Freedom to Screech
Do you remember the Dixie Chicks? This female group was the nation’s hottest country band back in 2003, when they went to Great Britain on an international tour and wound up destroying their career one night on a stage in London.
The “Chicks” were in London just days before U.S. ground forces invaded Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Pandering to European anti-war sensibilities, the group’s lead singer, Natalie Maines, said to a packed audience: “We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas.”
The Brits responded as I’m sure she expected them to. Even in 2003, President Bush was a despised figure by the elitist international left — depicted as a war-mongering, ignorant cowboy from Texas.
Back home in the U.S., things were a little different. The American public generally viewed the Dixie Chicks’ comments not only as rude and disrespectful, but unpatriotic as well. However, among the nation’s country music fans, the “Chicks” quickly became pariahs. These music fans were, if nothing else, flag-waving patriotic folks.
The Dixie Chicks’ music career slid almost immediately into the toilet. American concert dates were canceled and people refused to buy their CDs. After giving the big middle finger to their fans back in the U.S., the group argued that they had been silenced — censored, if you will — by supposedly intolerant, war-loving country music fans.
But there’s a point to my little walk back down musical history lane.
The Dixie Chicks have become just another musical asterisk, but the larger point is the inability of liberals and leftists to accept responsibility for their actions.
The Dixie Chicks had every right to make unpatriotic fools of themselves that night in London, but the American public also had the right to judge their comments and reject them and every note they played. Natalie Maines had insulted America and trashed an American president … while on a foreign stage!
But let’s fast forward the tape a few years.
Earlier this year, Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was invited to speak on U.S.-Israel relations at the University of California, Irvine. But Muslim activists from the university’s Muslim Student Union were also there and tried to prevent the ambassador from speaking.
In succession, the Muslim activists stood up and repeatedly shouted down the ambassador, saying that he was “propagating murder.” To loud cheers from other activists, one by one they were removed from the auditorium and led away by security guards.
You can guess what happened next.
The narrative of victimism is potent. It’s been used to browbeat honest businessmen into subsidizing the very forces that want them destroyed. It made Al Sharpton a national racialist “hero” and nearly sent the Duke Lacrosse players to prison for a crime they didn’t commit — indeed, a crime that never occurred. And it’s rationalized the suppression of news of genuine crimes about which the public desperately needs to know.
Victimism is the principal source of the maladies that will bring about the suffering that will inevitably follow the collapse of the Neo-Progressive Era. To this day, it propels the drive for “reparations” that would create a new class of victims: every self-supporting, honorable man in America.
Victimism must be invalidated, thrust into the outer darkness, made into an unimpeachable sign of contemptible venality. But how?
This is certainly not new. Far-left nuts always want to be portrayed as victims, no matter how violent they are, no matter who they try to silence. But you see this in the media too, especially on TV. Isn’t it interesting that whenever a conservative complains about a show on TV that has a lot of sex and violence, or has other content in it that is objectionable to a conservative, the conservative is usually told by the media to “Change the channel.” We’re always told that you are not being forced to watch the show, so don’t watch it. After all, it’s a freedom of speech issue, don’t you know.
But when a liberal disagrees with what a conservative has to say, be it Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, those shows have to be boycotted and silenced. Don’t you realize that Glenn Beck is a danger to society and is encouraging violence, claims just about everybody at the Huffington Post? It is amazing how deranged the liberal and far left become when contronted with their own tactics. They simply can’t tolerate anyone who disagrees with their deranged point of view. And if you DO have the temerity to disagree with them, you are shouted down, insulted, demonized, and in some cases, physically attacked (as when those “students” stormed a university stage where a representative from the “Minutemen” was speaking, or whenever Ann Coulter or Bill Kristol try to give a speech).
They are such a tedious lot, the far left. They are little children who scream and stamp their feet when they don’t get their way. We should realize that these “kids” eventually grow up to be violent adults if their childish attitudes are not reigned in. Don’t believe me? Just take a look a Bill Ayers or Andy Stern. And to think, our president is actually friends with guys like that. Shows you what happens when the far left takes over the White House.
Elections DO have consequences. Vote in November and throw these bums out of office. That’s the quickest way to reign in these overgrown juvenile delinquents.
