Entry: Who's Quoting Who? Sunday, April 18, 2004



Pop quiz: Who recently said the following?

"This war makes millions of dollars for big corporations, either weapons manufacturers or those working in the reconstruction [of Iraq], such as Halliburton and its sister companies...

"It is crystal clear who benefits from igniting the fire of this war and this bloodshed: They are the merchants of war, the bloodsuckers who run the policy of the world from behind the scenes.

"President Bush and his ilk, the media giants... all are a fatal danger to the world..."

Was it a) Osama bin Laden, b) John Kerry, c) a MoveOn.org ad, d) Robert Byrd or e) Ted Kennedy?

The answer, of course, is a) Osama bin Laden. But why was it so hard to choose, if you didn't already know the answer? Has anyone noticed that America's worst enemies and leading Democrats are starting to sound alike? Last week Ted Kennedy, Bobby Byrd and Moqtada al-Sadr all used the same troop-demoralising line about Iraq being Vietnam to attack President Bush. Can you imagine the Republicans quoting Emperor Hirohito or Adolf Hitler during the 1944 election campaign? Perhaps they could have quoted Prime Minister Tojo, when he said in 1942, "America that is suffering repeated defeats is trying to cover its mortal blow by relying on vicious propaganda and is in a desperate condition trying to cover the rising criticism within the country and to preserve the right of neutral countries." Would attacking the President using the enemy's words have won over the American people in 1944? Would telling US troops that they were fighting a war for immoral reasons, that they were bound to fail, and that their commander-in-chief was a terrible person have won the election?

Certainly not then, and I hope it doesn't now.
   11 comments

alan
April 18, 2004   09:47 AM PDT
 
Bin laden sounding desperate, also failed with his attempt to split us and europe

Try this site out it has an update on the photo seems it is likely to be a fake, although did suspect it from the start

http://www.gravett.org/Israellycool/

alan
JM
April 18, 2004   10:18 AM PDT
 
Yes, Alan, the photo was a fake by the pro-terrorist anti-American group CAIR.
http://www.imagedump.com/index.cgi?pick=get&tp=59682&user=all3
StarkTruth
April 19, 2004   09:00 AM PDT
 
What I love about John Kerry is he says in one breathe "The President does not have a plan for the war in Iraq" then turns around in the very next breathe and says "I am not sure what my plan would be but I would surely have the UN involved"
JM
April 19, 2004   09:07 AM PDT
 
He wants to turn Iraq over to the UN, which has done such a wonderful job in Bosnia that after five years of UN ineptitude, the people want their brutal dictator back!
Jamie from Ala
April 20, 2004   04:24 PM PDT
 
John Kerry can't seem to make up his mind just what he does or doesn't support. Last week he was saying Iraq was a failure, yet this week he is saying that it "isn't quite a failure". Is it a failure or isn't it?

Did anyone see Kerry's interview on "Meet the Press"? Did he directly answer any of Russert's questions? There is a little bit about the interview in "Best of the Web" for Monday, April 19th out there on OpinonJournal.com.
JM
April 20, 2004   04:28 PM PDT
 
Kerry is killing his own campaign. And Jamie, I believe you were my 10,000th visitor. Thanks.
Jamie from Ala
April 20, 2004   04:34 PM PDT
 
You are very welcome.
Mark Adams
April 21, 2004   02:11 AM PDT
 
I hate to break up the mutual admiration society, but did any of you Kerry/UN bashers happen to notice that the President said in his press conference that he would be turning over Iraqi sovereignty to whomever UN representative Brahimi said he should. We need the UN now, will in the future, and Bush could have been more diplomatic with the diplomats there in the past.
JM
April 21, 2004   04:15 AM PDT
 
The UN is good at organisation and humanitarian aid. They're terrible at just about everything else. Bush is right to let them run the things they're good at, while NOT letting them ruin Iraq, which Kerry would do. We don't need another Kosovo; one is bad enough.
Jamie G.
April 21, 2004   11:29 AM PDT
 
You may think we are bashing Kerry, but everything said here is true - he flips and flops on just about everything without anything changing in between. Bush did not want the U.N. involved in the enforcement of the U.N.s own resolutions. The U.N. did not have a place in making military decisions in re to the regime change in Iraq because they allowed SH to remain in power for years and merely issued new resolutions after SH failed to comply with the umpteen earlier resolutions. Now that SH has been removed from power, there is a place for the U.N. to help -with the elections, humanitarian aid, etc. Point made - Bush changes as the situation changes. Kerry changes as the POLL NUMBERS change.
Mark Adams
April 21, 2004   11:51 PM PDT
 
Jamie, I was going to leave this alone, but I honestly see Bush only changing his course on so many things only reluctantly, almost a pattern. eg: His tax cuts, he promised them because he sold the idea that we should have our money back when there was a surplus. he didn't change his tax cut policy, just the reason for it after the recession hit. Whether you agree with the policy or not, he wouldn't even consider a modification to the cuts to pay for the $87 million. Steadfast if you are with the idea. Stubborn if not.

Only giving an hour to the 9/11 commission now changed to answering all the questions only after getting flak from his own party faithful. Troop strength increase, only after the worst month yet in Iraq, long after "mission accomplished." Turning over sovereignty to whomever the UN decides, but not moving that artifical deadline, because the caucus plan fell apart and so is the chance for elections anytime soon in the current climate. Naturally Kerry looks like a waffle in comparison.

The UN is the last resort here and only being turned to because POTUS must. There is nothing else.

Of course the UN is an incompetent agency for making war. It was designed to prevent it. Hans Blix did not want to go down in history as the man who said, "Yep (or maybe 'ja'), fuggettaboutit, bomb the lying bastard. Saddam's got VX somewhere, but he hid it, he must have." UN diplomats didn't sign up to make war, but to give us hope for peace.

If anyone left SH in power it was us. It was Clinton. It was Blair. 9/11 changed a lot. Up til then, with only a suspicion of the corruption in the food for oil debacle, and SH's only danger seeming to be the occasional pot shot at an F-15, which promptly blew the AA site to hell, the American people would never have supported them in a costly invasion or grand scheme to reform the entire region. Especially in the wag the dog climate after zippergate.

It was us, all of us, not just or because of the UN.

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments