Giant turd Michael Moore must be so happy — not only is "Fahrenheit 9/11" the favorite movie of Hezbollah and little Jimmy Carter, he's given Osama bin Laden new ideas, too! Moore was the first person to popularize the clever "My Pet Goat" critique, which criticizes President Bush for continuing to read to kids after he was informed of the World Trade Center attacks. Apparently, he was supposed to leap up, rip off his clothes, and fly through the air to stop the other hijacked planes, instead of waiting for the Secret Service to arrange an emergency trip to the airport.
Senator Kerry (D-Fallujah), running on behalf of angry liberals and jihadists everywhere, must be even happier. For most of the last year, he and the Democrats have been saying that President Bush has made America less safe because we've made the international terrorists angry at us, whereas if we hadn't invaded Iraq (and, many said, Afghanistan), the terrorists would have started making rugs or driving a cab or whatever it is that terrorists do when they switch careers.
Well, it turns out that Osama believes the same thing, and as a bona fide international terrorist, he ought to know. "Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe," he says to the American people. In other words: act like Spain, back away from the war on terror, and we won't hurt you again.
We didn't find difficulty dealing with Bush [the elder] and his administration due to the similarity of his regime and the regims in our countries....Here he is being influenced by these regimes, Royal and military. And was feeling jealous they were staying for decades in power stealing the nations finances without anybody overseeing them. So he transferred the oppression of freedom and tyranny to his son and they call it the Patriot Law to fight terrorism. He was bright in putting his sons as governors in states and he didn't forget to transfer his experience from the rulers of our region to Florida to falsify elections to benefit from it in critical times.
Chris Core, a host on our local station WMAL (and a Catholic convert), said he was shocked that Osama seemed to be cribbing from the giant turd's movie. (If you doubt that he could get a hold of "F9/11," know that in the Mideast you can get any movie on a pirated DVD for about $5). I'll give Moore some credit: he isn't smart, but he is crafty. He's fooled a lot of people into thinking that his cheap shots are arguments, and now even a megalomaniacal mass murderer has endorsed his views. Now that's something to put on a résumé!
I'm sure this will be widely debated in the next few days, but I think Osama, even though he doesn't say it explicitly, has endorsed Kerry for president. He agrees with Kerry's approach to national security, which boils down to playing nice with people who want to slit our throats. There is nothing al Qaeda wants more than for us to "leave them alone," free to destabilize and then subvert Middle Eastern governments until they can set up gangster states fueled by oil money, and then realize their fondest dream: completing the Final Solution.
Maybe this is one endorsement that Kerry should refuse.
Moore's a phony, but calling him a giant turd is a bit too much.
I think "little s--t" is more appropriate.
Maybe this is one endorsement that Kerry should refuse.
I don't know: Osama is the most famous person who has endorsed Kerry so far, excepting perhaps Bill Clinton, and Kerry can use all the help he can get.
RC,
Well, Moore is a bit big-boned, so giant turd does sorta fit.
While I agree with you in general, I still donīt think itīs fair to say that Spain gave into terrorism, etc. Thatīs a pretty simplistic statement, given that it doesnīt take into account that the Aznar government had around 90% of the people against it, with respect to the War in Iraq. While the Aznar govt was seen winning the March elections, they were losing ground, and the elections were actually going to be quite close. What triggered the change, wasnīt that people voted in favor of Zapatero. Rather, the perception that the Aznar govt was also seen as being arrogant and out-of-touch was only highlighted by his govtīs attempts to say the M-11 attacks were the fruit of domestic terrorism. When it came out that wasnīt what happened, he was discredited...and then the people threw a fit. There are other instances that I could use to show the point, but thatīs probably room for another post. The main point though, is that what brought Aznar down wasnīt Al Qaida, or something similar - as is often touted in US press - but it was that the Aznar govt was seen as lying about the attacks for political gain. And that was unforgivable in the eyes of many Spanish voters ... many who are know probably wondering what they did, since itīs brought in Zapatero and his govt and attacks on the CHurch.
Paz
Robert Duncan
I would love to think you're right, Robert -- and I concede that you may well be, and that I'm just interpreting the facts as I see them. But to go back even further in your chain of events: why did 90% of the Spanish population oppose having their troops in Iraq? The Spaniards (who were moving in as I was leaving the Mideast) were sent as peacekeepers, not as war-fighters. True, they ended up in combat on several occasions, but that was in self-defense.
I would suggest that one reason for the Spanish opposition is rank cowardice. They have a growing North African population, and since the birthrate in Spain is 1.2 children per woman, eventually there will be more African Muslims than Spanish Catholics on the Iberian peninsula. Spain can't afford to anger Muslims, because one day the Muslims will be their masters.
To return to my original point: a branch of al Qaeda issued a statement before the elections, saying that if Spain would withdraw their troops, they wouldn't get bombed anymore. That's what Spain did, and their cowardice encouraged the beheadings of others in Iraq, with a view toward coercing other coalition partners from withdrawing. Luckily, Italians, Brits, and Koreans are made from sterner stuff.
Eric,
Greetings,
If you will allow me a couple of (long) points, which Iīll mention - and are tainted - from my living in Spain for so long, and for being a journalist.
Personally, I think that figures donīt match up to the general perception - often pushed in the press - that there is a growing Muslim population in Spain (yes, itīs growing, but not at rates that some alarmist would suggest). I wrote on this last year for the WSJ, and the latest figures seem to still be more or less in line with those figures (of course, itīs still to be seen if this will change under the current Socialist govt).