Liberty: Do you actually believe that elections matter to these same leftists? Do you believe there will be honest and fair elections in the future? Do you really think they will peacefully give up their stations of power?
The left/progressives/Islamists have nothing but contempt for our electoral process, our government, our traditions, values, culture and way of life. But we have let them insinuate themselves into every facet of government, culture, MSM and education so that they will continue to ruin our nation until such time as we stop them.
What you’re not reading in the commentary by Hicks is that while the cover story here is about Jewish/Islam conflict on campus and the pretense of First Amendment rights; the back story is really about how much disdain and contempt the left has for America. After all there have been Jewish leftists who have shouted down, insulted and attacked conservative speakers at these same colleges and universities for years. The left has grown very adept at using our Constitution, which they revile, against us.
“Liberty: Do you actually believe that elections matter to these same leftists? Do you believe there will be honest and fair elections in the future? Do you really think they will peacefully give up their stations of power?”
In short, yes I do. I do believe elections matter (if you don’t believe me, just look at what the last presidential election brought us). I do believe the left will give up their “stations of power” if the lose the next set of elections (they have to by law, and we’ll make sure of it). And I’m enough of a realist to know there is never such a thing as an “honest” or “fair” election in this country (just look at what happened in Minnesota’s last election for Senate and Al Franken). That just makes our job that much harder, but it can be done, regardless of how many ACORN or SEIU hacks the liberals throw at us.
I answered your post because a lot of people say what you say: “Elections don’t matter, we’re doomed, the same people always get into office, etc., etc.” Well, I’m not about to tamely submit and let Progressives, Leftists, and Socialists run the rest of my life. Not without a fight.
Unless you overthrow the government (which I’m against, totally), the only thing you have left is the Constitution and that document says that our most potent weapons against politicians are elections. Embrace that, use that against them, throw them out of office, make them get a real job for a living.
The best revenge we have against the far left and their minions is to use their own weapons against them. We can out organize them and out advertise them. We have massive motivation on our side and we have the truth. Nobody can win against that.
Remember, elections also brought us people like Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich. It can be done and we can stop them. And given the current state of our economy and our foreign affairs, failure is not an option.
“Not without a fight.” What if it comes down to a fight?
You give the left a lot of credit that they: 1. believe in the Constitution; 2. follow the rule of law; 3. will vacate their positions of power because you think they care about what the public thinks; 4. will not fight for their power.
Believe me I am on your side but I do not trust the left. They have shown me they will cheat at elections in order to win. They have shown me that they do not believe in the Constitution or rule of law (DOJ). Even if we “win” the next two elections the left still control the federal and state burearcracies, the MSM and other position of influence; therefore, they will never tire from trying to destroy our nation. This is what I meant by (future) elections not having any consequences.
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here and remind you that republicans have tried to steal elections through various means. I will not go into great detail, but I will point out that in the Florida elections in 2000 were highly suspect. Votes were thrown away, legal voters who had similar names as felons were uniformly turned away from polls. When the results were questioned and people whose civil rights were violated when they were denied a vote, the congress would not support their cause. I’m not supporting either side. I’m condemning both. Politician in general care about power. They do not for the most part care about us.
Do you have substantiation for your claims, or are you just spouting theories that you’d like for us to accept uncritically?
There were four recounts of the Florida ballots. Bush won all four. Had the networks not called the state for Gore an hour before the Panhandle polls closed, he would have won by several thousand votes, as the Panhandle is heavily Republican/conservative.
Here are a couple of articles I drummed up. I could spend hours of my time trying find your evidence, but what is the point. I can’t substantiate my claims anymore than you can substantiate some of the claims against dems for their indiscretions. Admittably, I can only use the same biased source you use to discover the truth. My point still stands, something fishy went on in Florida on election day 2000.
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch2.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30
I am a country music fan and thought Emily and Marty had a bright future with their original partner–but they dumped Lauri(?) and took on Natalie who I thought was an ass and she proved that for sure. Now the sisters are out as Court Yard Dogs and I predict they will do fine and I hope they never do another show or album with “her”.
” Even in 2003, President Bush was a despised figure by the elitist international left — depicted as a war-mongering, ignorant cowboy from Texas.”
EVEN in 2003? You mean the year he got us to invade Iraq under false pretenses?
