Posted on 03/12/2006 7:51:11 PM PST by bayourant
Europeans like to brutally slaughter animals too.
Lol, puleeeese Howlin...
YOU of ALL people want to talk about "ilk"??
You're the sheriff of your own FR posse.
Btw, 'Do not dub me shapka broham' has always been a gentleman and a well-informed independent thinker without an "ilk" as you imply.
Her final book-which has already been published overseas-is entitled "The Apocalypse," and it has a brief coda, Orianna Fallaci Interviews Herself.
I can't wait till they publish an English-language version.
Hopefully sooner rather than later.
I think your views on Americans being wary of Islam refelct your usual moderate to liberal stance on race issues I've come to know but if you found a poll that supported your views you would use it.
Btw, I supported the port deal as a tit for tat with the UAE for favors done....reluctantly.
But I resented W's race baiting....same as I resented his gender baiting on Harriet even though I supported him twice, marched for him a number of times with photo proof here on FR...I think he succumbs to PC race-religion-ethnicity kneejerkedness when it suits him....not like Clinton but still unseemly
and being distantly of Maronite DNA and having been married to and having two daughters with a Maronite Braslian, I fell I have the right to criticize Muslim Arabs all I want.
Is that ok with you?
Not that I particularly advocate this, but during WWII, Japanese citizens were interred in camps. I always thought it was extreme, until recently. I still have qualms about measures such as these, but do we sit and wait until the loons get the signal to detonate?
Who knows how many American Muslims sat and smirked, never mind passing out sweets and yodeling like dying goats?
Me? I just watch my environment. Nothing to see up here, yet...
Holy crap! Has this been posted here as its own thread yet? People need to be pinged. This is the most outrageous example of PC asskissing yet! Bloomberg and the NYPD are tools : (
You may have mistaken "W"'s quite natural reaction to the bigotry for "gender baiting". He pulled his punches ~ like it's been so long since we saw such raw and savage religious hatred that it could be he really didn't know how to answer.
Anyway, that's for a different time.
Regarding what you take to be "moderate to liberal" views on race, I'd suggest I have quite "rabid" views on race ~ rather along the lines of Dan Inoue's when he volunteered to take another Senator outside the Capitol Building and beat him to death with his own arm.
There's really no other way to deal with it you know (and I'm not referring to beating anybody to death, but you have to stand firm in the face of it every single time you run into it.)
I almost forgot -- Dubya DID gender-bait regarding Harriet as well as the recent race-baiting regarding the UAE.
His using CentCom Gen. Abizaid recently ("Arab-Muslim bashing") as a surrogate was especially embarrassingly egregious imo.
pardon me but W and Gillespie (his minion) and Laura all gender baited during Harrietgate.
you and I have divergent views on all identity based cultural issues and both been here a while....you longer than me granted
that's not surprising....I have yet to meet a former member of the WLAT BRIGADE that doesn't have socially liberal views beyond Dixie bashing....
You sound eerily like Poobah sometimes....or OPH....on this stuff...do you miss them?..and Wlat?
that you survive speaks highly of you.....you post on other issues where I agree heartily and have been to commend you
we are both probably products or who, what and where we are...you're older too are you not?
night night
;>)
There are lots of things we could do and say if we were not strangling in the death grip of political correctness.
Careful here... when you say "rules" you are implying (however subtly) that Abazaid has violated a "rule".
Look, you are one of the few people on FreeRepublic who demands a close adherence to fact over speculation. In my experience reading your posts, you are clearly someone who avoids throwing out bold statements that are not well supported by factual evidence. But on this thread alone, you have made the following statements regarding Abizaid's statements...
"It wasn't an accident. And it wasn't spontaneous.
It was ordered and cleared from the top."
"Are you assuming a CentCom chief -- Gen. John Abizaid -- is going to make such a controversial statement without clearance from his CiC?"
"We do know Abizaid's timely comments were not a coincidence, nor was he reprimanded because he was obviously given a green light."
"I concur with you that he should have known better than to step into this political fray -- especially as a military commander -- but the WH was THAT desperate to put him in that awkward position, which I deemed patheticly exploitive of Abizaid, AND the American people.
"I'm sure the CiC gave Abizaid the courtesy of first asking how he felt about giving his opinion in public.
The ploy worked to absolute imperfection.
Abizaid distorted reality, and the President used his commanding General at the expense of compromising on BOTH their respective integrity."
"As an Arab-American and CentCom General, Abizaid was perfect for what I saw as a voluntary "mission" straight from the top."
Could you explain what your factual evidence is to support your repeated insistence that Abizaid was doing Whitehouse directed PR work here. Or is this just speculation made despite your admitted lack of familiarity with the military? Did the Whitehouse also prompt the mainstream media reporters to ask Abizaid what his opinion was regarded the Dubai Port deal? If so, since when has the Whitehouse gained such control over the MSM? Also, you may be interested to note that Gen Pace made very similar comments today in Baltimore.
It's Bloomie's.
That guy is a such a friggin' clueless Boston yob.
"Free speech" my a**.
Grr...
"Could you explain what your factual evidence is to support your repeated insistence that Abizaid was doing Whitehouse directed PR work here. Or is this just speculation made despite your admitted lack of familiarity with the military?"
"Evidence"??
Do you need "evidence" the sky is blue? Since when is adding 2 + 2 "speculation"?
And are your implying Abizaid comments and timing were NOT out of the ordinary? Puleeese. And it doesn't take a expert in military protocol to figure this was calculated BS PR at its worse.
" Did the Whitehouse also prompt the mainstream media reporters to ask Abizaid what his opinion was regarded the Dubai Port deal? If so, since when has the Whitehouse gained such control over the MSM? Also, you may be interested to note that Gen Pace made very similar comments today in Baltimore."
