What is she trying to say, Saddam got rid of the flies????

As long as everybody is talking about sources of intelligence, plagiarism, and so on, I wonder about the source of Saddam’s latest speech. Clearly somebody is plagiarizing, but who? Is the Ba’ath Party plagiarizing from the Democra’ath Party, or vice versa?

Miral Fahmy seems to be a fairly biased reporter. I’ve read a few of her other pieces that took a definitive anti-war stance

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=3&num=299

Democra’ath Party.…nice. Mean, but nice.

It not that Americans don’t care. Its that the Iraqis have to do this, install a democratic government, build their security institutions, and rebuild their economy. The Americans can dictate how this is to be done, but that simply is not going to work. You don’t order a people to freedom, and sooner or later, the Iraqi people will see that their future belongs to them. That no one is going to hand them a destiny, but they have to create it themselves.

“Allah” has liberated them.



Um, guys? Step one is to acknowledge that actual humans, called Americans and British, liberated you.

Step two is to acknowledge that actual humans, called Iraqis, are what will make or break your future.

Step three is to acknowledge that acknowledging steps one and two are not incompatible with the Islamic faith, past, present, or future.

Got it?

Any questions?

As I’ve written before, many of the war supporters and Wilsonian idealists have created a false dichotomy in their minds as to the nature of the Iraqi people’s feelings towards the U.S. government, and towards the Baathist government.

While it is true that the majority of Iraqis opposed Hussein and the Baathist government (though this was less true among the Christians of Iraq, as I pointed out in one of my past blog entries; also, some of the Christians were affiliated with the Baath Party, as it opposed militant Islam), that does not mean that they like or support the U.S. government. For many Iraqis (possibly the majority), there is a major third viewpoint. Many strongly oppose Saddam and the Baathists, while at the same time disliking the U.S. government. Even among those who are glad for the U.S. intervention, many are deeply suspicious about our motives for ‘liberating’ them, and about the continued U.S. occupation in Iraq. As the occupation continues, it seems that all of this anger and resentment (much of which was once aimed at the Baathists), may continue to fester and build, and the result could turn out to be horrible.

That is what happens when we follow the Wilsonian, neo-liberal utopian idea of state action and government expansion on foreign lands. From the perspective of our national security and safety, this seems to have made things a lot worse than they were before.