No, the year we finally abided by numerous UN resolutions and a US law signed by Democratic President Bill Clinton called Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, passed 360-38 in the U.S. House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. US President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law on October 31, 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
Try educating yourself before making moronic, straight out of the looney Lib Play-book comments.
Your “false pretense” is itself a “false assumption.” Try reading Congress’s war authorization bill during the lead-up to OIF. It clearly states that the reason to (potentially) depose Saddam was based upon multiple provocations, not just the presumption of WMDs (which presumption, BTW, had been used by Bill Clinton two years previously to launch bombing runs on Saddam’s “WMD facilities.”
I tell you, leftist pinklets are SO damn stupid. But it’s all about fashion. It is a pose. A pathetic attempt at saying “Hey, I’m important! Hey, I’m hip!” No substance on the left. Just yap and a cowardly desire to sucker punch somebody — anybody, but preferably some workaday citizen who may be so disgusting as to profess traditional American values.
The only false pretense, is your claim to having an above room temperature IQ.
“You mean the year he got us to invade Iraq under false pretenses?”
You mean the false pretenses of no WMDs? The false pretenses that every intelligence agency in the world presented? The false pretenses that Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Bubba Clinton and Billary, Rockefeller, Gore and Edwards also claimed?
Ignorance is bliss for the left, even if they know it is a lie. They existed and were moved, there have been enough articles written over the years about it, but you folks on the left keep telling your lies and disinformation. I could google it for you, but why, you don’t really care for the facts and would ether try to twist it to suit your ends or just ignore it as you have done for years.
Troll, return to your hole or your bridge.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Democrats+claims+of+wmds+in+iraq&hl=en&client=firefox&hs=S4I&rls=com.yahoo:en-US:official&prmd=v&source=univ&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=Ydg5TLj_DoH7lwf796TTBw&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CCkQqwQwAw
Thanks for the back-up.
~Peter
Proud OIF Vet
we here in the united states have the 1st amendment freedom of speech; if i disagree with the president I’ll tell him so; i don’t follow like a brain less zombie like the right do. that war was started on lies by a president with no credibility and took our rights and tortured people at gotmo. that’s on the record they should be tried for war crimes and jailed look it up on you tube forgive me i know you were born that way. president retarded bush
And yet, if a celebrity figure trashed Obama on a world stage, the left would howl over how our president was disrespected. They would no doubt blame some rising right wing anger over a black president and other crack pot theories.
Liberals routinely consider popular dissent against the “establishment” or government as a celebration of first amendment rights, but many of them are just ITCHING to silence forms of speech they perceive to be “hate”. That’s why they shout down featured speakers in a private setting and enact all kinds hate crime laws. Who runs these human rights councils that persecute infidels that speak out agaisnt the prophet and dare to create speech that MIGHT incite racial strife? Why, they must be all right wingers.
You’re not a patriot by default for speaking out against the government, especially one ran by George Bush. Wow, what courage it takes to berate a president with 30% approval rating. No KGB like agents are coming after you or bugging your phone lines, despite all the self pitying rants. But they know muslim extremists might. That’s why they gladly apply self censorship on islmaic matters while gleefully insulting the many others who actually respect the first amendment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW65vlzLWHg
Like when is the clown in chief going to close “Gotmo?” He signed 3 executive orders to do so on his 1st day in office!!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/guantanamo.order/index.html
Do you follow the left like a zombie? Do you still support Pres. Obama, even though he still hasn’t, and won’t, close GITMO? Do you support him expanding the use of Predator drones against- and targeted assasination of – suspected terrorist threats, even if they are US citizens afield? Do you support him still, even though he has not made it any kind of priority to “restore our freedoms” (/sarc) and getting a congress, which is controlled by the left, to repeal the hated-by-the-left patriot act? He could have gotten that done easy early in his term- the republicans were too disorganized, and all the hope-and-change magic ™ was still there. He could have easily gotten a security bill passed that gutted the patriot act while still having the pretense of “protecting our national security while not harming our freedoms” which no one on the left seems to be able to produce a credible plan for- hell, they don’t even need Pres. Obama for that.
The bright sparks who are Pelosi and Reid could have done that themselves- they’d have probably gotten a few scared republicans on their side with a few deals, if not out-right threats. That did not happen. ‘Yeah, but there was the whole economic crisis caused by Bush’ you’ll say. Even better- the bill could have slipped under the radar, or been a way to bolster the support of the base and the independants while planning what to do about the economy. I’m sure Gibbs could have spun it into something about ensuring our freedoms is good for the economy. A win-win.
