror" is a 'tactic' used by terrorists, and not the identifier of a people. Thus, the war is better understood as a war against Islamic extremists (NOT fundamentalists!!!) who have twisted the words of the Koran against the advice and wisdom of many wise and peace-loving Islamic clerics. The problem is that the very nature of the Islamic faith is that is is designed to be somewhat rudderless...somewhat without clear, identifiable leadership. This leaves the door open for unbridled dissent that becomes hate against all things NOT Islamic. The War on Terror is really a War on Islamic radicals and extremists. They employ Terror as a tactic. Today, the Al-Queda forces in Saudi Arabia announced via the web that they will target Western airlines, military bases, and RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
These radicals have no Intention to "give peace a chance". Put on your seatbelt, folks. they are coming to a theater near you. And you are naive to believe that the US and Great Britain are responsible for this surge. 9/11 occurred after an incredible period of passivity during the dovish Clinton administration. This horrific attack that killed thousands of innocent people of all nationalities, including Muslims, in minutes (do you remember it?...Or have you forgetten it?) was essentially unprovoked, UNLESS you subscribe to the notion that it was provoked by sanctions in Iraq. If you subscribe to that belief, then Iraqi leadership played a key role in 9/11.
One of the most incredible "truths" about the Michael Moore film is that all of his assertions were completely debunked and explained to him PRIOR to the limited release, and soon to be full release of the film. He, as well as the bipartisan 9/11 commission, know full well that there was no malintent in the immediate post-9/11 deportation of many Saudi foriegn nationals, including some members of the Bin Laden family. These poor family members were STUNNED by the actions of their radical family member. Not one of them was identified on any active list of terrorists or those showing any predisposition to supporting terrorists. They were deported for their own safety. Should the Bush administration have left them to their own security, they would have been hunted down like animals and lynched on American soil. If you do not believe it you have indeed forgotten the incredible period of confusion, and anti-islamic sentiment that brewed into an uncontrollable boil after the shock of the 9/11 attacks began to abate and gave way to anger.
Michael Moore is fully aware that the 9/11 Commission cleared this adminsitartion of all wrongdoing. The 5 democrats on the committee worked very hard to try to connect dots that were not able to be connected. They admitted that this situation was handled with civility and genuine concern for innocent people who found themselves in harms way. The FBI did indeed interview 145 of the 146 Saudi's/Bin Laden family members prior to allowing them to depart the country. They were summarily and completely cleared. We learned from Pearl Harbor that incarcerating innocents simply as a function of their nationality is fundamentally wrong, and the same mistake was not repeated.
It absolutely kills me that Moore is fully aware of this, but is cashing in all the same for the purpose of making money and politicizing the tragedy of 9/11. He is a brilliant and creative guy who has become intoxicated by his own story-telling, disquised as documentary, in spite of the facts which tend to get in the way of a good yarn. He makes Oliver Stone look like a historian more than a film-maker.
Be careful, and don't believe everything you hear on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, the CBS evening news, etc. Get the latest issue of BusinessWeek Magaizine that presents a study that scientifically examines liberal and conservative media bias. A wonderful experimental paradigm that should be appreciated by all who take one source and form an opinion.
So far, I haven't been deleted yet, and I can still get in! Of course, the beauty of this forum is captured by what Bobster said in a previous post...paraphrased that " I could hardly stand it to read to the end of SJN post". He knows that he doesn't have to. He can ignore the thread. But he choses to try to understand the alternate view. He doesn't capituate to it. He doesn't agree. He is informed by his own sources. But the thirst for knowledge will, indeed, set you free.
Stay free.
God Bless America.
Iraqi Gratitude
Again, I'd have to say people need to stop looking at things in black and white. Some white reporter from the Wall Street Journal isn't going to convince me that Iraqis are entirely happy, even if he makes some vaild points.
Just because Iraqi's are grateful that Saddam Hussein is gone, doesn't mean they like to see their people abused and ridiculed on camera by soldiers breaking the Geneva Convention.
Just because approximately half of the American voting public does not support or agree with the Bush, doesn't mean they hate their country.
Just because President Bush was in power during September 11th, doesn't mean that he is automatically hero of the day.
Just because many Americans would rather have their tax dollars spent towards health and education, doesn't mean they hate their troops.
Just because most Europeans disagree with Bush's policy doesn't mean they hate all Americans.
This cowboy attitude of "Either you're with us, or against us" has created a ridiculous sentiment among many Americans who lean toward the right these days. Just because some farmer in Nova Scotia disagrees with President Bush, doesn't mean he's going to start sending mailbombs to the White House. Part of what makes democracy great is being allowed to express your feelings without being called anti-American.
