Posted on 12/29/2001 9:27:49 AM PST by Demidog
I am not an America hater by any stretch of the imagination. Nor are the plethora of folks calling for a re-examination of our foreign policies. But that's what we're called.
I wish I knew why.
I really don't want to be against any American. I don't like being on the butt end of insults. So if there were a way to somehow explain what it is that bothers me about our foreign policy without the resultant cries of "traitor! treason! Islam firster!" I would.
One of the main problems apears to be that any "agreement" with bin Laden and his band of murdering thugs is seen to be support. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is probably true that bin Laden knows that water is tantamount to life in the desert. If I agree with this, I am no more supporting bin Laden than you are by agreeing.
When we decry any actions taken by Israel, we are "anti-semites." When Israel admitted that they had set a booby trap near an area where children played and 5 Palestinian boys died when it went off, you couldn't get near the topic without being ridiculed.
This is puzzling to me. There is nothing wrong per se with Israel and certainly not Jews, but for certain they are not perfect. For some, Israel is perfection and any criticism is tantamount to racism. Those who disagree are shouted down with such fervor it makes one pause.
American policies aren't perfect either. It is arguable for instance that John Wayne's death from cancer could be attributed to nuclear tests performed back in the 40's. Movie locations happened to be in the area where tests occurred. Many film industry professionals who worked on movies filmed in Nevada died from cancer including that great American we called "the Duke."
Many soldiers who were in the vicinity of those tests also died from cancer.
Why is it an indictment on all of America to bring such mistakes to light? In general, the American population has no say so in the slightest regarding these sorts of activities nor do they have much say in our foreign policy.
But as usual, it is the American population that has to accept the consequences of Policy mistakes made by the government. To say that those who object to this "hate America" is completely absurd.
The truth is quite the opposite.
I love America. And those who decry our foreign policy blunders and the theft of our hard earned money that is necessary in order to carry out these blunders also love America. We're simply tired of having to pay the price for those mistakes, while those who carry them out never have to suffer the consequences.
One of the most bizarre claims by those who are calling us "America haters" and "Islam firsters" is that terorrists are simply angry that we are so democratic as a nation and love freedom. These terrorists "hate freedom" and thus hate America and Americans. They're "jealous," in other words, of our prosperity.
This is about as brilliant an analysis as claiming that Timothy McVeigh was upset that he was no longer an employee of the federal government and thus took out his jealosy and rage on that same federal government.
It is the analysis of the simpleton.
The fact is, we only know what the terrorists claim. Not that it matters much. The opinions of mass murderers are not that important. Clearly however, this is not what any of the terrorists are saying. What they are saying is that they believe themselves to be oppressed by our foreign intervention.
When students took Iranian embassy employees hostage, their reason given for such extraordinary measures was American meddling in Iranian internal affairs.
The Shah of Iran was our personally hand-picked leader for their country. The CIA had, in the time period between the time we basically annexed Iran during WWII, purposefully destroyed opposition to the Shah by using tactics they had learned in South America.
None of those tactics were even remotely related to "freedom" or the principles upon which this nation was founded. They were the actions of a government that believed the Iranian people were chattle and were not worthy of chosing their own leadership.
So what happened? A number of Americans paid the price for our meddling. When we allowed the Shah to enter America to receive medical treatment, the last straw was put upon the back of that proverbial camel.
And that is not to mention the American lives that were sacrificed in a botched rescue attempt. For some, these lives are expendable. They are the price a nation pays for being a "super power." I agree with that assesment. But I don't think we need to be a superpower. I don't think we need to meddle in the affairs of other nations in order to protect our borders.
As is proven time and time again, such meddling has a high price.
And therein lies the rub. Dying in order to defend this nation from an attacking force is national defense and is noble. Sending young men and women across the globe to secure oil fields and preserve the "American way of life" is a sick project. I for one, am not willing to lose a single American for the cynical goal of sub-dollar-a-gallon fuel for my SUV.
If that is the measure of value for an American life then you can call me an America hater all day long and I will be proud to wear that badge.