Side note: I have yet to feel or see any restriction of freedom from the patriot act- I can still post to sites, the daily KOS, sadly, still exists, americans still travel the world and citizens of other nations still come here- if I were to call my long lost uncle by marriage to a third cousin’s neice, Usama the Yemeni, I’d not be surprised to have that call monitored- then again, so long as I’m not doing anything wrong, ie, plotting treason, I have nothing to worry about.
I’m still wanting credible evidence- ie, not posted by KOS of Huffington, or by a lefty media outlet- that my freedoms have been curtailed. Ironically, it’s the ‘I’m a victim!’ ideology of the left that has restricted freedoms, particularly of speech. And for that, the Left should feel shame, and the ACLU should be all over those kids, but I have yet to see it.
The Patriot Act actually expired in February 2010. Congress and Obama then extended it for another year.
Legislation to extend the Patriot Act was passed by the Senate, without debate, on a voice vote, and passed 315-97 by the House. Obama then signed it with little fanfare.
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/politics/25brfs-PATRIOTACTEL_BRF.html
http://rawstory.com/2010/02/obama-patriot-act-year-privacy-protections/
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll067.xml
(Note:the bill title refers to its original name, before all reference to Medicare was removed and the Patriot Act language added.)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3961:
The loony left is an interesting lot, they suck up the lies and disinformation of the msm and call it truth, yet their lies won’t stand scrutiny, unless the left is the one doing the checking.
Troll to your bridge.
You mean you don’t follow like a brainless zombie like the Democrats do, don’t you?
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. The Act found that between 1980 and 1998 Iraq had:
1) Committed various and significant violations of International Law,
2) Had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed following the Gulf War and
3) Further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.
The Act was passed 360-38 in the U.S. House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. How many of those politicians at the time were Democrats?
There are several quotes concerning Democrats, Iraq, and WMDs in the years and months leading to the 2003 invasion. Most of them come during a time in the Clinton administration when decisions were being made about action against Saddam Hussein and amid concerns about weapons of mass destruction.
We’ll take them one at a time.
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
“Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright.
“We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.
“Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago. She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country. Albright said, “There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies.”
“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find did not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed nine other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the need to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there would be the need at that point.
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
Senator Kerry’s comments were made to the Senate as part of the same debate over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
Senator Rockefeller’s statements were a part of the debate over using force against Saddam Hussein.
“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
Senator Waxman’s contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she did not feel that using force at that time was a good option.
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003
In a speech to Georgetown University.
So by your own arguement, either all these prominent DEMOCRATS were brainless idiots, or there was intelligence that stated the possibilities of WMDs were real, viable, and factual. Of course, your whole premise is that these DEMOCRATS were brainless boobs.
The Iraq Intelligence Commission, following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, rejected claims that the Bush administration attempted to influence the intelligence community’s pre-war assessments of Iraq’s weapons programs, but it did not investigate whether the administration misled the public about the intelligence.
“The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community’s pre-war assessments of Iraq’s weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments.”
The post-invasion Duelfer Report stated that Hussein had still not given up on trying to produce WMD in 2003. His strategy was to first bring UN sanctions to an end by demonstrating that he was cooperating with weapons inspectors and, once sanctions were lifted, to then revive Iraq’s WMD program, including nuclear weapons.
Finally, there are some definitive answers to the mystery of the missing WMD. Civilian volunteers, mostly retired intelligence officers belonging to the non-partisan IntelligenceSummit.org, have been poring over the secret archives captured from Saddam Hussein. The inescapable conclusion is this: Saddam really did have WMD after all.
The gist of the new evidence is this: roughly one quarter of Saddam’s WMD was destroyed under UN pressure during the early to mid 1990′s. Saddam sold approximately another quarter of his weapons stockpile to his Arab neighbors during the mid to late 1990′s. The Russians insisted on removing another quarter in the last few months before the war. The last remaining WMD, the contents of Saddam’s nuclear weapons labs, were still inside Iraq on the day when the coalition forces arrived in 2003.
