Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 25 May 2012, 19:44:52 pm *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: A Chill Wind is Blowing in This Nation...  (Read 2026 times)
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« on: 05 May 2003, 15:42:00 pm »

This was a speech given by Tim Robbins -
(I wouldnt want to be accused of plagiarism )

The words spoken are astute and very important and although I know many on this board will instantly dismiss it as rubbish and never bother to actually contemplate the words, I ask you all to spare 5 minutes and think about it.  Reply if you like but there isnt really a need.  

I know the speaker is both very rich and associated with stongly with some radical characters but that does not negate his sentiments.

See what you think
--------------------------------------------

TIM ROBBINS: Thank you. And thanks for the invitation. I had originally been asked here to talk about the war and our current political situation, but I have instead chosen to hijack this opportunity and talk about baseball and show business. (Laughter.) Just kidding. Sort of.

I can't tell you how moved I have been at the overwhelming support I have received from newspapers throughout the country in these past few days. I hold no illusions that all of these journalists agree with me on my views against the war. While the journalists' outrage at the cancellation of our appearance in Cooperstown is not about my views, it is about my right to express these views. I am extremely grateful that there are those of you out there still with a fierce belief in constitutionally guaranteed rights. We need you, the press, now more than ever. This is a crucial moment for all of us.

For all of the ugliness and tragedy of 9-11, there was a brief period afterward where I held a great hope, in the midst of the tears and shocked faces of New Yorkers, in the midst of the lethal air we breathed as we worked at Ground Zero, in the midst of my children's terror at being so close to this crime against humanity, in the midst of all this, I held on to a glimmer of hope in the naive assumption that something good could come out of it.

I imagined our leaders seizing upon this moment of unity in America, this moment when no one wanted to talk about Democrat versus Republican, white versus black, or any of the other ridiculous divisions that dominate our public discourse. I imagined our leaders going on television telling the citizens that although we all want to be at Ground Zero, we can't, but there is work that is needed to be done all over America. Our help is needed at community centers to tutor children, to teach them to read. Our work is needed at old-age homes to visit the lonely and infirmed; in gutted neighborhoods to rebuild housing and clean up parks, and convert abandoned lots to baseball fields. I imagined leadership that would take this incredible energy, this generosity of spirit and create a new unity in America born out of the chaos and tragedy of 9/11, a new unity that would send a message to terrorists everywhere: If you attack us, we will become stronger, cleaner, better educated, and more unified. You will strengthen our commitment to justice and democracy by your inhumane attacks on us. Like a Phoenix out of the fire, we will be reborn.

And then came the speech: You are either with us or against us. And the bombing began. And the old paradigm was restored as our leader encouraged us to show our patriotism by shopping and by volunteering to join groups that would turn in their neighbor for any suspicious behavior.

In the 19 months since 9-11, we have seen our democracy compromised by fear and hatred. Basic inalienable rights, due process, the sanctity of the home have been quickly compromised in a climate of fear. A unified American public has grown bitterly divided, and a world population that had profound sympathy and support for us has grown contemptuous and distrustful, viewing us as we once viewed the Soviet Union, as a rogue state.
This past weekend, Susan and I and the three kids went to Florida for a family reunion of sorts. Amidst the alcohol and the dancing, sugar-rushing children, there was, of course, talk of the war. And the most frightening thing about the weekend was the amount of times we were thanked for speaking out against the war because that individual speaking thought it unsafe to do so in their own community, in their own life. Keep talking, they said; I haven't been able to open my mouth.

A relative tells me that a history teacher tells his 11-year-old son, my nephew, that Susan Sarandon is endangering the troops by her opposition to the war. Another teacher in a different school asks our niece if we are coming to the school play. They're not welcome here, said the molder of young minds.

Another relative tells me of a school board decision to cancel a civics event that was proposing to have a moment of silence for those who have died in the war because the students were including dead Iraqi civilians in their silent prayer.
A teacher in another nephew's school is fired for wearing a T- shirt with a peace sign on it. And a friend of the family tells of listening to the radio down South as the talk radio host calls for the murder of a prominent anti-war activist. Death threats have appeared on other prominent anti-war activists' doorsteps for their views. Relatives of ours have received threatening e-mails and phone calls. And my 13-year-old boy, who has done nothing to anybody, has recently been embarrassed and humiliated by a sadistic creep who writes -- or, rather, scratches his column with his fingernails in dirt.

