After seeing this photo with the following caption: "People shout slogans during a protest in central Madrid January 30, 2005. Marchers were protesting Iraq holding national elections under what they called U.S occupation. At least 10 suicide attacks targeted polling stations and voters on Sunday, but Iraqis still voted in large numbers. REUTERS/Susana Vera," I dug out a translation of article, sent to me by e-mail, titled: EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE written by Matthias Döpfner, Chief Executive of German publisher Axel Springer AG, in the daily WELT. EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE
A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements. Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.
Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us. Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.
Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U. N. Oil-for-Food program. And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of
appeasement...
How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany. I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time".
What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction. It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.
Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed. In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China. On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.
For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything. While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive". These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.
#1
The last image is an instant classic. Bravo to the Iraqis, well done. Arsenic raspberries to the tranzi "ists" - fascists, socialists, communists, maoists, marxists, multicultists, OWGists, ad infinitum ad nauseum... and their onanist apologists who frequent the 'burg.
#2
The U.S. Constitution begins "We the people...".
The European Union Constitution begins "HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS...". I kid you NOT. The Preamble begins on page 11 of this PDF file:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/21_07_04cg00086.en04.pdf
Posted by: Tom ||
01/30/2005 15:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Yep, Tom.
I've always thought the difference between Euros and Americans is that we think of ourselves as citizens and they still think of themselves (if only subconsciously) as subjects.
European: Pay attention to your betters.
American (non-leftist): That sumbitch ain't been born yet!
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/30/2005 15:25 Comments ||
Top||
#6
That is a keeper (Winston Churchill reborn as an Iraqi woman), and that's saying something considering the many amazing photos coming out of Iraq today. What makes it really work here is the contrast with the top shot of the Spanish protest.Cowardice, meet courage.
Posted by: Matt ||
01/30/2005 15:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The Preamble begins on page 11
That alone should make you reject it.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/30/2005 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
#8
...flip me that blue finger any time!!!
Posted by: Red Stater ||
01/30/2005 16:00 Comments ||
Top||
#9
In all fairness, there are a HELL of a lot of people in eastern Europe who just fume when "old Europe" and Brussels speaks on their behalf. They resent western Europe, always willing to let them suffer under the Soviet bloc, being snooty to America, who was always there to give them hope and encouragement, even if it couldn't do much more to help them at the time. And they see America *still* trying to help oppressed people, and western Europe *still* stubbornly wanting to maintain a loathsome status quo, or make some petty profit at the expense of suffering people.
I still think of a Czech professor who, in 1968, brought his class of American students to tears telling them about the ongoing invasion of his country. And I think of how few other countries there are, where students would cry in sympathy for a people they had never met, whose dreams of freedom were being crushed by tanks.
Old Europe had it's collective butt kicked today in Iraq in conjunction with the Democratic Party of the USA.
What must it feel like to be on the wrong side of history? What must it feel like to have no sense of one's manhood? No courage...no higher purpose? The answer to those rhetorical questions will never be known since I'm a card carrying Republican and a free man.
Posted by: Mark Z. ||
01/30/2005 16:31 Comments ||
Top||
#11
This is why we see a division between Old Europe and New Europe and why New Europe stood against Saddam. Countries like Poland have seen what happens when you end up with the short end of the appeasement stick.
#13
It is interesting to watch the progress of the rot in Old Europe, cloaked in the recurring guise of "experience". Inevitably I find myself saddened by what they are losing, especially in the U.K. and Germany, and their sense of resignation and surrender to the tides of Islamists who come to hasten the fall of the West. I was heartened today by the proof that great powers still have a sense of being able to shape the course of the world when faced with great adversity, and marvel at the old friends who have fallen to the wayside because they lost faith in us. I confess, I fear we are headed their way in time, but not yet, by God, not yet!!!
#15
Put your desired name in the "Your Name" box on the comment form, stop erasing your Rantburg cookie, and give it time. What's wrong with "Thraing Hupoluper1864"?
Posted by: Tom ||
01/30/2005 17:14 Comments ||
Top||
#16
If you lost your Rantburg cookie, then a name is generated for you. I think Thraing Hupoluper is a very nice name, but apparently there are 1,863 who had the name before you do.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
01/30/2005 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
#17
I think the number means that the Hupolupers first posted in 1864. Thraing should be proud to be part of the tradition.
