Posted on 09/19/2003 4:44:09 PM PDT by Mr.Atos
As with many of you, who have entered this thread due to that provocative title, I was similarly motivated to construct this response after reading those words included in a message from an associate. The content of that message has not been included in its entirety, out of respect to this person. Enough material has been referenced in the body of my response, however, for you to understand the context of the discussion. It is essentially, the lastest contribution to an ongoing debate over ideology, politics and culture - one of those email chains where the two Conservatives get assaulted by 6 to 8 Leftist on a daily basis. But I don't want to make this longer than it already is. I did want to offer my response for your interest, consideration, and comment... irregardless of your politics.
------------------
My first reaction to your response (once I was able to retract my jaw) was close the post and leave it be. Where to begin… and why? But, inexplicably I kept coming back to the statement like a peculiar object so ill conceived and poorly designed that one feels compelled to continue pondering the abomination in an effort to find anything extant with which to make some degree of sense. Finally concluding that it offers none I began chopping off bits to see what happens.
Like this, when asked to provide sources and context of your attacks on the President’s policies, you reply that … “[You]don’t see that any qualifiers are required.” No! I can see why you wouldn’t. Afterall, you believe that the President’s actions are simply the product of some pathologic fixation. You do this in order to qualify your own irrational disgust for the man and his ideology and to correct the outcome of his election. You’d never accept, for instance, Stratfor’s analysis concluding that the President’s move against Iraq was a shrewd and calculated, if not risky, strategic response to a very dangerous and complex threat; one that did not directly involve Sadam’s murderous fascist regime, but was certainly related to it. Time, fortune, and perserverance will ultimately determine the administration’s righteousness in this endeavor and not the vitriolic and hateful rhetoric of the fringe Left.
Then there’s this… “ Sadam had nothing to do with Islamic Militantism.” Except that, as was already pointed out and you conveniently ignore, Sadam funded Islamic terror, payed bounty on the acts, trained operatives, supplied arms, provided sanctuary, and celebrated each attack from shredding busloads of school-children with nails & glass laced with feces and rat poison, to destroying the WTC... to begin with (by the way, this is the done in the name of the cause you ‘agree’ with!). Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy has pointed out that it is patently ridiculous to forward the notion that there is no connection between Al Quaida and Sadam. The evidence is factual, overwhelming, and has never been in doubt by anyone in Washington including Democrats in Congress. It includes the indirect connection with the 911 hijackers, definite connections with the first WTC bombing, and even a frighteningly and increasingly likely possibility of a connection with the OKC bombing. Based on these previous actions, was there any reason to believe that Sadam’s participation in an ongoing war with the US would not escalate with his continued development of WMD’s – this list of which included even the possibility of a weaponized small-pox program that Ken Alibek (W.H.O, and former Soviet BW-Small-Pox researcher) suspected to be in operation. Sadam’s regime personified Middle East fascist militantism and the violence and strife that cause it to flourish. The use of the term ‘Islamofascist’, you contend, condemns all Islamic peoples for the acts of a few and “… shows a complete lack of understanding of the Middle East.” And yet, the term has been coined and used by many authorities on Islamic terrorists to separate the actions of the person or movement from the people and their religion; much the same way that Nazi did not define all Germans. What is fundamental here is your voluntary ignorance of the calculated semantic differentiation. The fascist wings of Islam are made up of twisted Marxist heretics disguising themselves as religious fundamentalist, as Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute, points out. They do not represent the people of Islam nor their religion. I will repeat this point for you, they (The Islamofascists) do not represent the people of Islam nor their religion. They do however represent you, as you have stated.
You chide the power vacuum left behind the removal of the Hussein/Baathist regime, implying that the Iraqi people would be better off living under the oppression of a murderous thug tyrant; one who’s legacy includes some 57 mass graves, one containing 1200 children as witnessed by Federal Judge Don Walters on a recent fact-finding mission. In doing this, you once again ignore relevant strategic facts: 1. that we freed a horribly oppressed Islmamic population; and 2. In doing so, we also moved the front of the current war into the heart of the Middle East. As long as we are taking the war to the enemy, we are not fighting it in our own cities. Our presence in the region at this time, provides tremendous political and strategic leverage. A free Islamic state could be the catalyst that allows the good people of Islam to dispose of the shackles of millennia of oppression and assume their rightful place among the civilizations of Earth – proud, free, and self-determined. All of this, you choose to ignore, making you the one who is truly naive or simply ignorant of the history, politics, and conditions in the Middle East.
So you believe that your profound (?) understanding of the Middle East extends to socio-political conditions in Saudi Arabia and the ongoing struggles in Israel? You believe that the citizens of Saudi Arabia (unlike those in Iraq) are truly the subjects of horrendous oppression, “[not] allowed any freedoms by a government that is being prop[p]ed up by America,” ignoring the role that the rest of the nations of the world play independently and through the UN in maintaining the status quo in SA and the other oppressive nations of the Middle East - a situation that is certainly being reconsidered by the current administration in stark contrast to previous ones.
You believe that the Palestinians are enslaved subjects to an occupying force of Jewish invaders ignoring all of the UN treaties that established national boundaries for all of the people’s of that region, ignoring the fact that the so-called Palestinians (A loose collection Islamic and Christian Arabic people’s) rejected their own provisions for statehood and joined sides in a war to drive the Jews from the Middle-East… and lost. You ignore the fact that the Palestinians were driven from Jordan into the ‘territories’, by Jordanians who did not want them to establish colonies within their borders. You ignore the fact that Israel accepted them within their culture and that most enjoy freedoms in Israel far in excess of any other Islamic nation in that region. And that the only issue oppressing them at present is their own propensity toward and endorsement of acts of horrendous violence against their benefactors. Additionally you ignore the numerous offers by the Israeli government to give the Palestinian people everything that they profess to want. Further you go on to identify a certain allegiance with these murderous thugs in your very words, “Terrorism is wrong, but their cause is right.”
Excuse me? Terrorism is wrong, but their cause is right. What cause would that be? What cause justifies shredding women and children? What cause justifies 3000 dead in an hour? Is that the same cause that you agree with that took several million innocent victims in the killing fields of Cambodia at the hands of the Marxist armies of Pol Pot? Is it the cause against Capitalist affluence and the primacy of individual existence and human dignity that you support. Do you, like the terrorists to whom you profess allegiance, hate Man’s existence to the extent that you might someday strap on a bomb and murder your way into a righteous afterlife? Or do you, like Sadam, simply hate your ideological enemies so much that you’d supply money to a 12 year old minion to kill himself for you and your hatred of those with whom you disagree. Perhaps you might just burn their houses down or torch their SUV, like your friends in the ELF.
Have these terrorist with whom you agree, outlined a declaration of human existence and independence for which they fight, like the one used by militant Christians, statesman, and farmers to targeted their muskets in a field outside Saratoga Springs some 300 years ago? …targeting armed soldiers I might add.
I suggest you be damn sure that you know exactly what someone’s cause really is before you go declaring your allegiance to same or preaching tolerance of the murderers you choose to affiliate yourself with.
Shall I now define ignorance for you. Ignorance is the condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. Stupidity on the other hand, is lacking the ability to comprehend. Personally I think the former describes the fringe left as I believe that you, as I have said, ignore facts in order to qualify the hate, and scorn that you have for people who do not agree with you, and facts that contradict your tenuous positions.
You may be one judge. History will be your other.
References
Center For Security Policy Frank Gaffney President and CEO
Iraq: A Federal Judge's Point of View
Silent Weapon: Smallpox and Biological Warfare
Or even "regardless"
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.