So believe your revisionist history if you choose, but most of us out here prefer to live in the real world, where real fact have real consequences.
but saddam had WMD for 20 years. You sold them. and the french. and the germans.
sdraio;
Who sold what to Saddam:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
The fact is that the US contributed less than one percent to Iraq’s military machine and virtually all of that was dual-use materials – for example, civilian helicopters converted to military use and cultures diverted to biological weapons research.
It doesn’t matter whether you are talking about conventional weapons nor WMDs, we didn’t supply either to Saddam. There was no American weapons system sold to Saddam. None. That means zero. Nada. Zilch. Ixnay. It’s just that freaking simple.
The people who supplied the bulk of the weaponry were the French, Russians and Chinese. The bulk of the financing was by the Saudis and the Kuwaitis. The chemical weapons were sourced privately through (IIRC) German, Dutch and Indonesian firms, some of whose directors have since been prosecuted for their actions, I believe.
you are right, sorry, my bad. no WMD from Usa to Iraq. I got confused with the satellite imagery you provided, that allowed the Iraqi army to stop the Iranians from arriving to Baghdad during the Iraq-Iran war.
altough my point still stand: Saddam had WMD for 20 years, WE sold them also weapons, dual-use stuff, sat stuff. we watched while he proceded to gas the kurds (maybe using the US helicopters you mention?).
but in 2003? saddam has WMD. oh my god. who would have tought.
Sdraio at 7:38 AM;
Satellite intelligence was also provided to the Iranians.
Sorry, but dual use stuff doesn’t imply responsibility. The seller isn’t responsible if the end user decides to arm a fleet of SUVs with rocket launchers. Your argument is cut from the same cloth that says if a criminal uses a gun in a crime, then the gun manufacturer is to blame. The premise is false and deserves rejection.
we watched while he proceded to gas the kurds
So did the rest of the world. What’s your point?
Iran and North Korea both have dangerous weapons, but we did not invade either country, and we should not have invaded Iraq. It was a horrible strategic and expensive move. The main outcome of our overthrow of Saddam is making Iran more powerful in the region. Not to mention that Afghanistan was ignored post invasion. Also, lets mention the pure monetary cost of the expedition and the horrifically unprepared invasion. How could any fiscal conservative support the incredibly costly Iraq war.
to spaghetti monster:
brian summed it up well: Iran and North Korea both have dangerous weapons,including WMD, but we did not invade either country, and we should not have invaded Iraq.
by the way, selling dual-use stuff DOES imply responsability if you KNOW what use will be made of that stuff. and if you give a gun to someone who told you he wants to kill someone else, yuo ARE responsible.
And I’m sure as soon as the dithering UN gets around to finally issuing North Korea the punishment it deserves, especially in the light of their recent sinking of a S. Korean patrol ship, we’ll be right there on the doorstep leading the way, just like we were when the UN AUTHORIZED the attack and invasion of Iraq, leading a coalition of close to 100 countries. (Bet you had no clue how many countries were allied with us during the 2003 invasion, because the Dinosaur Media did their best to hide this fact from the general public. I list list every single one of them if you like?)
As for duel use items, are you saying just because something, like medicine, COULD be perverted into a weapon by some sicko or crazy, that the US should not take the risk and stop selling ANYTHING? Because every single item ever manufactured in the history og the world can be perverted into a weapon in the wrong hands? Is that what you’re advocating, that the US should cut off all supplies to all foreign contries, like food, medicine, fuel, farming supplies? Please clarify.
~Peter
Proud OIF Vet
Sdraio;
We invaded Iraq because we’d been maintaining those no fly zones for almost 12 years at a cost of billions of dollars. Gulf War 1 never ended.
However, we should not have “saved” Iraq on the simple grounds that Saddam’s people were no better than he was. The middle east is a horribly dysfunctional backwater filled with horribly bigoted people. They are best left alone to stew their own brutalities.