Posted by: Matt ||
01/30/2005 17:31 Comments ||
Top||
#18
A couple of years ago a friend bought me as a gift the book "Atomised" by Michel Houellebeck (a European Novelist currently living in Ireland).
I have read about half through the book while I gradually felt an intense need to vomit.
The book is a fairly accurate description of the faithless, pointless, utterly materialistic, masturbating society Europe has become.
I could not bring myself to finish the book because it is so totally depressing.
It may , however, be mandatory reading material for anyone who wants to understand the spiritual abyss into which Europe has fallen.
Be warned though, it is not a very pleasant reading experience.
This European doesn't even know how to translate a word such as 'better' used as a noun. I can only translate it in the adjectival sense.
"I've always thought the difference between Euros and Americans is that we think of ourselves as citizens and they still think of themselves (if only subconsciously) as subjects."
I thought that was something that was typically used as the distinction between Americans and Brits. But I'm sure the proverb can be modified.
#24
Talk about your ultimate wingnut. How can the bleeding hearts in Madrid bitch about 72% of the Iraqis voting for their own creators of their own constitution?
Those people need to be swallowed up by a giant Whale and farted out its backside.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/30/2005 17:59 Comments ||
Top||
#25
And Tom, in regards to #2, you're always always amusing. European eurosceptics (mainly Brits) generally have the opposite argument:
"Ohmigod, it's a Constitution and that's so horrid because a Constitution is so very different from the treaties we had previously, and we don't need no steenking Constitution. Quick, quick, make it more like a treaty."
On the other half those people that only play with the pretense of having specific objections (mainly anti-European Americans) but in reality just either hate the entire continent or atleast the principle of the EU at its core, accuse the Constitution for not being Constitution-like enough.
Ofcourse thus they bring their arguments in opposition to those of the only eurosceptics that actually matter (the ones located in Europe and who oppose moving European Union having any Constitution at all). But idiocy is always self-negating that way.
To sum it up: If you want the European Constitution to become more like a Constitution, less like a treaty, then I agree wholeheartedly with you.
This European doesn't even know how to translate a word such as 'better' used as a noun. I can only translate it in the adjectival sense.
I'm glad to hear that, Aris.
Unfortunately, too many in Western Europe can't. It appears to me they still accept a "ruling class" which "knows better" in the form of their career politicians. The Phrench seem particularly bad about it, but they're not alone.
I don't remember the exact quote, but somebody in Austria said, when Arnold was elected Governor of California, that it was nice but he shouldn't be the governor, it should be left to the professional politicians.
Riiiiiight.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/30/2005 19:37 Comments ||
Top||
#27
"...he's having a bad day already."
"...what are you talking about?"
I'm talking about this article and especially the Madrid protest photo. These are the people with whom you are in union. Even though you are very liberal about all kinds of unions, that must be depressing.
Posted by: Tom ||
01/30/2005 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#28
These are the people with whom you are in union.
If by that you mean the European Union, we have similar and worse people in Greece, so I'd be in "union" with them regardless, unless I wanted to declare my flat a sovereign nation.
If by "in union" you mean "in agreement", then I'm quite sure that I've never argued against elections in Iraq.
#40
It was never planned. The most leftwing Greenie we have (so radical that he had to run without a secure Green list seat) proposed the Muslim holiday and was nearly laughed out of town by all parties (the Muslim organizations excepted of course). This article was written some time ago, the day when that proposition was made... that explains some of the bile. About every German found the idea nuts and it was of course buried.
Die WELT is, of course, the major traditional US and Israel friendly serious daily paper in Germany. I think it's too negative in some respects. The Eastern Europeans (and that would include the East Germans at that time), were no cowards when they faced down their commie governments in 1989. It's true that Ronald Reagan paved the way for Gorbachev's perestroijka, but lets not forget that the Stasi had already set up the camps for the peaceful demonstrators of 1989. Berlin could have lived a Tienanmen moment, with less luck. The demonstrators were well aware of that.