Susan and I have been listed as traitors, as supporters of Saddam, and various other epithets by the Aussie gossip rags masquerading as newspapers, and by their fair and balanced electronic media cousins, 19th Century Fox. (Laughter.) Apologies to Gore Vidal. (Applause.)
Two weeks ago, the United Way canceled Susan's appearance at a conference on women's leadership. And both of us last week were told that both we and the First Amendment were not welcome at the Baseball Hall of Fame.

A famous middle-aged rock-and-roller called me last week to thank me for speaking out against the war, only to go on to tell me that he could not speak himself because he fears repercussions from Clear Channel. "They promote our concert appearances," he said. "They own most of the stations that play our music. I can't come out against this war."
And here in Washington, Helen Thomas finds herself banished to the back of the room and uncalled on after asking Ari Fleischer whether our showing prisoners of war at Guantanamo Bay on television violated the Geneva Convention.

A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.

Every day, the air waves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and fear.

I am sick of hearing about Hollywood being against this war. Hollywood's heavy hitters, the real power brokers and cover-of-the- magazine stars, have been largely silent on this issue. But Hollywood, the concept, has always been a popular target.

I remember when the Columbine High School shootings happened. President Clinton criticized Hollywood for contributing to this terrible tragedy -- this, as we were dropping bombs over Kosovo. Could the violent actions of our leaders contribute somewhat to the violent fantasies of our teenagers? Or is it all just Hollywood and rock and roll?

I remember reading at the time that one of the shooters had tried to enlist to fight the real war a week before he acted out his war in real life at Columbine. I talked about this in the press at the time. And curiously, no one accused me of being unpatriotic for criticizing Clinton. In fact, the same radio patriots that call us traitors today engaged in daily personal attacks on their president during the war in Kosovo.

Today, prominent politicians who have decried violence in movies -- the "Blame Hollywooders," if you will -- recently voted to give our current president the power to unleash real violence in our current war. They want us to stop the fictional violence but are okay with the real kind.
And these same people that tolerate the real violence of war don't want to see the result of it on the nightly news. Unlike the rest of the world, our news coverage of this war remains sanitized, without a glimpse of the blood and gore inflicted upon our soldiers or the women and children in Iraq. Violence as a concept, an abstraction -- it's very strange.

As we applaud the hard-edged realism of the opening battle scene of "Saving Private Ryan," we cringe at the thought of seeing the same on the nightly news. We are told it would be pornographic. We want no part of reality in real life. We demand that war be painstakingly realized on the screen, but that war remain imagined and conceptualized in real life.

And in the midst of all this madness, where is the political opposition? Where have all the Democrats gone? Long time passing, long time ago. (Applause.) With apologies to Robert Byrd, I have to say it is pretty embarrassing to live in a country where a five-foot- one comedian has more guts than most politicians. (Applause.) We need leaders, not pragmatists that cower before the spin zones of former entertainment journalists. We need leaders who can understand the Constitution, congressman who don't in a moment of fear abdicate their most important power, the right to declare war to the executive branch. And, please, can we please stop the congressional sing-a- longs? (Laughter.)

In this time when a citizenry applauds the liberation of a country as it lives in fear of its own freedom, when an administration official releases an attack ad questioning the patriotism of a legless Vietnam veteran running for Congress, when people all over the country fear reprisal if they use their right to free speech, it is time to get angry. It is time to get fierce. And it doesn't take much to shift the tide. My 11-year-old nephew, mentioned earlier, a shy kid who never talks in class, stood up to his history teacher who was questioning Susan's patriotism. "That's my aunt you're talking about. Stop it." And the stunned teacher backtracks and began stammering compliments in embarrassment.