Just because Iraqi's are grateful that Saddam Hussein is gone, doesn't mean they like to see their people abused and ridiculed on camera by soldiers breaking the Geneva Convention.
Just because approximately half of the American voting public does not support or agree with the Bush, doesn't mean they hate their country.
Just because President Bush was in power during September 11th, doesn't mean that he is automatically hero of the day.
Just because many Americans would rather have their tax dollars spent towards health and education, doesn't mean they hate their troops.
Just because most Europeans disagree with Bush's policy doesn't mean they hate all Americans.
This cowboy attitude of "Either you're with us, or against us" has created a ridiculous sentiment among many Americans who lean toward the right these days. Just because some farmer in Nova Scotia disagrees with President Bush, doesn't mean he's going to start sending mailbombs to the White House. Part of what makes democracy great is being allowed to express your feelings without being called anti-American.
This morning you've got time for a hot, home-cooked breakfast! Delicious and piping hot in only 3 microwave minutes.
-
Stripped Jack Naked
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
Blue, thank you for a great response. In point of fact, I do not disagree with much of what you posted. Your wording was thoughtful and cautious, without betraying your true sentiment.
Two questions:
1, Was your reference to the 'white' Wall Street Journal reporter (who merely transcribed quotations from Iraqi leaders) a reference to the color of his skin, or to the fact that he is one sided, or a reference to a 'vanilla' reporting style. I am not sure. I am perplexed, however, if it is a reference to his skin color, because it suggests that those of white skin color have an intrinsic opinion about the matter that differs from the opinion of brown or black-skin people.
2. Is it the prevailing notion that the prison abuse scandal is an anomoly, or is the standard of practice for the way American jailers treated Iraqi detainee's? If an anomoly, what percentage of the total prisoner population do you (personally) think was abused? 5%? 15%? 25%? 50%?, or more?
Thanks. I just want to understand how the general view is shaping regarding the abuse scandal. The jailers must be held accountable to an even higher standard because of the role that America plays in the liberation of Iraq. However, it MUST be determined where in the chain of command this behaviour was sanctioned, and appropriate action MUST be taken. If Rummy is shown to be responsible, I will lead the effort to have him not only ousted, but charged. There is some interesting incriminating data that is being revealed today, so we will see.
Thanks for having the courage to comment on these quotations given by leaders of the new Iraqi Leadership.
Long may they live. Unfortunately, I am fearful that fellow Muslins will have them taken out in short order. The tactic of terror is a horrible thing, cultivated by horrible people with hate as their motive, masquarading as their love for Allah.
Two questions:
1, Was your reference to the 'white' Wall Street Journal reporter (who merely transcribed quotations from Iraqi leaders) a reference to the color of his skin, or to the fact that he is one sided, or a reference to a 'vanilla' reporting style. I am not sure. I am perplexed, however, if it is a reference to his skin color, because it suggests that those of white skin color have an intrinsic opinion about the matter that differs from the opinion of brown or black-skin people.
2. Is it the prevailing notion that the prison abuse scandal is an anomoly, or is the standard of practice for the way American jailers treated Iraqi detainee's? If an anomoly, what percentage of the total prisoner population do you (personally) think was abused? 5%? 15%? 25%? 50%?, or more?
Thanks. I just want to understand how the general view is shaping regarding the abuse scandal. The jailers must be held accountable to an even higher standard because of the role that America plays in the liberation of Iraq. However, it MUST be determined where in the chain of command this behaviour was sanctioned, and appropriate action MUST be taken. If Rummy is shown to be responsible, I will lead the effort to have him not only ousted, but charged. There is some interesting incriminating data that is being revealed today, so we will see.
Thanks for having the courage to comment on these quotations given by leaders of the new Iraqi Leadership.
Long may they live. Unfortunately, I am fearful that fellow Muslins will have them taken out in short order. The tactic of terror is a horrible thing, cultivated by horrible people with hate as their motive, masquarading as their love for Allah.
-
Otis Westinghouse
- Posts: 8856
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 3:32 pm
- Location: The theatre of dreams
Equivalent to an ignorant President who believes his 'crusade' is the will of his somehow superior God, perhaps?
Who says the words of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister represent the beliefs of the Iraqis (without an apostrophe, thank you) en masse? Tony Blair and Jack Straw believe they were right to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with The Great Crusader in invading Iraq and yet no-one I count as a friend thinks they are in the right.