No "prompting" required. The fix was in -- Especially from Abizaid -- despite what you wish wasn't true.
A very public race-baiting comment by Abizaid amidst a rabid political fight Dubya swore he'd ram down our throats was indeed sanctioned by the CiC -- AND quite newsworthy in it's clumsy cheesiness.
Dubya simply miscalculated in his using the press, exploitation of Abizaid, and insulting the intelligence of the American people (most of which were conservatives.) MY OPINION.
Here's a question: Was the Port Deal a strategic military ploy, OR purely just globalist business as usual?
And YOUR opinion on the entire matter?
However, Muslims belong to the only major, supposedly monotheistic, religion that still demands you either submit to its will or else.
Emigres who are Sikhs may request that their adoptive country allow their children be allowed to carry a ceremonial kirpan to school, or that they be granted the right to wear turbans, and not cut their beards, even in jobs where these basic rules are obligatory.
There is even a small minority that drive around with "Free Khalistan" bumper stickers on their cars, or contribute to paramilitary organizations indirectly.
There is a minority of Tamil exiles who support radical separatist/terrorist groups like the ETTE.
However, as objectionable are these things are, they are the exceptions to the rule, and are in no way comparable to the absolute, unyielding compulsion imposed by Islamic immigrants.
The second and third generation Muslims that support the Islamic equivalents of the Tamil Tigers and the International Sikh Youth Foundation are not an insignificant minority.
The concessions that they demand of our culture are not in the same vein as the debatable requests of civil authorities made by Sikhs, Hindus, and other religious minorities.
But most importantly, they do not assimilate to American culture-or European culture-like their non-Islamic counterparts.
Hmmmmm.
How about the property seized from those people? There was little compensation. The land was usually sold at tax sales to celebrities and wealthy Democrat politicians and war financiers.
I suppose you favor that as well ~ lock 'em up, sell their stuff for pennies to your friends, pocket it.
I just know I can look your posts up and see what you had to say about Kelo and that vicious Justice Ginsburg when it comes to taking property to give to the rich ~ bet it's not consistent with your position on the JA's.
Does that mean you have a racial bias in such matters?
Everyone can observe the sky color. 2 + 2 is mathematically proven. You are claiming the Whitehouse ordered an Army General to make a specific statement. Show me your proof.
"And are your implying Abizaid comments and timing were NOT out of the ordinary?"
Timing?!?! The issue couldn't be any more current. Out of the ordinary...he was commenting on a major strategic issue concerning a country that falls right in the middle of his military area of responsibility. If he was commenting on mad cow disease in Japan, I would agree his comments were odd. But he was responding to a reporter's question about an issue that will have a very significant effect on his ability to accomplish his mission in Southwest Asia. It is certainly not out of the ordinary for him to comment on that issue. Here is a link to a statement Gen Abiziad read to Congress on 1 March 2005 regarding the current status of CENTCOM operations Abizaid's Statement You will note that the mission of CENTCOM is stated as "U.S. Central Command conducts joint and combined operations in our area of responsibility (AOR) to defeat adversaries, promote regional security and stability, support our allies and friends, and protect vital U.S. interests." Denying the DPW port deal has a very signicant impact on CENTCOM's mission. By commenting on the UAE port deal, Abizaid is doing his job.
"And it doesn't take a expert in military protocol to figure this was calculated BS PR at its worse."
Let me rephrase that for you...it takes someone who knows nothing about military protocol to assume Gen Abizaid's comments were orchestrated by the Whitehouse.
"No "prompting" required. The fix was in -- Especially from Abizaid -- despite what you wish wasn't true."
You didn't answer the question. Did the Whitehouse direct reporters to ask Abizaid to comment on the UAE port deal? And do you think the correct answer by Abizaid to a question that dealt specifically with a nation in his AOR would have been "no comment"?
"A very public race-baiting comment by Abizaid"
What part of his statement wasn't accurate?
"Dubya simply miscalculated in his using the press, exploitation of Abizaid, and insulting the intelligence of the American people (most of which were conservatives.) MY OPINION."
Which part of your statement is your opinion?
"Here's a question: Was the Port Deal a strategic military ploy, OR purely just globalist business as usual?"
My opinion...It was globalist business as usual. One foreign company was bought by another. It happens all the time. It just so happens in this case that Chuck Schumer recognized the opportunity to make political hay, so he did. The reason he was able to make political hay was because the company doing the buying out in this case happened to be an Arab company. If the Germans were buying out P&O, this wouldn't have been noted publicly outside page 62 of the Wall Street Journal. Unfortunately, the Arab country involved happens to be one of our strongest and oldest allies in the region. And the fundamental reason for terminating the deal was the belief that we couldn't trust that ally. We essentially spit in their face. It's going to hurt us in many strategic ways and will have a significant impact on CENTCOM planning for future operations. If Gen Abizaid didn't have an opinion (which he is allowed to voice) on the matter, he would be derelict in his duties.
Uh, in the context spoken, what's the difference between a dirtball and a mudball?
Just asking.....
I agree.
Of course I should probably jump to the latest replies, but this thread is too good. (And I'm not too happy certain Freepers didn't ping me about it either...but that's another story)
Let me say I think Mark is second to Rush....the rest be damned. But, what we have here is a failure to communicate.
A simple apology instead of doing pushups parsing words was in order...but hey, what should we expect from a lawyer?
Okay, so I'll continue being 600 replies back in the thread so I can enjoy this. ;^)
It's a big difference, and you need to spend some time reading the whole thread before posting this. If you did so, you would see that Mark Levin did NOT call Gen Abizaid a "Dirtbag"...instead, Mark Levin commented on the "mudballs" Gen Abizaid was throwing at critics of the port deal.
BIG difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.