Orson Scott Card weighs in on the hypocrisy of the anti-war folks, why Bush scares the Left, and the McCarthy-like tactics of the Left.
In other words, our war against Iraq from 1991 never ended. Certainly that is Iraq’s declared position — they consider themselves at war with us, and have been shooting at us since 1991.
So the question of what Iraq has done to us is easy to answer.
But when Sarandon and Garafolo ask that question, it is pure politics — and pure hypocrisy. Not only do they know the answer, they also don’t even believe in the question.
Nither Sarandon or Garafolo really thinks that we have to wait for an evil tyrant to attack America directly before we have a responsibility to take action — including military action — to stop them.
Why do I know this? Because neither of them said a single, solitary word against Bill Clinton when he bombed Serbia.
Sarandon and Garafolo are not anti-war. They are merely anti-Bush, and are invoking our collective fake memories of the “noble” anti-war movement of the sixties as a stick to beat him with.
Why? Because George W. Bush is the most frightening President the Left could imagine, domestically or abroad.
He frightens them because he is actually a moderate, a centrist. He wants to serve all the people, not just narrow special interests. He actually believes in egalitarian, non-racist policies; he really means it when he talks about “compassionate conservatism.”
Just as Clinton de-fanged the Right by coopting all their economic policies, so Bush de-fangs the Left by embracing their populist goals (though not their methods).
They call him stupid, though clearly he is not. They call him a fascist, a racist, a fanatic — precisely because he is none of those things. They pound at us with lies and name-calling about him and his policies, because they are terrified that people will realize that by and large his policies are good and decent ones that are likely to work pretty well.
What the American Left doesn’t seem to realize is that they are behaving exactly like Joseph McCarthy and the red-baiting fanatics of the early 1950s. They fling monstrous charges against decent people, hoping to rouse the anger of the people. And for a time they gain political advantage by doing so.
—The Ornery American
(Oh, and once again, if you haven’t already go check out Ender’s Game
This argument has been tossed around quite a bit since 9/11, but I don’t think anyone’s ever taken the time to refute it. Terror isn’t the goal of the terrorists, it’s the means to achieve their goal. There’s nothing wrong with being afraid. There’s nothing wrong about changing our habits. The terrorists are trying to kill us and destroy our country, they’re not trying to keep small planes trailing signs from flying over stadiums or have us focus terror investigations on Arabs. Changing our lives to take sensible security precautions hurts the terrorists’ cause.
Some argue why should we be told to be prepared now when during WWII the people were being encouraged to go about their normal lives. Quite simply, there were plenty of things around in WWII to remind people they were at war. This is a very different war. There are no air raid sirens. No rationing. No constant bombing. This is a war that can quite easily slip away from the public’s conscious mind. When people had constant reminders of the terror they didn’t need to be reminded to be vigilant. When the biggest inconvenience is the price of gas going up to $1.75 a gallon it’s a different story. People need to be reminded every once in a while that they’re practically on the front lines of a war. Of course people should be free to go shopping, or go to a ballgame, but it’s simply not too much to ask that we change our lives in little ways. These changes hurt the terrorists, they don’t lead to the terrorists’ victory.
New Europe isn’t exactly pleased with Chirac’s recent “they missed an opportunity to shut up” tirade.
“When [Chirac] reproached the candidate countries for not having discussed their attitudes with the others to a minimal extent at least, he forgot that it was mainly France and Germany who, since the very beginning, have taken a negative stance on a possible use of force against Iraq and on Turkey’s request for … military aid without asking about positions of other countries.
Poland Chirac allowed himself to say things which should not have been said… Poland can make its own sovereign decisions about its views. EU membership must not deprive us of this right. Loyalty towards Paris should not mean subordination. Loyalty brings obligations on both sides.
And my favorite…
All right, Monsieur Chirac. Perhaps we are poor. Perhaps we were not raised properly. We do not know about fine wine and the various directions of avant-garde art. But we do not repay those who have helped us and who continue to help us with ingratitude.