Arnold ol bean! May we be honest? Compare credetials of former President Bush vs. Obama………Bush graduated from Yale with a higher GPA than John Kerry, yet the MSM tauted the superiority of Kerry, Obama, well he claims to have graduated from numerous institutions of Higher learning, yet he has sealed all his records regarding them. Bush, actually accomplished something as a Business owner responsible for the incomes of thousands of employees dependent on their Major league Baseball related jobs. Bush worked across the aisles of the legislation in Texas with Democrat Bob Bullock to benefit all Texans, Bush is much loved and respected to this day all over Texas. Obama held only public sector employment, working as community orginizer drawing his wages from the public trough. His tenure in the US Senate was short and uneventful, his record of voting “present” says volumes. In Chicago we have an ongoing federal trial involving the former “impeached” Govenor, referred to as Blogo revealing many questionable actions by now President Obama…..Arnold put down the kool-aid, your are supporting the most unverifiable intellectual giant ever foisted upon the country.
Is it just me…or do the “libs”, who so pride themselves on the elitist educations they have,not have the slightest inkling of how to use such things as coherent argument to get their point across? And did they actually pay attention to such things as English grammar where Capitalization and punctuation are neccesary to be able to understand their incoherent arguments? And speaking of “brainless zombies”, where the heck is Gotmo? Is that next to Tim Buk Too?
Mike
To the academic Left — none of whom is employable outside of academia itself (including, alas, our public education system), Washington, D.C., and the Dinosaur Media — substantive argumentation is something to be avoided at all costs. Thus the reliance upon elitist JARGON (welcome to graduate school in the liberal sciences). squishy New Hollywood dogmatism, and, well, *feelings* .. nothing more that FEELINGS .. La la la, la la.
What I mean to say is that the Marxian Narrative (to be terribly pedantic about it) is intellectually dead. All of the good thinking — I mean, the incisive thinking, the substantive thinking, the cutting-edge thinking, is on the Right. It is in Conservative intellectualism that Western mankind’s salvation lies. The Left has gone over to the Dark Side. They are only a hinderance to us now. They need to be jettisoned ASAP, so that we can lock on to the real threat. Otherwise, we all die.
http://ezralevant.com/2010/07/john-stossels-fox-news-channel.html
http://ezralevant.com/2010/07/michael-ignatieff-praises-chin.html
We’re on your side Constitutionalists!
Fight now or get stuck in the Canadian style quagmire we have up here.
I wish someone somewhere would publish a list of the parental units of these “students”. While they are obviously also Muslims, it would be interesting to know which particular rat hole the parents grew up in and fled from.
It would also be amusing to publicly humiliate them in an “honor killing” sort of way for having their spawn drag the family name through Islamic-bred mud.
Oh, dear. Just thinking about these dangerous nutcases having parental units puts a whole new light on the thing. I wonder if some of those parental units have, as new (and perhaps some of them legal?) immigrants to this country…worked their butts off, appreciated these United States and are not completely aware of what their little cutie pies are doing at school…..
Whether they are aware or not, whether they trained them this way or not–I like your idea. Identify and expose the parental units.
Also be interesting to know how the Muslim students are funding their time on campus (I hesitate to call it “education”). As in, how much of their tuition is paid by US and/or California taxpayers through scholarships / loans.
The Dixie Chicks still sold a few million more CDs after the 2003 incident, so I’m not sure what point the author is making.
They would have sold far more then a few million had they not did themselves in. I don’t hear them on any Texas C&W station in Texas. I quit buying them as did most.
joe: you are right. they blame evryone else for their suspension and not themselves. just as the Israeli IDF shhoot people point blank and blame the flotilla.
In miriams world, the worst possible crime occurs anytime a jew defends himself.
I wonder how many years she will be spreading the latest set of lies.
My aren’t you the anti-semite?
Miriam Rove
Civilians who charge into a declared war zone with the intention of provoking an incident should be shot point blank – just on the grounds of ridding the gene pool of idiots.
Gosh,,, if you listen to the left, 9/11 never occurred.
I’m sorry to inform you, but 3,000 Americans died in that attack that day. A war on terror is fully justified. Obama can apologize all he wants to, but the facts remain. Nations of Islam don’t like us very much. They will kill us as the opportunity presents itself.
Wake up America, the Won, Obama, is not looking out for your best interests.
To all you vicious left wing destroyers of freedom…your day is coming…soon…very soon!
IT IS SUCH A GOOD FEELING OF SCHADENFREUDE TO READ WHAT HAS BEFALLEN THE DIXIE CHICKS, JOHN EDWARDS, AND NOW AL GORE. HOW THE MIGHTY HAVE FALLEN AND QUITE A FEW WILL FOLLOW.