#41
TrueGermanAlly: The Stasi had already set them up? Where can I get more info about that? The more or less official line on the 'Chinese solution' was that the SED-bonzen balked because they couldn't be sure the troops would obey orders to shoot... and that Mielke gave up on it after the Leipzig demo where they were expecting 8,000 and 80,000 showed up. It is true that all the people participating in 1989 were very brave; nobody knew at the time that the commies wouldn't shoot back.
As for appeasement... the German Left is still sore at everyone for the failure of "die andere Republik". 1989 doesn't mean anything to them. The will of the people doesn't either. We have the same nuts here in Latin America. All they can see is their old and rotten Marxist dogmas, that tell them none of this should ever have happened.
Posted by: Hans Averdung ||
01/30/2005 22:50 Comments ||
Top||
It may not have been apparent on the surface, but Europe's recent commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was steeped in irony. Even while the Old World stirringly recalls the horrors of Hitler's death camps and vows never to forget the Nazi genocide of the Jews, it also embraces an increasingly -- and alarmingly -- antagonistic attitude toward the Jewish state that arose from the ashes of World War II.
As the Middle East conflict burns on, more and more Europeans are turning against Israel. A growing number subscribe to the belief that the impasse between the Israelis and the Palestinians is the wellspring of much of the world's ills today, and that the blame for all this lies squarely with Israel -- and by extension, with its staunchest ally, the United States. As President Bush seeks to find common ground with Europe in his second term, he might do well to acquaint himself more thoroughly with this reality. For as surely as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict divides Jews and Arabs, it also divides Europeans and Americans. If you're looking for root causes of the growing transatlantic split that go beyond the easy cliches about U.S. unilateralism, it's time to sit up and take notice.
Go to a dinner party in Paris, London or any other European capital and watch how things develop. The topic of conversation may be Iraq, it may be George Bush, it may be Islam, terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. However it starts out, you can be sure of where it will inevitably, and often irrationally, end -- with a dissection of the Middle East situation and a condemnation of Israeli actions in the occupied territories. I can't count how many times I've seen it. European sympathy for the Palestinians runs high, while hostility toward Israel is often palpable.
And the anger is reaching new -- and disturbing -- levels: A poll of 3,000 people published last month by Germany's University of Bielefeld showed more than 50 percent of respondents equating Israel's policies toward the Palestinians with Nazi treatment of the Jews. Sixty-eight percent of those surveyed specifically believed that Israel is waging a "war of extermination" against the Palestinian people.
Germany is not alone in these shocking sentiments. They have been expressed elsewhere, and often by prominent figures. In 2002, the Portuguese Nobel Prize-winning writer Jose Saramago declared, "What is happening in Palestine is a crime which we can put on the same plane as what happened at Auschwitz." In Israel just last month, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, the Irish winner of the 1976 Nobel Peace Prize, compared the country's suspected nuclear weapons to Auschwitz, calling them "gas chambers perfected."
Moreover, in a Eurobarometer poll by the European Union in November 2003, a majority of Europeans named Israel as the greatest threat to world peace. Overall, 59 percent of Europeans put Israel in the top spot, ahead of such countries as Iran and North Korea. In the Netherlands, that figure rose to 74 percent.
Perceptions of Israel in the United States, meanwhile, contrast sharply. A poll by the Marttila Communications Group taken in December 2003 for the Anti-Defamation League had Americans putting Israel in 10th place on a list of countries threatening world peace, just ahead of the United States itself.
What accounts for this transatlantic values gap?
Part of the explanation is that, despite all the Holocaust commemorations, the memory of that event really does appear to be fading in Europe. Increasing numbers of younger Europeans have no real sense of what the Nazis did. In Britain, Prince Harry isn't the only one who's oblivious to the realities of Nazi tyranny. A BBC poll of 4,000 people taken late last year, in the run-up to Holocaust Remembrance Day last Thursday, showed that, amazingly, 45 percent of all Britons and 60 percent of those under 35 years of age had never heard of Auschwitz -- the Nazi death camp in southern Poland where about 1.5 million Jews were murdered during World War II. Such ignorance compounds anti-Israeli feelings; for those who have no understanding of the Holocaust, Israel exists and acts in a historical vacuum.
