The people currently in power in this administration are the ones who put Saddam in power in the first place. Well, good on them and all, and we definitely need to clean up our own messes, but does the fact that I support people who put dictators in power mean that I support putting dictators in power?
Our interests have converged on an issue; they (the administration) get my support. Drawing a conclusion that just because some friends of mine don’t want to see the US at war means that they wish the violent overthrow of the US government seems a bit far-fetched...
Oh, what a load of horse-crap. Hussein put himself in power, after he usurped power from a relative in 1979.
The idea that the United States has ever had any real influence over the Iraqi branch of Baath is ludicrous. The next thing I know you'll trot out the ancient chestnut that the US armed Iraq, too. Sheesh.
This sort of insistence that the US is somehow responsible for all the evil rulers in the world is a weird form of arrogance: that our country is so powerful we really can dictate another country's ruler.
Anyone who saw the D.C. march on CSPAN knows that the entire thing was anti-American, Anti-Israel hatred. No one can say that these were just the organizers, EVERY sign, EVERY speech was hate filled on a level that defies description. It is not going too far to say that it was evocative of Hitler's work in the 1930s.
What is really more troubling to me is not the useful idiots who attended, it is the fact that all major media outlets seem to be in on the game. Sullivan called it propaganda and I must agree. At least the useful idiots are self-absorbed individuals who willfully blind themselves to the hatred expressed at the demonstrations because they feel that there is no other outlet for their opposition to the war-to come. But what is the excuse of CBS, NBC, ABC, NYT, NYP, CNN and even FOXNews? Why do they not blow the whistle on these extremists who are fomenting hatred? And advocating the destruction of the USA? I don't get it. If you don't believe me, check out the CSpan tape next time it runs. It is chilling.
The DC rally for tyrants. The line between protest and treason is probably the distinction between word and deed. They didn't cross the line, but they came pretty close in my book.
(Dean & Rosemary: wonderful web log. I am a daily reader.)
Whether you believe the U.S. is responsible for Saddam Huseein being in power or not is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that if you were at that rally, you were at an event sponsored by a communist front group that admittedly supports Kim Il Song, Saddam Hussein, and the killing of protestors in China.
Supports them, says they did the right thing. Calls them anti-imperialist heroes.
As Jane Galt asks, if the Klu Klux Klan staged a rally to help feed starving puppies, would you show up to be a part of it?
Winston Churchill once said that if Satan declared war on Hitler, Satan would (at least) receive a positive mention in Commons.
In that vein, if the KKK had a fund raiser for Puppies, I would most likely not care. In the unlikely event that they (the KKK) were to stage a rally specifically calling for the execution of Milosevic, I would give that rally a favorable mention in my blog. I might even go so far as to point out this link. Then I would have to vomit.
Asking people to stop kicking around an 83 year old man who never (so far as we know) physically attacked anyone, for something he did 60 years ago and has spent decades apologizing for, is much the same as applauding avowed and unapologetic Stalinists, eh?
Nasty business, Andrew. But coming from a man who seems to think the Right has a pecular love for dictators, I suppose it's unsurprising. You're a silly person. Not funny, but definitely silly.
On the chance that I may have made my point poorly, I try and explain:
Just because I find a group’s purposes and methods to be evil doesn’t mean that they have never done anything good. That is the reason I would point out your post; the history lesson.
I do think that the Bush admin would replace Saddam with another dictator if it suited their interests. I do _not_ think that they have a “particular love for dictators”, just not as low a tolerance for them as I would like.
The Left may not have a better record on the dictator support scale, but they aren’t nearly as competent at it, and so raise my ire less often.
Now now, no need to go looking for nice things to say about evil men. *grin* But I don’t consider forest replantation to be important enough to say nice things about Hitler for, or even mere neo-Nazis. Indeed, I cannot think of anything they are likely to support that I feel is so important that I would actually say anything nice about them.
I did read some of the position papers written by workers world. I couldn’t stand reading too many of them; I have a low tolerance for poison. Were I to feel strongly against the US’s involvement in Iraq, I would be willing to make common cause with them. On this one issue. Since I don’t, I don’t. I am much willing to call them evil and make common cause with those with whom I do share interests with. Of course, it helps that the pro-war company isn’t even on the same scale...
The people currently in power in this administration are the ones who put Saddam in power in the first place. Well, good on them and all, and we definitely need to clean up our own messes, but does the fact that I support people who put dictators in power mean that I support putting dictators in power?