Who says the words of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister represent the beliefs of the Iraqis (without an apostrophe, thank you) en masse? Tony Blair and Jack Straw believe they were right to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with The Great Crusader in invading Iraq and yet no-one I count as a friend thinks they are in the right.
There's more to life than books, you know, but not much more
-
Stripped Jack Naked
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
It is sheer ignorance to claim that George Bush is ignorant.
He may be bumbling, a poor orator, have a good grasp on his own limitations, and he fails to present a dominant presence. But he is far from ignorant.
Even the leadership of the oppositon ( please forgive me if I have omitted an "s" in opposition ) now understand that he is much more calculated and sly then they ever had thought. So we have another major point of significant division in the opposition to GWB. Half of the Bush haters say that he is a bumbling, drug-addled fool who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and the other half label him sly, calculated, and with an organized plan that he intends to carry through, even if it means that he is ousted in November. Some call that a person of conviction. It is certainly NOT the behavior of a seasoned politician. It really becomes comical to listen to the dissent among the anti-Bush crowd, because they cannot agree on anything other than the fact that he is a very, very bad man.
Very strange post from a very bright person. Held in high regard almost universally by the members of this forum. But your message sounds as if it was mentored by WHAR. Some mean words, but no substance.
Everyone has decided Bush is a bad, bad man. Seems that many hold the same opinion for Tony Blair.
I disagree.
I sincerely apologize for the apostrophe in Iraqis. I am completely embarrassed, and am wondering if there is any validity in my positions as a result.
He may be bumbling, a poor orator, have a good grasp on his own limitations, and he fails to present a dominant presence. But he is far from ignorant.
Even the leadership of the oppositon ( please forgive me if I have omitted an "s" in opposition ) now understand that he is much more calculated and sly then they ever had thought. So we have another major point of significant division in the opposition to GWB. Half of the Bush haters say that he is a bumbling, drug-addled fool who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and the other half label him sly, calculated, and with an organized plan that he intends to carry through, even if it means that he is ousted in November. Some call that a person of conviction. It is certainly NOT the behavior of a seasoned politician. It really becomes comical to listen to the dissent among the anti-Bush crowd, because they cannot agree on anything other than the fact that he is a very, very bad man.
Very strange post from a very bright person. Held in high regard almost universally by the members of this forum. But your message sounds as if it was mentored by WHAR. Some mean words, but no substance.
Everyone has decided Bush is a bad, bad man. Seems that many hold the same opinion for Tony Blair.
I disagree.
I sincerely apologize for the apostrophe in Iraqis. I am completely embarrassed, and am wondering if there is any validity in my positions as a result.
-
Otis Westinghouse
- Posts: 8856
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 3:32 pm
- Location: The theatre of dreams
Substance? Yes, I and pretty well everyone else around here (message board and real life) think Bush is an ignorant scumbag who should have stayed out of Iraq and has made an utter fool of himself by deciding victory had been achieved just as chaos was being unleashed across the country. And Blair has equally made a fool of himself by his undying support.
But what really gets to me is wheeling out on the same thread the twin cliches of 'God Bless America' and the 'hate as their motive, masquerading as their love for Allah'. It's the same Dark Ages mentality that leads an ignorant President to talk of a 'crusade against terrorism'.
Thanks for your kind words. In return, my advice: why don't you stick around, but forget bothering with the pro-Bush Iraq invasion apologist posts that seem to have become all you wish to offer here?
Allah bless Iraq.
But what really gets to me is wheeling out on the same thread the twin cliches of 'God Bless America' and the 'hate as their motive, masquerading as their love for Allah'. It's the same Dark Ages mentality that leads an ignorant President to talk of a 'crusade against terrorism'.
Thanks for your kind words. In return, my advice: why don't you stick around, but forget bothering with the pro-Bush Iraq invasion apologist posts that seem to have become all you wish to offer here?
Allah bless Iraq.
There's more to life than books, you know, but not much more
-
Stripped Jack Naked
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
These are Cliches? Really?
God Bless America is not a cliche'.
And Using the name of God to murder innocents is not a cliche'. It is a brutal reality that, if you don't face, will afflict you in your lifetime. Face it. It is here to stay unless you fight it.
London burned not to long ago by a similar type of tyranny. Are these events so foriegn to you that everything that I say is seen as pro-Bush. I reaally don't care if Paul Rubens is calling the shots if, indeed, he has as a core motive the goal of unifying the world against the tactic of brutal terror.