This faltering awareness of the most vivid example of racist mass murder in the 20th century is accompanied by enduring anti-Semitism. A poll in Italy last year, for example, by the Eurispes research institute showed 34 percent of respondents agreeing strongly or to some extent with the view that "Jews secretly control financial and economic power as well as the media." The Eurobarometer survey quoted above also showed 40 percent of respondents across Europe believing that Jews had a "particular relationship to money," with more than a third expressing concern that Jews were "playing the victim because of the Holocaust."
Yet while the persistence of anti-Semitism is undeniable, it's not likely to be the chief explanation for European hostility to Israel. After all, surveys show that some anti-Semitic attitudes persist in the United States as well, but they don't translate into visceral animosity toward the Jewish state. Instead, the intense antagonism toward Israel appears to be a subset of the wider European hostility, emanating mainly from the left, toward the United States. It's unlikely to be a coincidence that the 2003 Eurobarometer survey put the United States just behind Israel as the greatest danger to world peace, on a par with Iran and North Korea.
Many European intellectuals see Israel, perhaps rightly, as one of the central pillars of U.S. hegemony in the modern world. European leftists implacably opposed to America are implacably opposed to Israel as well, and for exactly the same reasons. Over dinner in Berlin not long ago, a Frenchwoman told me emphatically that Israel was "America's policeman in the Middle East." Her companion, nodding in furious agreement, insisted that the two countries are partners in a "new imperialism," leading the world inexorably into war.
In the contorted universe of the chattering classes, Israel is at once America's servant and the tail that wags the dog -- doing America's bidding while forcing it into madcap adventures such as Iraq. As Peter Preston, the former editor of Britain's Guardian newspaper, put it in an op-ed last October, bemoaning both U.S. political parties' alleged servility toward Israel: "Republican policy is an empty vessel drifting off Tel Aviv, and the Democratic alternative has just as little stored in its hold."
The left-leaning antipathy toward Israel is moreover buttressed by deeper and wider pathologies in Europe's collective memory, particularly in our overriding sense of guilt about the past, a guilt that springs from the great 20th-century traumas of war and imperialism. The first has made Europeans, especially continentals, overwhelmingly pacifistic: In the German Marshall Fund's 2004 Transatlantic Trends survey, only 31 percent of Germans and 33 percent of the French could bring themselves to agree with the ostensibly tame proposition that "Under some conditions, war is necessary to obtain justice." Such attitudes do not mesh well with television pictures of Israeli helicopter gunships firing missiles at militant targets in the crowded Gaza Strip, whatever the justification for Israel's actions.
Europe is also awash in post-imperial guilt, and I frequently get the sense that Israel's claim to a piece of land in the Middle East revives guilt-inducing memories, among my English countrymen and others, of white Europeans carving up the Third World and subjugating "lesser peoples" in the 19th century. While the disturbing view that there's an equivalence between Nazi Germany and modern Israel is a relatively new development, another view equating Israel with apartheid South Africa and referring to Palestinians herded into "Bantustans" has been around for decades.
Mixed with the supercharged ideological hostility of the European left, the demons of the continent's past can make for an intoxicating cocktail of anti-Israeli sentiment There is undoubtedly room for criticism of Israel and its policies in the Middle East, but reasoned criticism appears to be giving way to emotional and irrational antipathy that is coloring the wider debate. And as that sentiment grows, American support for the Jewish state will continue to scratch raw nerves in the Old World.
There is much, of course, that the United States should be doing to improve its relationship with Europe. But repairing transatlantic relations is a two-way process. Americans should now be aware that on one crucial issue, at least, it is Europe, and not America, that needs to clean up its act.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/30/2005 12:22:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
I have been trying to post a few articles and they've been going into the void. What am I doing wrong???
OT: Soros said this, cos I can't post the article:
Soros Says Greenspan Lost Credibility Helping Bush (Update1)
...While China loosening its decade-old peg of the renminbi to the dollar would ease pressure on Europe, ``probably it's best not to push China because it might hurt their national pride,'' he said....