The majority of Spainīs immigrants nowadays are Latin Americans and Eastern Europeans. Out of a population of 40-plus million people, there are only around 600,000 Muslims - and some of those Muslims are Spaniards (if somebody tells you there are a million Muslim immigrants, be very suspect of those numbers). Immigration controls from northern Africa are very tight, and about the only way they can arrive is via illegal entry across the Gibraltar Strait (thatīs another post). There are around 1.6 million immigrants with papers, with a total of around 3 million immigrants in Spain (thatīs a pretty accurate number since even illegal immigrants register with City Hall to receive social health care, schooling, etc). The actual percentage of North Africans out of the entire immigrant pool has dropped drastically, and it is a close call if there are more Moroccans or more Ecuadoreans in Spain now (for years, Ecuadoreans didnīt need a visa to enter Spain). This actually brought protests from the Moroccan immigrants that the former PP govt was unofficially seeking to allow "Catholic" immigrants easy entry into Spain, to keep out the Muslims (personally, I do think there was some truth to the charges).
Incidentally, I think there are now more Evangelicals (Latin American?) in Spain than there are Muslims!
With respect to the birthrate, immigrants in general - not just Muslims from North Africa - have larger families than the average 1.2 Spanish birthrate - my own American-Peruvian family is a good example :)
Moving on: Iīd argue that itīs not out of cowardice Spainīs approach to Iraq, but to a general feeling in Spain against any military conflict - and possibly this is a result of the Spanish Civil War, which is still fairly recent in societyīs mind (perhaps this is something similar to that of Japanīs current mentality toward military interventions?). For all his criticisms, there are many people who actually argue that at least Franco even kept Spain out of WWII - I mention this not as a historical fact, but as a sentiment that is often mentioned.
But this appearance should not be taken as being in favor of isolationism either. I find it curious the number of Spaniards that support social works, i.e. NGOīs, etc., not to mention that Spain is the leading country with Catholic missionaries.
That said, people forget that Spain is a Left-Center country - which also brought on the Civil War(?) - and that PM Aznar actually came to power as a result of a protest vote - a vote not against the Center-Left Socialist political platform, but against corruption in the very popular Felipe Gonzalez Socialist government. Incidentally, the Spanish markets actually dropped when it became known that the PP won elections, because the Spanish Socialists are very pro-business, and pro-EU. Thatīs an important point as well, since the current Socialist govt is once again strengthening ties with France (and there are several business deals even with Russia in the pipeline).
All to once again stress, that the actual vote against the PP last March wasnīt so much a vote in favor of "supporting" Al Qaida, or out of cowardice - but it was a vote meant to punish an unpopular govt.
In a nutshell, the PP govt was thought to have lied to the people, by claiming the attacks were the result of ETA. It was later shown that the PP govt had known of the Al Qaida relationship to the M-11 attacks, and instead kept saying that it was the work of ETA.
And I can tell you, that as an ombudsman for the foreign press in Spain, many journalists actually recieved phone calls pressuring them to not write on links to Al Qaida, but to instead push the line that the attacks were the work of ETA.
Why was this so important? Part of the PP govtīs strength was based on its war against ETA - PM Aznar barely escaped alive from a car bomb planted by ETA. In other words, the PP govtīs response to the M-11 attacks was seen as seeking to use the attacks for political gain in a close election...and in the end, when the distortions came to light - the public exploded and demanded a change in govt (a govt that even though it was unpopular the people were still willing to support in general). This is what forced the people to vote for a change, and not pressure from Al Qaida.
For me, I think this reaction is also linked to the Spanish idea of "honor."
I cannot stress enough how the PP govt was seen as arrogant, and out of touch with the society...unfortunately, the current Socialist govt is also running that risk by ramrodding through legislation that serves minority interests over that of the majority, and are anti-family.
To end this long comment (my apologies), are we saying the same thing? Perhaps, but I think there are subtle things that possibly need explaining a bit better the reasoning behind the Spanish psyche with respect to military interventions in general.
Finally, please understand my comments here are in no way meant as an attack on your service to our country. They are merely comments that I hope round out a bit more this complicated subject.
Paz
Robert Duncan
I didn't interpret your comments as an attack of any kind, Robert, and I appreciate your obviously well-thought-out responses. (The numbers about immigration and the Muslim population were fascinating, and I'll tuck them away for future use.) I wish I had the time to do them justice with a more detailed response myself.
As I said, I am not pretending to be an expert on Spanish affairs, and you certainly qualify as one; I could challenge a fact or two, but you clearly have the advantage in experience and subject knowledge.
However, I still think cowardice was there in the mix. One of my little tropes is that Socialism is less an ideology than a suicide pact. The idea originated, I think, with the late James Burnham, but the gist is that socialism represents an abandonment of what has made the West great (Christianity foremost, but also individual liberty, including economic freedom.) It is based on the falsehood that there is a way to plan one's way out of life's miseries, and that the instrument of that planning is the state. Since socialism is failing at the nation-state level, Western Europe wants to salvage it with the EU.
Curiously, although a large part of the EU's population wants their culture to commit suicide, they do not themselves actually want to die. They want to grow old with their 1.2 children, having the state pamper them until their natural death. Having bombs explode in crowded places will interfere with that dream, so they will give in to the terrorists if they promise not to harm them.
Plus, there were all the Spaniards in the news accounts that said after the election, "Good, maybe the terrorists will leave us alone now."
Curiously, although a large part of the EU's population wants their culture to commit suicide, they do not themselves actually want to die. They want to grow old with their 1.2 children, having the state pamper them until their natural death.
Eric, see Dutch euthanasia policy.
I am deeply offended that you would dare compare a giant turd to Michael Moore.
Is there no limit?!?!?!?!?!
You're right. I apologize to all kinds of excrement everywhere for comparing you to Michael Moore.