Posted on 05/18/2003 12:28:01 AM PDT by DocFarmer
"Explosions in Riyadh, So Let's Blame Dubya!"
Posted by Doc Farmer
Sunday, May 18, 2003
I lived in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for about four-and-a-half years before I moved to Doha, Qatar, last July. And other than the way they drive in Riyadh, I really liked it there. I've still got friends there. I've even got family there--my cousin and her hubby. So you can imagine my concern when I heard about the terrorist bombings of three residential compounds and a joint Saudi/American business there.
I sent an e-mail to my friends and colleagues there, and thank God, they're all fine. The terrorists didn't target their compounds. And my cousin is okay too; the bombings weren't even close to where they live now. However, they did live in one of those compounds several years ago, which was a bit frightening.
Apparently, known Al Qaeda operatives in Riyadh did the bombings, after Saudi security officials arrested a bunch of these terrorists and seized a large weapons cache. U.S. officials apparently warned the Saudis around the beginning of May that there was an elevated threat in the area, and asked them to increase security around ''soft'' targets. The Saudis ignored or discounted that advice. And because of that ignorance, they ended up with a lot of dead people on the deck.
So would somebody please explain to me how all of this is somehow Dubya's fault?
In opinion pieces, in news articles, and in discussion groups, I hear the same tired refrain. It's retaliation for the ''illegal'' invasion of Iraq. Dubya said we had destroyed terrorism. The war's over, we're all supposed to be safe again. Sen. Bob Graham, part-time presidential candidate and full-time misinformed legislator, said in part: ''It took us off the track of the war on terror which we were on a path to win, but we've now let it slip away from us.''
Sen. Graham, with all due respect, please stop having that second bowl of STUPID for breakfast, okay?
I've seen pundits and commentators on TV, and read their articles and columns, and almost all of them have been quite busy blaming the President, the administration, the war on Iraq, the war on Afghanistan, the Department of Homeland Security, sunspots, lunar phases, and the SARS epidemic for the attack in Riyadh.
So far, though, I've not seen one of them blame the terrorists. You remember them, don't you? The guys that stormed those compounds? The guys with the automatic weapons? The guys with the cars stuffed with explosives? The guys who murdered unarmed civilians?
Sadly, in their world of moral relativism, those who murder are not responsible because the innocent forced them to do it. It's Dubya's policies that are responsible, not the whacked-out Islamofacist scumbags who were packing their picnic baskets full of Semtex and Kalashnikovs for their night on (or all over) the town.
To the average lib/dem/soc/commie, truth is relative too. Facts, figures, video footage, affidavits, all are meaningless if they run counter to what they ''feel.'' They 'feel' that Dubya is 'bad' because they still can't get over the fact that Al Gore lost. So, in order to balance the scales, they spend every waking moment blaming every possible (and in many cases, IMpossible) ill in the world on the President.
Here's a fresh idea for the Democratic National Committee. Blame the Murderer for the Murder. Blame the Rapist for the Rape. Blame the Terrorist for the Terror. Instead of blaming everybody BUT them! Instead of blaming the President.
Just as a change of pace, I mean...
If other governments fail to take actions that adequate protect the civilian population (no matter what their nationality), even when they are warned, do they not hold some level of responsibility for their inaction? The Saudi security services were warned. The Saudi security services failed to act. They are not culpable for the attacks, but they do bear some responsibility for the consequences of their inaction. Not the President, not America.
The President NEVER said that the war was over. He NEVER said that terrorism had been defeated. He said at the outset of this war on terrorism that it would be a long, difficult struggle, with many battles ahead. He said that countries that support terrorism or harbor terrorists would be considered culpable (France, please take note...). He did not start this fight. But I'm confident that he can finish it. Assuming the lib/dem/soc/commies start supporting the President and stop supporting the terrorists, that is.
By the way, I hear a lot of folks saying that I should come back to America because it's not safe out there in the rest of the world. Well, here's a statistic that you should find disturbing. More Americans have been killed by terrorist attack in the US than the rest of the world combined. Oklahoma City, WTC'93, Anthrax and 9/11 all had external assistance (see also: Hussein, Saddam, and Laden, Osama bin). But we also had homegrown terrorist acts. Ruby Ridge. The Branch Davidian Compound in Waco. See also: Reno, Janet and Clinton, Bill.
And lest you think that folks in the Middle East support the goals of Al Qaeda, Hamas, and other Islamofacists, I want to end this with part of an e-mail message that I got from my good friend, Khalid, back at my old job. He said, ''I hope they find those scum and put them away.''
I couldn't agree more.
http://www.chronwatch.com/featured/contentDisplay.asp?aid=2752
(Excerpt) Read more at chronwatch.com ...
OK, OK, I'm behind the times. I'm still used to hearing from liberals, poly-sci professors, democRATs and others unencumbered by the thought process that whatever it is, "it's Reagan's fault!"
Sorry, I gotta update my database of cliches.
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.