Soros said his spending to defeat Bush was not an ``investment gone bad because when you stand up for principles you have to do it whether you win or lose.'' He said he now believes Democratic presidential nominee Kerry ``did not, actually, offer a credible and coherent alternative.''
Soros said he would remain active in American politics, although he hasn't decided in what form.
#3
A poll by the Americans putting Israel in 10th place on a list of countries threatening world peace, just ahead of the United States itself.
I would be rather sceptical of poll results where Americans viewed their own country as a #11 "threat" to world peace. Sheesh. Anyways, there were only 1200 people polled, so not a large sampling.
However, I'd say it is a safe bet that Americans' views of Israel would be comparable to Europeans if GWB antagonizes Iran. Iran is clearly viewed as Israel's threat not ours.
Americans have already done the sacrifice of conscripted American sons for a foreign country per the Vietnam War - bad memories. And the ME country as purveyor of WMD against America has been used recently with embaressing revelations about our intelligence gathering.
So let's hope that the Iran situation cools off so Israel's #10 position as a threat to peace stays the same.
#5
Soros said his spending to defeat Bush was not an ``investment gone bad because when you stand up for principles you have to do it whether you win or lose.''
Pretty damned easy to say when one has money to burn.
#6
The revolution, the 444 day hostage crisis, the 200+ marines killed in beirut because of Iranian-backed terrorist, and they are the core of training and financing terrorist in the Middle East even now. It just happens to be that, Israel is constantly fighting terrorist supported from Iran, but it's the US and World's problem too, especially if they aquire Nukes.
#7
Europeans had to suppress their natural impulses for (almost) 60 years --- since Nazis made anti-semitism unfashionable. Now, when they've found an alternate rationale for judeophobia, the Europeans are just making up for lost time.
#8
This article misses two important reasons for the difference between US and European attitudes toward Israel:
1) The USA has an influential Jewish community that energetically and effectively explains Israel's postions and actions in public discussions.
2) The USA and its citizens have been attacked and targeted by Moslem terrorists many times over the past several decades.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
01/30/2005 9:06 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Our own left espouses the same views as this article. It just seems overwhelming to me, the ignorance and self-righteousness that goes behind those on the left (and extreme far right), who wish to blame Israel.
Start any discussion about anything and they will always bring it back to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.
If you ask me, it's all marketing. Someone has done a GREAT job of marketing the Palestinian conflict - to the point where all other massacres, genocides, starvations are simply ignored - not because they don't care, but because they don't really know about them.
If during a rant about Israel, you ask someone on the left why they care so much more about the numerically fewer Palestinian deaths (usually terrorists) than the other civilian mass genocides of the day - such as Congo, Sudan, Zimbabwe, mass starvation in Korea, etc. etc. they get incredulous because they don't even know about them. And it's actually kind of fun to bring it up - cause they get really defensive because they can't argue what they don't know about - it strips them of their self-righteous I'm smarter than you because I understand the nuance that you don't grasp and they usually just will get huffy and walk off.
Educating about the Holocaust is important - but it does nothing to suppress the beliefs by this crowd, who have a disconnect between the "Jews" of Nazi Germany and the "Israeli's in Israel". Plus, as I've said before, and believe strongly, educating the holocaust in a vacuum without the context of the multiple other ethic cleansing genocides - reinforces Hitler's "Jews are bad, Jews to blame" propaganda to a whole new generation...many will reject it - but many will believe.
Sigh. I don't have any answers - but it's easy to see that, as in Hitler's time, it is the relentless propaganda in the media that is to blame for fanning the flames of anti-Semitism. CNN, AP, BBC, NPR have all been marketing the Palestinian crisis as "Jews bad" Palestinians good" for decades. IMHO that's where the battle against anti-Semitism needs to be fought - not in the history books - but in exposing the reasons why the MSM fails to put their focus on anything except The Plight of the Palestinians Against the Evil Jews.TM
#10
Re #8: We do have a significant Jewist population. The Europeans, under the wise (sarcasm here if you're missing it)guidance of the Germans, solved that problem. Growing up in the midwest, where there was hardly a black person to be seen, the racism against them was rampant and virulent. Same scenario. It's easy and cheap to be bigoted against people who aren't around to do anything about it. Same reason for supporting the paleos. Lots of moslems in Europe. Not wise to piss them off, since most of them appear to be crazy.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
01/30/2005 9:29 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Let's put it this way; if Israel and the Jews didn't exist, her enemies would be forced to invent one.
