Comments on IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT THE CONSERVATIVES WHO CREATED al-QUA'EDA. PART 2

Go to WHO IS THIS GUY CALLED ARIEL? - Add a comment - Go to IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT THE CONSERVATIVES WHO CREATED al-QUA'EDA. PART 2

Ariel

Just dropped in to say, you are an excellemt writer with some very good view points.

posted by cosy on September 22, 2005 at 5:18 AM | link to this | reply

ariel...

...I thought, since you are harking back to the Balkans era, that you might be interested in something Dubya said at the time.

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." : Texas Governor George W. Bush, April 9, 1999, on the US intervention in Kosovo.

Clearly, he believed this 'exit strategy' thing was an important issue for Clinton to tackle, but it's irrelevant to him now.

If he ends sentances with propositions, I very much doubt he can spell 'hypocrisy'.

D

posted by DamonLeigh on September 22, 2005 at 3:42 AM | link to this | reply

Damion

" Look to the beam in thine own eye, ere thou attempt to cast out the mote from thy neighbour's eye."

posted by ariel70 on September 21, 2005 at 6:57 AM | link to this | reply

Again...

...I find myself darkly amused!

Your opening ploy is to ask for no comments that make any mention of the current "administration", and then a few paragraphs from the end talk about "Bush’s neo-Con hawks". interesting - YOU can mention Bush, but your readers can't. I guess you simply know your own limitations when it comes to such debates.

But I'll respect your request.

I see some of your readers are complimenting you on your research - even twodog, a researcher of the first order. I find that odd as you mention NOT ONE source, anywhere in either of these two pieces. Oh, apart from an article each in Time and the Guardian. Is that IT???

I strongly suggest you read a little wider on the subject (And I've already made one suggestion for you to follow up) before dismissing the Afghan connection out of hand. Otherwise you're stepping very firmly into the camp of history revisionists - those whose agendas are served better if they can just twist and spin historical events enough to further their own narrow ends.

D

posted by DamonLeigh on September 21, 2005 at 6:01 AM | link to this | reply

Flame

Thank you your comment. It's high time that someone introduced a little sanity, and a few hard facts into the increasingly acrimonious debate on the subject

I hope that it will go at least a little way towards fostering rational debate, instead of mere mud slinging. I'm posting part one of another challenging post today, dealing with why we white people today shouldn't feel guilty about what our ancestors did to other races.

Raisi a few hackles in here, I bet!!!

posted by ariel70 on September 21, 2005 at 5:26 AM | link to this | reply

First I want to thank you for your just and very encouraging fine words. Secondly, your post is an eye opener to many and I only hope the Liberals will liberally accept the truth and apologise for misleading the world.

posted by Flame-thrower on September 21, 2005 at 5:13 AM | link to this | reply

ariel70

In my research into bin-Ladin's role in Afghanistan, I discovered he was not the great leader claimed by others for him now. In fact, according to statements by Afgan fighters, bin-Ladin was, in most cases, viewed as a blow hard, religious ideolog, more a henderence than help.

It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for liberal westerners to believe, much less understand, the Islamic Terrorist mind set. That is not just a problem in the United States, but generally world wide. There are a few western leaders, Prime Minister Blare, President Bush, the Prime Minister of Australia, who understand full well terrorist intentions. To chose negotiation over direct confrontation is considered a weakness, and any weakness will be exploited.

Sadly, it appears the west is fighting a religious war, an idea they aren't, to date, willing to accept.

An extremely informative post, well researched, and a must read for those who search for the truth behind this most dangerous threat to freedom of modern times

posted by twodog on September 20, 2005 at 6:04 PM | link to this | reply

ariel70 -- these two postings were a very fascinating read and I must

commend you for the amount of research you must have done. I share your opinions on many of the points you are making and have very little to add to the body of this posting but the title ?? I know that the title of this posting is a form of refutation to a phantom contention made by liberals blaming conservatives for the strength of Al Queda .. . . but "created"? Facilitated or enabled, even nourished, would have been better words. This minor objection stemming entirely from the premise of not losing sight of who the actual perpetrators are. Sure, those who are in power are forced to make self serving decisions on behalf of one group that impose some nasty things on others, but let us not lose sight of the fact that these zealots are willing to do what they do. In the name of their religion and against all who are not of their religion.