Sunday, April 18, 2004
A Terrorist, is a Terrorist...Unless it's Not
U.S. "gravely concerned" about Mideast stability
Hamas Leader Killed in Israeli Strike
Above are two news stories covering the attack on the Hamas leader. I provide them for those of you who may not know about the attack, or the international reaction.
The attack on the Hamas leader came last night. It was the latest of many pinpoint attacks on terrorist leaders by the IDF. The Israelies claim this was not a retaliatory strike; it is but one more example of their “war on terror. After the strike came, there was the predictable outcry on the Muslim street for Jewish blood. And also, there came the international dismay at this Israeli “provocation”. The response to this strike by the international community is incredible. Let’s write off the Europeans for a bit and focus on the good ole USA. Our lovely presidential administration is asking both sides to “show restraint” and for the Israelies to be mindful of the “consequences of their actions.”
Last look at this in a little bit of context. Ok, we get attacked by someone on 911. Our government says it is Al-Qaeda and ole Osama bin Laden. So we strike out, and basically carpet-bomb Afghanistan for a few months. Then, in furtherance of GW’s “War on Terra”, our troops invade Iraq. Now I must ask, did we show restraint? Did the Israelies warn us to be mindful of the consequences of our actions? Now, we claimed we were acting in self defense, and most everyone bought it and hasn’t been complaining horribly.
I know there’s much criticism of the situation in Iraq. I’m a big critic of that mess as well. However, when we shredded Uday and Qusay, I don’t remember the British issued a statement anything like the following, which was issued in response to the latest attacks on Hamas:
"The British government has made it repeatedly clear that so-called targeted assassinations of this kind are unlawful, unjustified and counterproductive,"
Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t see any talk like that. And we certainly weren’t acting with restraint, neither in Afghanistan or Iraq.
But now, we are so wary of hurting the feelings of Yasser Arafat, and Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. This is not necessarily a list of our great friends. Buses are blown up, and we ask for restraint. Cafes full of innocent men women and children are exploded into so many flesh piles and concrete bits, and we ask for consideration of consequences when the ATTACKED decide to attack? As most of you know, I despise hypocrisy in all forms. It is my core ideological stand. And this sickens me.
I simply wish our leaders would just come out and say
“Hey, you know, we were wrong. A terrorist isn’t necessarily a terrorist, only when we say it is. You can just go blow up people because they strap bombs to children and send them into your land while holding the child’s family at gunpoint. Only we can decide who terrorists are and when and where to attack”
That’s all I’m asking for, just a little honesty. Oh wait…I forgot…it’s a campaign year…never mind…..
|
U.S. "gravely concerned" about Mideast stability
Hamas Leader Killed in Israeli Strike
Above are two news stories covering the attack on the Hamas leader. I provide them for those of you who may not know about the attack, or the international reaction.
The attack on the Hamas leader came last night. It was the latest of many pinpoint attacks on terrorist leaders by the IDF. The Israelies claim this was not a retaliatory strike; it is but one more example of their “war on terror. After the strike came, there was the predictable outcry on the Muslim street for Jewish blood. And also, there came the international dismay at this Israeli “provocation”. The response to this strike by the international community is incredible. Let’s write off the Europeans for a bit and focus on the good ole USA. Our lovely presidential administration is asking both sides to “show restraint” and for the Israelies to be mindful of the “consequences of their actions.”
Last look at this in a little bit of context. Ok, we get attacked by someone on 911. Our government says it is Al-Qaeda and ole Osama bin Laden. So we strike out, and basically carpet-bomb Afghanistan for a few months. Then, in furtherance of GW’s “War on Terra”, our troops invade Iraq. Now I must ask, did we show restraint? Did the Israelies warn us to be mindful of the consequences of our actions? Now, we claimed we were acting in self defense, and most everyone bought it and hasn’t been complaining horribly.
I know there’s much criticism of the situation in Iraq. I’m a big critic of that mess as well. However, when we shredded Uday and Qusay, I don’t remember the British issued a statement anything like the following, which was issued in response to the latest attacks on Hamas:
"The British government has made it repeatedly clear that so-called targeted assassinations of this kind are unlawful, unjustified and counterproductive,"
Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t see any talk like that. And we certainly weren’t acting with restraint, neither in Afghanistan or Iraq.
But now, we are so wary of hurting the feelings of Yasser Arafat, and Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. This is not necessarily a list of our great friends. Buses are blown up, and we ask for restraint. Cafes full of innocent men women and children are exploded into so many flesh piles and concrete bits, and we ask for consideration of consequences when the ATTACKED decide to attack? As most of you know, I despise hypocrisy in all forms. It is my core ideological stand. And this sickens me.
I simply wish our leaders would just come out and say
“Hey, you know, we were wrong. A terrorist isn’t necessarily a terrorist, only when we say it is. You can just go blow up people because they strap bombs to children and send them into your land while holding the child’s family at gunpoint. Only we can decide who terrorists are and when and where to attack”
That’s all I’m asking for, just a little honesty. Oh wait…I forgot…it’s a campaign year…never mind…..
|
Comments:
Post a Comment