If Israel disappeared tomorrow, all that hatred would find another outlet. It has *nothing* to do with Israel. It only has to do with hate...and envy.
#17
Perhaps the Left supporting tyrannies in preference to democracies needs no explanation. Otherwise, I think Europe sees its future in the Arab-Israli conflict and it is in denial. 'We are not nasty Jews and therefore this is not in our future.'
(2005-01-30) -- News reports of terrorist bombings in Iraq were marred Sunday by shocking graphic images of Iraqi "insurgents" voting by the millions in their first free democratic election.
Despite reporters' hopes that a well-orchestrated barrage of mortar attacks and suicide bombings would put down the so-called 'freedom insurgency', hastily-formed battalions of rebels swarmed polling places to cast their ballots -- shattering the status quo and striking fear into the hearts of the leaders of the existing terror regime.
Hopes for a return to the stability of tyranny waned as rank upon rank of Iraqi men and women filed out of precinct stations, each armed with the distinctive mark of the new freedom guerrillas -- an ink-stained index finger, which one former Ba'athist called "the evidence of their betrayal of 50 years of Iraqi tradition."
Journalists struggled to put a positive spin on the day's events, but the video images of tyranny's traitors choosing a future of freedom overwhelmed the official story of bloodshed and mayhem.
#3
Hey yall, this may be Scrappleface, but this is no joke.
Another website I hang out on has a few people who go trolling on DU and the mood reported over there is nothing short of highly refined psychosis.
One of the quoted posts talks about how they hope that the Iraqis decide to revolt against whatever govnerment is elected, because it just has to be a trick by Bush to get at the OIL!!!
It my considered opinion that this skeleton in the closet of the Democratic party will end up fomenting revolution in the US. They have simply forgotten that it is not they who have all the guns . . .
Posted by: Jame Retief ||
01/30/2005 17:17 Comments ||
Top||
#4
this may be Scrappleface, but this is no joke.
I have totally lost the ability to distinguish between ScrappleFace posts and news from 'legitimate' sources like Rooters and the Beeb without looking at the link address. I don't know whether to blame Scott Ott or the rest of the nutjobs on this planet for this sorry state of affairs.
As for the Iraqi election, any bets on who will be the first to claim the turnout was much, much higher when Saddam was the only candidate?
I posted this over at Winds of Change and feel it is so important it is worth risking Fred's wrath (or veto) with the crosslink:
This is the most encouraging thing I've heard about the Iraqi elections - not just the high turnout, but this account by Mohammed and Oscar at Iraq the Model:
The first thing we saw this morning on our way to the voting center was a convoy of the Iraqi army vehicles patrolling the street, the soldiers were cheering the people marching towards their voting centers then one of the soldiers chanted "vote for Allawi" less than a hundred meters, the convoy stopped and the captain in charge yelled at the soldier who did that and said:
"You're a member of the military institution and you have absolutely no right to support any political entity or interfere with the people's choice. This is Iraq's army, not Allawi's".
This was a good sign indeed and the young officer's statement was met by applause from the people on the street.
'Democracy' (as in 'everyone can vote') is not a magic bullet. Voters who are not informed or not committed to a whole set of principles can impose a tyranny of the masses, can be manipulated .... but a mature understanding of representative government under law -- THAT is the heart of freedom.
UPDATE: I should add that one of the great contributions of the U.S. Military Academy is that it produced, from its founding in 1802, an officer corps whose loyalty was to the country as a whole and to the Constitution rather than to individual states, religions or ethic orgins. That loyalty was deeply tested during the Civil War and one of the most moving places at West Point is the Reconciliation Walk which documents how those who fought on both sides extended forgiveness and a commitment to national unity in the years afterwards.
The non-political nature of our military -- which is deeply engrained in regulations and culture both -- has been a key element in the success of our political system.