I criticize our foreign policies because they result in the deaths of American soldiers and citizens at home and abroad. In no way do I criticize Americans. In the aftermath of the Trade Center attacks, it wasn't the government that responded with such ferocity and bravery. It was the average American.
The Beaurocrats were busy playing CYA and letting us know that none of this was their fault. In the meantime, Americans came up with over 60 million dollars in cash and even more in valuable resources in spite of the fact that they are taxed to the extreme in order to pay for the very policies that helped to incubate the attacks of 9/11.
America proved it's greatness in the response to the attacks. The government proved it's complete disregard for human liberty by passing laws which violate the spirit and letter of the Supreme law of the land. Even while the fires were still burning.
America is a great nation and is full of great people. Unfortunately its leaders have no respect for its people or its laws. Pointing this out is not showing hate for anything but the lawbreakers who do so.
If I think about it,
nobody, not even my government,
has the right to give my money
to a badly ran business.
Let them declare bankruptcy.
I have better uses for my charity.
“Disclosure to Congress of confidential advice to the attorney general regarding the appointment of a special counsel and confidential recommendations to Department of Justice officials regarding whether to bring criminal charges would inhibit the candor necessary to the effectiveness of the deliberative process by which the department makes prosecutorial decisions,” Bush wrote.
He added, “It is my decision that you should not release these documents or otherwise make them available to the committee. ... I have decided to assert executive privilege.” Burton decried the decision. “This is not a monarchy,” he said. “The legislative branch has oversight responsibility to make sure there is no corruption in the executive branch.”
That's what I said.
Auctions are Constitutionally allowed.
Commercial enterprises are not.
Government is not allowed
to participate in private sector profits.
What was he asking for and from who?
The attacks of 9/11 did tremendous damage to our nation's airlines. Congress may take steps to try to minimize that damage.
If you don't like the policy, write your Congressman.
There isn't any mention of "auctions" in the Constitution. According to the Constitution, Congress sets the rules regarding the manner in which it disposes of federal property. Auctions, sales, leases; that's up to Congress to decide.
Whew! I am ROTF!
HeHe
The article is innocent as a baby. Baby rattlesnake.
Yes it does, Roscoe.
Use your own source,
Article 1, Section 8.
Go to Clause 14. "To make Rules for the Government..."
How to dispose of government property
would be covered under "rules for the government."
# 731 by exodus
************************
To: exodus
So if the rules provided for profit,
it would be Constitutional by your own argument.
Another self-refutation.
# 739 by Roscoe
************************
"Always throw it out in the yard" is a rule.
"Always dispose of property at auction" is a rule.
"Buy a building, fill it with government workers,
make good products, and sell them for a profit"
is a business.
"Rules" are allowed.
"Business" is not.
"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America as an independent press. You know it and I know it.
There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job.
If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty- four hours my occupation would be gone.
The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread.
You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press?
We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men.
We are intellectual prostitutes."
John Swinton, former Chief of staff for the New York Times. Called by his peers “The Dean of His profession.” He stated the above when He was asked to give a toast before the New York Press Club in 1953.
HeHe
The Libertarian position is laughable.
"And wait for an attack to occur before "using tax dollars." Terrorist just hafta love that."
Ain't that what just happened?
"...nobody, not even my government,
has the right to give my money
to a badly ran business.
Let them declare bankruptcy.
I have better uses for my charity.
# 741 by exodus
************************
To: exodus
The attacks of 9/11 did tremendous damage to our nation's airlines.
Congress may take steps to try to minimize that damage.
If you don't like the policy, write your Congressman.
# 745 by Roscoe
************************
Saying
"if you don't like it, write your Congressman"
is the same as saying "shut up."
I'm talking to you, Roscoe.
I want your opinion, not useless advice.
More or less. Clinton said he was a libertarian.
Opinions are like bellybuttons. The actual Constitution is there for the reading.
Doesn't that mean they get 33% of profit, if there is any, plus the repayment of the loan?
I really am asking.
I don't know what this means.
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.