Our interests have converged on an issue; they (the administration) get my support. Drawing a conclusion that just because some friends of mine don’t want to see the US at war means that they wish the violent overthrow of the US government seems a bit far-fetched...
Oh, what a load of horse-crap. Hussein put himself in power, after he usurped power from a relative in 1979.
The idea that the United States has ever had any real influence over the Iraqi branch of Baath is ludicrous. The next thing I know you'll trot out the ancient chestnut that the US armed Iraq, too. Sheesh.
This sort of insistence that the US is somehow responsible for all the evil rulers in the world is a weird form of arrogance: that our country is so powerful we really can dictate another country's ruler.
Anyone who saw the D.C. march on CSPAN knows that the entire thing was anti-American, Anti-Israel hatred. No one can say that these were just the organizers, EVERY sign, EVERY speech was hate filled on a level that defies description. It is not going too far to say that it was evocative of Hitler's work in the 1930s.
What is really more troubling to me is not the useful idiots who attended, it is the fact that all major media outlets seem to be in on the game. Sullivan called it propaganda and I must agree. At least the useful idiots are self-absorbed individuals who willfully blind themselves to the hatred expressed at the demonstrations because they feel that there is no other outlet for their opposition to the war-to come. But what is the excuse of CBS, NBC, ABC, NYT, NYP, CNN and even FOXNews? Why do they not blow the whistle on these extremists who are fomenting hatred? And advocating the destruction of the USA? I don't get it. If you don't believe me, check out the CSpan tape next time it runs. It is chilling.
The DC rally for tyrants. The line between protest and treason is probably the distinction between word and deed. They didn't cross the line, but they came pretty close in my book.
(Dean & Rosemary: wonderful web log. I am a daily reader.)
Whether you believe the U.S. is responsible for Saddam Huseein being in power or not is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that if you were at that rally, you were at an event sponsored by a communist front group that admittedly supports Kim Il Song, Saddam Hussein, and the killing of protestors in China.
Supports them, says they did the right thing. Calls them anti-imperialist heroes.
As Jane Galt asks, if the Klu Klux Klan staged a rally to help feed starving puppies, would you show up to be a part of it?
Anna: Thanks. Bunny power all the way!
Winston Churchill once said that if Satan declared war on Hitler, Satan would (at least) receive a positive mention in Commons.
In that vein, if the KKK had a fund raiser for Puppies, I would most likely not care. In the unlikely event that they (the KKK) were to stage a rally specifically calling for the execution of Milosevic, I would give that rally a favorable mention in my blog. I might even go so far as to point out this link. Then I would have to vomit.
Asking people to stop kicking around an 83 year old man who never (so far as we know) physically attacked anyone, for something he did 60 years ago and has spent decades apologizing for, is much the same as applauding avowed and unapologetic Stalinists, eh?
Nasty business, Andrew. But coming from a man who seems to think the Right has a pecular love for dictators, I suppose it's unsurprising. You're a silly person. Not funny, but definitely silly.
On the chance that I may have made my point poorly, I try and explain:
Just because I find a group’s purposes and methods to be evil doesn’t mean that they have never done anything good. That is the reason I would point out your post; the history lesson.
I do think that the Bush admin would replace Saddam with another dictator if it suited their interests. I do _not_ think that they have a “particular love for dictators”, just not as low a tolerance for them as I would like.
The Left may not have a better record on the dictator support scale, but they aren’t nearly as competent at it, and so raise my ire less often.
Well, Hitler did rebuild Germany's forests, after all.
The great problem here is that those who were part of this horrid little "peace march" gave these Stalinists credibility they should not have.
Now now, no need to go looking for nice things to say about evil men. *grin* But I don’t consider forest replantation to be important enough to say nice things about Hitler for, or even mere neo-Nazis. Indeed, I cannot think of anything they are likely to support that I feel is so important that I would actually say anything nice about them.
I did read some of the position papers written by workers world. I couldn’t stand reading too many of them; I have a low tolerance for poison. Were I to feel strongly against the US’s involvement in Iraq, I would be willing to make common cause with them. On this one issue. Since I don’t, I don’t. I am much willing to call them evil and make common cause with those with whom I do share interests with. Of course, it helps that the pro-war company isn’t even on the same scale...
I think that the kkk was a disgarce and the people that was involved with it should be ashamed of thems elves