Neatkariga Rita Avize
The British Tabloid The Sun is distributing a special edition of their paper Paris. The front page is entirely in French and translates to the following:
Greetings to the citizens of Paris from The Sun newspaper, which is read by ten million people every day.
We think your President, Jacques Chirac, is a disgrace to Europe by constantly threatening to veto military action to enforce the will of the United Nations against Iraq.
We think it is all the more hypocritical because the world knows that eventually President Chirac will agree to support the UN, America and Great Britain.
British people feel M Chirac, who in the UK is nicknamed the ‘worm’, is arrogantly strutting about trying to make France seem more important in the world than it really is.
The truth is that all the world – including France – recognises that Saddam Hussein must be dealt with. But only the French President seems determined to frustrate the will of the international community.
When Saddam Hussein has gone, people in Britain and the rest of Europe will look at France and ask themselves whether France is much of an ally any more. People will ask themselves why anyone should bother with what France and its leader say.
We also think in Britain that you in France have forgotten how much you owe to other nations, particularly America and Britain, for coming to your aid in two world wars.
You were glad enough to welcome the Americans when Hitler ruled France.
But now you sneer at the American people and their president, and forget how the war cemeteries of France are packed with American and British soldiers and sailors and airmen who laid down their lives so France could be free.
Today, the Americans – backed by other European nations braver than France – are preparing again to rid the world of a tyrant.
On behalf of our ten million readers, we say to you today:
Are you not ashamed of your president?
According to the BBC, plenty.
While the major Arab countries, headed by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria… invest faithful efforts towards resolving [the crisis] through peaceful means – and to persuade the American administration not to close the door on diplomatic efforts – the Iraqi regime continues its policy of arrogance and empty obstinacy and does all it can to thwart these efforts. The Iraqi regime is like someone galloping, with a driving force that is unclear, on the path of annihilation, while dragging the region yet again into a destructive war.
While regional and international forces act to open a window of hope to diplomatic efforts, the Iraqi regime misses opportunity after opportunity by continuing its policy of statements of pseudo-heroism ungrounded in objective foundations or realistic considerations. It has reached the point where I can almost say that the Iraqi people and its well-being are not a consideration for the Iraqi leadership, which excels in games, maneuvers, and even in arrogance over the powers genuinely striving to defend Iraq … from maltreatment by a leadership that cannot read reality.
A peaceful solution to the crisis is still possible, but the main obstacle is the leadership that was cast upon the Iraqi people and the entire Arab region.”
The Iraqi leadership is characterized by great pride combined with total ignorance. When these two traits are joined, they cause the [kind of] disasters and crises that Saddam Hussein’s regime has brought upon us time after time.
—Egyptian government daily Al-Ahram(Translation by MEMRI)
The Arabs have done everything they can to avoid war and Saddam has just ignored every opportunity available, and it looks like the Arabs are just about fed up with him, regardless of all the protestors who seem to think the Arabs are going along with us only because we’re forcing them to. The Arabs have seen what France refuses to see: that the root of the problem is not Bush or a lack of inspectors, but the unwillingness of the Iraqi regime to comply in any way with International mandates.
Anti-war protesters blocked lanes on State Route 520 in Seattle during the morning commute Tuesday. State troopers arrested several people and have cleared the scene.
Protesters set up a pyramid structure with three poles in the eastbound lanes of 520 at Montlake and appeared to be trying to put up a banner on the structure before it was taken down by troopers.
Troopers made eight arrests, KIRO 7 Eyewitness News reported.
Officers removed the pole-structure, banner and towed away a car to get traffic moving again.
The incident slowed the flow of traffic across the Highway 520 floating bridge during the latter part of the morning commute, on the day following a three-day weekend for many workers.
A group of three or four dozen other demonstrators watched the demonstration and shouted anti-war slogans.
What isn’t mentioned is that that traffic backup led to an accident that killed a 30 year old mother trying to get to work. When informed of the death one of the protestors said “sometimes, people have to die for a cause. This death could prevent hundreds and thousands more.”