I do not really understand where all the hate is coming from. As it turns out the Dixie chicks were pretty prophetic, as Bush did leave with a horrendous approval rating. Clearly the Iraq war was under false pretenses. It is incredible that you attack the Dixie Chicks for dissing Bush, but daily bash Obama much worse. Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy. Also I daily read articles where people here play the victim card. It might be the second most common thing I read here. Most of you people are a non stop whine fest. It is pretty sad. Then you have the audacity to whine about other people whining.
And clearly Brian N hasn’t been paying attention to the facts if he still believes the liberal lie that WMDs were the one and only reason for the Iraq invasion. And I’m tired of re-printing the same facts over and over again, so I’m not going to do it. Brian can just get off his lazy butt and read some of the other responses on this article and maybe, just maybe (though I’m not holding my breath) reality will burth through and he will understand how the real world works?
Muslim women have only one choice: to agree with what their men tell to do.
They are little more than chattle, possessions.
The custom of raping women and calling it normal has even now become accepted among the Palestinians who are OK with raping the foreign activist morons who come to support their terrorism.
Though I abhor rape and sexual violence, these stupid women who came to attack Israel and support the Muslims deserve what they got. May the Muslims defile every one of them. I wouldn’t lift a finger to support these traitors.
http://jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com/2010/07/15/palestinians-rape-us-peacenik-tell-her-to-shut-up/
It’s the govt. leaders and corporations that have no interest in their citizens. Resources (oil) and wealth are all that matter and ally and foe alike buy weapons from each other to continue to play the game that enriches those at the top. Young boys(soldiers) unwittingly help those monsters enrich themselves.
This might go against your whole lefty daydream, but has it actually occurred to you that the majority of the people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, both before and after 9/11, were Muslims being killed by other Muslims?
As in any war, yes there is certain to be collateral damage, people – including civilians – killed who were not meant to be killed. War cannot be antiseptic. But the modern form of war the US and its allies conduct in the present day stresses trying not to kill people haphazardly. (Perhaps if we employed the rules of engagement the Allies used during WWII, this would all have been over in 2 months? And even in WWII, most US forces tried their best not to bombard civilian populations without reason.) The only ones killing innocent civilians in numbers totaling hundreds – if not thousands – per day are the Jihadists and Terrorists who kill indescrimantly, either not caring who it is they kill or, more likely, relishing in the death and innocent blood spilled.
I really wish I could see a world run by the Liberal ideology. They would be wiped off the face of the Earth by our enemies in mere weeks. Unfortunately I cannot let that happen, because I do not want to have to suffer for the sins of the Libs.
~Peter
Proud OIF Vet
As a matter of fact, it does.
That’s what happens when one country or a group that is being sheilded by a country, declares war on another.
Don’t want to get your a$$ kicked, then don’t declare war on the US.
Nullzone has it ever occurred to you that your WILDLY EXAGGERATED numbers of dead makes your whole moombat diatribe both RIDICULOUS and PATHETIC. As Peter has already told you the VAST MAJORITY of those killed in Afghanistan, Iraq and PAKISTAN are Mohammedans killing OTHER Mohammedans so your left wing moonbat claim fails yet another test. Just goes to prove what a pathetic hilarious moonbat EUPHEMISM calling Islam the ‘Religion of Peace ‘ is. Sunnis and Shi’a have been killing each other since Mohammad INVENTED Islam and will continue to do so if we are there or not and they BOTH kill Ba’Hais.
Oh yeah, because arresting the leaders of rogue nations always works out for the best, don’t it? (sarc/)
Allow me to make a gentle suggestion: please, please, please acquire a used copy of Lee Harris’ Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History. It’ll only cost you three bucks for a used copy. The intro alone will be worth your time. Harris concludes his Civilization and Its Enemies with this:
Your problem is that you haven’t even acquired the knowledge of history and human nature to forget in the first place. Your outlook is fundamentally flawed and amounts to a recipe for civilizational suicide if were to be applied to the rest of us.
Adn I know the answer to Harris’ question above. The memory of how we got here, how we achieved our freedom and at what cost has been systematically purged from the general consciousness. Not necessarily from ours, but from that of many of our countrymen. Harris’ concluding sentence is the price that we will all pay for that forgetfulness…