Sportswriters across the country reacted with such overwhelming fury at the Hall of Fame that the president of the Hall admitted he made a mistake and Major League Baseball disavowed any connection to the actions of the Hall's president. A bully can be stopped, and so can a mob. It takes one person with the courage and a resolute voice.
The journalists in this country can battle back at those who would rewrite our Constitution in Patriot Act II, or "Patriot, The Sequel," as we would call it in Hollywood. We are counting on you to star in that movie. Journalists can insist that they not be used as publicists by this administration. (Applause.) The next White House correspondent to be called on by Ari Fleischer should defer their question to the back of the room, to the banished journalist du jour. (Applause.) And any instance of intimidation to free speech should be battled against. Any acquiescence or intimidation at this point will only lead to more intimidation. You have, whether you like it or not, an awesome responsibility and an awesome power: the fate of discourse, the health of this republic is in your hands, whether you write on the left or the right. This is your time, and the destiny you have chosen.

We lay the continuance of our democracy on your desks, and count on your pens to be mightier. Millions are watching and waiting in mute frustration and hope - hoping for someone to defend the spirit and letter of our Constitution, and to defy the intimidation that is visited upon us daily in the name of national security and warped notions of patriotism.

Our ability to disagree, and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are. To allow those rights to be taken away out of fear, to punish people for their beliefs, to limit access in the news media to differing opinions is to acknowledge our democracy's defeat. These are challenging times. There is a wave of hate that seeks to divide us -- right and left, pro-war and anti-war. In the name of my 11-year-old nephew, and all the other unreported victims of this hostile and unproductive environment of fear, let us try to find our common ground as a nation. Let us celebrate this grand and glorious experiment that has survived for 227 years. To do so we must honor and fight vigilantly for the things that unite us -- like freedom, the First Amendment and, yes, baseball.

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
ExpatSingapore Message Board
« on: 05 May 2003, 15:42:00 pm »



 Logged
Publius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 411


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 06 May 2003, 0:05:00 am »

This is a great speech.
Logged
PhilM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1096


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 06 May 2003, 9:35:00 am »

I have to agree with Robbins comments regarding 9/11. Initially I felt this barbaric act was going to be cathartic in healing divisions in society in the USA. It seemed the people were united in their grief and people of all walks of life were coming together to pull the USA through this terrible event. I first realised this was only a short term effect when the arguing started over what races should be depicted in the monument to the firemen who died trying to save others.

Bush ruthlessly hijacked 9/11 in my opinion, and has used it to his own political and business ends. His war on Afghanistan whilst moving people’s thinking away from the way he was elected has done little other than turn large parts of that country into rubble. The War Lords are back in power and Osama lives on probably in Pakistan a county Bush currently calls an ally! Of course you still have Afghanis illegally locked down in Cuba a disgrace he and Rumsfeld continue to support after nearly two years.

Can’t find Osama? Well get your spin-doctors to convince people the real home of terrorists and a current danger to them is Saddam in Iraq. Of course you must ensure nobody asks why when 17 of the terrorists involved in 9/11 plus the finance came from Saudi Arabia you are not going after them. When you invade Iraq, beat the rag tailed army and cannot find Saddam or his Weapons of Mass Destruction throw up another smoke screen by blaming Syria for hiding them.

Whilst all this is going on wreak havoc on the USA economy, give tax cuts to your rich friends, give contracts to Cheney for the rebuilding or Iraq, and take adverse action against USA citizens’ civil liberties.

Robbins is right with regard to views outside of the USA. A whole new generation of people in the Middle East now hate Americans. Many of us in the West who have affection for Americans as a people think your Government is nothing more than a bunch of thugs with no respect for International Law, the United Nations, or the views of anyone who dares to disagree with them.

The tragedy is the average American is the one who will pay the price. Bush and his cronies will get richer whilst the tax burden and the cost of living goes up for the majority of Americans. Bush and his cronies will be protected on the very odd occasion they venture abroad; the average American is now less safe abroad than they were two years ago. It is also the average American who gets upset at public opinion abroad regarding the USA – Bush is too thick skinned and financially cushioned to care.

I sincerely hope a strong and purposeful leader comes forward in the next elections to ensure Bush gets thrown out. Perhaps the USA foreign Policy might then start to match the average American by being good, honest, and caring about other people outside of Texas.

My apologies for reiterating some of Robbins points; however I feel strongly about them.

Logged
Publius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 411


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 06 May 2003, 10:39:00 am »

Phil,

There's alot of rhetoric here but not much fact. Today, al Qaeda has been driven from Afghanistan and their many terrorist camps shut down. Bush deserves credit for this. Lobbing cruise missiles at Osama's "hideout" did nothing in the 1990's. And I'll take the US puppet Hamid Karzai over medieval Shiek Omar any day. The Afghan women and girls who were barred from work and school under the Taliban would likely agree.