Posted by: Robin Burk ||
01/30/2005 11:00:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is truly a great day, and those officer's words a cause for much hope. Let's pray the Iraqi people can hold it together-- and that we have the stamina and courage to help them do it in the years ahead.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
01/30/2005 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I should add that one of the great contributions of the U.S. Military Academy is that it produced, from its founding in 1802, an officer corps whose loyalty was to the country as a whole and to the Constitution rather than to individual states, religions or ethic orgins
#3
One can't help be moved by the Iraqi elections. These folks, in many cases, walked great distances to vote under great threat. We, in the U.S., should be very proud of the role our military has played in bringing about movement towards democracy in a part of the world that has long needed the light of democracy.
Well, there were a few military achievements by its grads, too .....
But yes, until I got there I never quite realized how important West Point was in the development of the country as a unified republic. Pretty amazing, when you think about it ... certainly the world experience hadn't gone that way before and in most places still doesn't.
Posted by: Robin Burk ||
01/30/2005 16:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
It's been a goose-bumps kinda day, and this article started them afresh!!
The bravery of the Iraqi people in voting dwarfs the cowardice of the terrorists who threatened them!!
And now 8,000,000 of them have a stained finger that represents a badge of courage and honor. There are lots of bumps in the road ahead, but they took a good first step today!
#1
"The IMF noted in November that the Iraqi economy is already outperforming all its Arab neighbors." This statement is truly the death knell of Mafias and gangs, and they know it. Their greatest fear is prosperity, because with prosperity, the trouble-makers not only lose any active support, they lose passive support, and ordinary citizens become antagonistic to them.
Iowahawk Guest Commentary by Senator Edward M. Kennedy
Like all Americans, I had high hopes for the future of the Oldsmobile and its passengers, as we struggle against the onrushing water and its poorly-designed shoulder belts. But as claustrophobia sets in we must begin to sober up and face the truth: hope is no longer an option.
It is time for us to recognize that our continued presence in this volatile region is a hinderance to the Oldsmobile and its people. Rather than helping the situation we are further weighing down the Oldsmobile, causing it to sink faster and faster into the quagmire of Chappaquidick Bay, creating a dangerous situation for both ourselves as well as its passengers who are desperately seeking an air pocket in which to start a better life.
That is why I believe we have reached the point where we must take a deep breath and immediately depart the Oldsmobile. We must seek through the watery darkness and release the belt latch of madness that has kept us here, and reach out for a sane and honorable window crank.
Obviously there will be passengers in the Oldsmobile who do not want us to leave, and will likely try to grasp and grab at our feet as we depart. While we wish them success, it is critical that these passengers quickly learn independence and self-determination. The most effective way to teach them is through example, and with a vigorous kick-off. Let us hope they will cherish our shoes as a lasting legacy of our commitment to liberty.
And, after we return to the safety of the American shore and phone our lawyer, we must begin to ask the hard questions. How did we get here? The sad answer is that we were sold a lie by Gene Quinlan of Hyannisport Oldsmobile-Buick-GMC. We were told that this Oldsmobile had the Delta 88 Royale option package with 6-way electric seats. We were told that they were sold out of the new '69 Toronado. We were given a choice of a burgundy vinyl roof, but never given an exit strategy. We were told, repeatedly, that the Oldsmobile was waterproof and had an automatic pilot system. In short, Gene Quinlan sold us a lie.
There will be ample time for us to reflect on the mistakes and lies of the Oldsmobile misadventure, and hold those who were responsible to account. But that is for another day. Now we must focus our energy on getting out before it is too late.
Come home, America. Come home.
Posted by: .com ||
01/30/2005 5:08:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That was crude, cruel and way over-the-top. I wish I could write like that.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
with the following caption: "People shout slogans during a protest in central Madrid January 30, 2005. Marchers were protesting Iraq holding national elections under what they called U.S occupation. At least 10 suicide attacks targeted polling stations and voters on Sunday, but Iraqis still voted in large numbers. REUTERS/Susana Vera," I dug out a translation of article, sent to me by e-mail, titled: EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE written by Matthias Döpfner, Chief Executive of German publisher Axel Springer AG, in the daily WELT.
Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us. Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.
How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany. I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time".
Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed. In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China. On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.
For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything. While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive". These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.
