President Bush Versus The Leftists

Despite all the doom and gloom forecast by liberal media naysayers, President Bush's trip to London was, in fact, a moderate success. Bush flew into the storm of anti-American dissent, and demonstrated to the world that he is indeed a true statesman, an astute man of character and vision. This certainly belies the vapid smears of the propagandistic BBC and its chief ally, the hardcore socialist movement, which have caricatured Bush as some kind of dopey, gung-ho Texan cowboy. Flagrantly biased journalists such as Katie Kay of the BBC are a disgrace to their profession, and are indifferent to alienating more than half of the American population by their skewed reporting. Most media coverage has failed to place London's anti-American, antiwar demonstrators in proper perspective. The strident Leftists of Great Britain only comprise about a third of the British population. As underscored by the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, "It must have galled the editors of the Left-wing Guardian, for example, to report the results of its poll that public opinion in Britain is overwhelmingly pro-American with 62% of voters believing that the U.S. is generally speaking a force for good, not evil, in the world."

In brief, the shrill Leftists are encumbered by a major blind spot - they do not grasp how America and its allies utilize a comprehensive toolbox to address foreign policy and national security concerns, tools ranging from various diplomatic efforts and sanctions, to threats of war and war itself. And certainly they don't comprehend, nor do they wish to comprehend, the appropriate use of sovereign power and military force.

There was no need to exerpt the article.

President Bush Versus The Leftists By Carol Devine-Molin November 24, 2003

Despite all the doom and gloom forecast by liberal media naysayers, President Bush's trip to London was, in fact, a moderate success. Bush flew into the storm of anti-American dissent, and demonstrated to the world that he is indeed a true statesman, an astute man of character and vision. This certainly belies the vapid smears of the propagandistic BBC and its chief ally, the hardcore socialist movement, which have caricatured Bush as some kind of dopey, gung-ho Texan cowboy. Flagrantly biased journalists such as Kattie Kay of the BBC are a disgrace to their profession, and are indifferent to alienating more than half of the American population by their skewed reporting. Most media coverage has failed to place London's anti-American, antiwar demonstrators in proper perspective. The strident Leftists of Great Britain only comprise about a third of the British population. As underscored by the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, "It must have galled the editors of the Left-wing Guardian, for example, to report the results of its poll that public opinion in Britain is overwhelmingly pro-American with 62% of voters believing that the U.S. is generally speaking a force for good, not evil, in the world."

Moreover, the Left continues to propagate the "big lie" that America is arrogant and acts unilaterally in terms of Iraq. In fact, the US gathered together a "coalition of the willing" involving approximately forty nations, including most of the NATO member nations. The US went back to the UN time and time again, and obtained UN Resolution 1441 in November 2002, which cogently warned the Saddam Hussein regime that it would "face serious consequences" if it continued to violate its obligations delineated in said resolution and "previous relevant resolutions". Simply put, Iraq exhibited ongoing defiance and Saddam Hussein was subsequently ousted by the "coalition of the willing" pursuant to UN resolutions. And for those squealing that WMDs have not been found, it must be emphasized that Iraq had an 18 month run-up to the invasion, more than ample time to hide, destroy or move WMDs, which might very well have been squirreled away with Saddam Hussein's chief ally in the region, Syria. And, of course, let's not forget that Iraq had a substantial history of aiding and abetting various terrorist organizations, and was guilty of atrocious human rights violations that made those of the former Yugoslavia pale in comparison.

Unfortunately, the Leftist crowd will demonize and denigrate anyone who is not in agreement with them. And that is why some in the British media are now making the absurd claim that President Bush is directly responsible for al-Qaeda's recent retaliatory strikes in Turkey (and against British assets abroad). Are we now to believe that Bush should do nothing to upset or annoy the terrorists? Well that's the twisted thinking of the Leftists - blame America first. In fact, America and the rest of western civilization are not even in a position to assuage al-Qaeda simply because the terror group is hell-bent on annihilating us. We are the "infidels" to be snuffed out, so say these radical Islamist thugs. Succinctly put, al-Qaeda adherents despise us for who we are, not for what we do in this "war on terror". We have only one recourse in this matter, and that is to assiduously fight the "war on terror". Ultimately, we must kill or apprehend the terrorists if we are to persevere. There is no other way.

As noted by Richard Miniter in his book, "Losing Bin Laden", al-Qaeda "publicly declared war on the western world" on myriad occasions. In the decade leading-up to 9/11/01, al-Qaeda and its affiliates made good on their threats by consistently targeting American citizens throughout the globe: The Goldmore and Aden Hotels in Yemen (1992), the Twin Towers, NYC (1993), the Black Hawk Down incident in Somalia (1993), Project Bojinka, which plotted to bring down American commercial aircraft, and severely damaged a Philippine Airlines aircraft in a "practice run" (1995), the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (1998), the USS Cole, Yemen (2000), etc. Moreover, in recent times, al-Qaeda has launched a series of terror attacks throughout Asia and the Middle East including, but not limited to, those in Saudi Arabia, Bali, and now Turkey. That said, will members of the largely Leftist British press continue to blame President Bush for al-Qaeda terror assaults? It's crucial to note that the majority of Americans still believe that the war in Iraq is worth fighting. And Americans of the heartland are likely to rally around a president that is unfairly under siege, especially by journalists (albeit British journalists) who, as a class, are held in rather low esteem by the American public.

In his London speech at Whitehall Palace, President Bush offered no apology for spearheading the ouster of the tyrant, Saddam Hussein. And why should he? Rightly, President Bush averred that "we seek the advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings" and we have a "commitment to the global expansion of democracy". He underscored the willingness of democratic nations to constrain "aggression and evil by force", if necessary. Iraq has made impressive strides in just seven months, and President Bush cited the organizing of local representative governments, the opening of schools, and the freedom of speech now afforded the Iraqi people. He also wants to see movement toward a Palestinian state. Most importantly, President Bush was pleased to have Prime Minister Tony Blair as America's staunch ally.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.