George is no great leader. He is the best we have. By far. And there is no one on the horizon that has the same intestinal fortitude to do what he thinks is right, regardless of the fact that the polls suggest that he should make a U-turn and run scared. Do you really think that the terrorists will soften if we run?. Tell me that you don't really believe that! You are far too intelligent to believe that the pan-Islamic motive is not designed to mow down the Western devils (infidels) of which you are an active member...not by your politics, but by your birthright.
Should the Muslim clerics who love and support the Allah of peace find their kahunies and rally the incredible Muslim populace to stop this madness, then we will have a world that makes sense.
I have so much more to offer, and I have offered it over the years. But this matter is of such critical import to me, and the children of future generations, that I feel it is worth expounding on. Worth taking the spiteful vitriolic barrage that I get for my views. Do you think I am ignorant? Barbaric? Stupid? Hateful? Racist? What!
But get it right, Otis. Stop with your labelling as everything I say as Pro-Bush. It is not. Read the freakin' posts, whydoncha! Don't just assume that since it is Mr. Average/Stripped Jack that it is instantly inane and stupid.
Attack my support for the good fight, the good race. That I can deal with, and reconcile with the book of James. But try to read what I am saying, instead of being blinded by the Bush-hate that is so deeply embedded in you, and instantly revealed in your posts.
I am for the War on Terrorist Extremists, whether they are Muslim, Taoist, Christian, or practice Judism. Or Whatever. It corrupts the notion of world peace. It can happen, but NOT by wishing that the bad people will go away. It takes work and blood and tears. Not wishful thinking and popular idea's that stimulate another round of cocktails.
Hey, what about them Lakers, eh?
God Bless America is not a cliche'.
And Using the name of God to murder innocents is not a cliche'. It is a brutal reality that, if you don't face, will afflict you in your lifetime. Face it. It is here to stay unless you fight it.
London burned not to long ago by a similar type of tyranny. Are these events so foriegn to you that everything that I say is seen as pro-Bush. I reaally don't care if Paul Rubens is calling the shots if, indeed, he has as a core motive the goal of unifying the world against the tactic of brutal terror.
George is no great leader. He is the best we have. By far. And there is no one on the horizon that has the same intestinal fortitude to do what he thinks is right, regardless of the fact that the polls suggest that he should make a U-turn and run scared. Do you really think that the terrorists will soften if we run?. Tell me that you don't really believe that! You are far too intelligent to believe that the pan-Islamic motive is not designed to mow down the Western devils (infidels) of which you are an active member...not by your politics, but by your birthright.
Should the Muslim clerics who love and support the Allah of peace find their kahunies and rally the incredible Muslim populace to stop this madness, then we will have a world that makes sense.
I have so much more to offer, and I have offered it over the years. But this matter is of such critical import to me, and the children of future generations, that I feel it is worth expounding on. Worth taking the spiteful vitriolic barrage that I get for my views. Do you think I am ignorant? Barbaric? Stupid? Hateful? Racist? What!
But get it right, Otis. Stop with your labelling as everything I say as Pro-Bush. It is not. Read the freakin' posts, whydoncha! Don't just assume that since it is Mr. Average/Stripped Jack that it is instantly inane and stupid.
Attack my support for the good fight, the good race. That I can deal with, and reconcile with the book of James. But try to read what I am saying, instead of being blinded by the Bush-hate that is so deeply embedded in you, and instantly revealed in your posts.
I am for the War on Terrorist Extremists, whether they are Muslim, Taoist, Christian, or practice Judism. Or Whatever. It corrupts the notion of world peace. It can happen, but NOT by wishing that the bad people will go away. It takes work and blood and tears. Not wishful thinking and popular idea's that stimulate another round of cocktails.
Hey, what about them Lakers, eh?
-
stormwarning
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:56 am
- Location: Manhattan
I just don't know where to start on this one, so I won't bother. Bush may well be ignorant, but he does a fine job of keeping his voters even more so.
It's mid-June 2004, and people are still equating the occupation of Iraq with the War on Terror, and forging a link between Saddam and the tragic events of 9/11.
I'm going back over to the Annex, I'd rather watch WHAR + 1 get involved in a harmless slanging match than read any more posts defending the Bush/Blair treatment of Iraq.
It's mid-June 2004, and people are still equating the occupation of Iraq with the War on Terror, and forging a link between Saddam and the tragic events of 9/11.
I'm going back over to the Annex, I'd rather watch WHAR + 1 get involved in a harmless slanging match than read any more posts defending the Bush/Blair treatment of Iraq.