More people directly involved in 9/11 have been arrested in Pakistan than in any other country (other than Afghanistan). Musharrif (spelling?) deserves tremendous praise for having the political will to go after and extradite these murderers against overwhelming domestic opinion. Six more key al Qaeda were captured just yesterday. If this is not an ally in the war on terror than there isn't one.

As for the the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, most (if not all) were caught fighting and dying to defend the camps in Afghanistan that the US shut down after 9/11. Many of these thugs (real thugs) are not even Afghans but foreigners who, in earlier times, would have had the same status under int'l law as mercenaries. This said, I agree that the legal process is highly flawed. But such is the nature of war against a guerrilla army that uses terrorism as its weapon of choice.

I assume that you are not serious about the US attacking Saudi Arabia. The entire Muslim world (and I imagine you too) would be enraged if the US were to ACTUALLY attack the country of Mecca. Bush, unlike his predecessors, is the first US President to pull troops out of Saudi Arabia. Again, he deserves enormous praise for this.

Iraq's "rag-tag army" killed over a half a million Irianians and another half million of Iraq's own citizens. During the war, many on this board believed that the war was a quagmire and the US would have a far more difficult time than what actually resulted. The reason why it was such a walkover was because of how the war was fought, more than anything else. Alot of bad military decisions by the US/Britain could have dragged this war on for months.

Lastly, I disagree with you about whether Americans are safer today. I believe that they are MUCH safer now. And I believe history will prove this to be true. With four enormous, permanent US bases stationed in Iraq, the Syrians, Iranians, Saudis and other state-sponsors of Islamic terror will be kept on a very short lead. These countries will reign in their radicals whether they like it or not. And Bush has shown the will and the capacity to respond militarily if they do not. Yesterday, Assad announced the closing of four radical Palestinian terrorist organizations in Damascus. One of these was responsible for hijacking the Achille Lauro (whose leader, Mohammed Abbas was arrested by the US in Baghdad last week).

Today, it would be impossible to hijack four US domstic airliners. I imagine anyone who has visited an American airport in recent months would concur. Something else could happen, but the US is much more cognizant and (to a certain degree) prepared for such a calamity than it was prior to 9/11.  


                                             
                                             
                                               
                                             
                                             


[This message has been edited by Publius (edited 06-05-2003).]

Logged
Manc Man
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 593


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 06 May 2003, 11:19:00 am »

Back to the original speech.

This overpaid pampered man child who earns millions for playing make believe was upset because he was uninvited to a  party.

He seems to be under the impression that the first amendment compels a private organization (Hall of Fame) to give him a platform to voice views that they do not agree with.

And that a private organization exercising choice over who they invite to a private function is some how oppressing him.

Odd.

mm

Logged
PhilM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1096


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 06 May 2003, 12:05:00 pm »

Publius – we will have to agree to disagree over many points. First you see rhetoric in my post, well all I can say is check out the history of the Middle East and Western involvement.

I still subscribe to Jayne’ Intelligence briefing, their latest update states al Qaeda is far from finished but has for the moment gone underground whilst carrying out a large recruitment campaign. Hamid Karzai has already completed the job he was put in place for, the contacts for the gas line through northern Afghanistan have been signed. The USA will now pay off the War Lords to ensure the safety of the line, but will have little interest in the rest of the country.

I do not feel Musharrif deserves any praise, here is a man who seized power illegally and since he got Bush’s support has. Declared himself President for five years, then asserted his Presidential powers to remove the Prime Minister and Parliament all of whom were elected officials, and finally of course seized control of the military to keep him in power. He plays the old game of handing over a few small fry so Bush gets his publicity and he Musharrif gets his USA hand outs. Oh and by the way he has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, but that is all right because currently he is an ally.

Guantanamo Bay – I would agree undoubtedly there are thugs and terrorists amongst the detainees, but without due process of law how do we know who is and who isn’t? I do not agree you can justify the action by claming the invasion of Afghanistan was a war on terrorists.

No I was not serious about attacking Saudi Arabia, you already have access to their oil; however I was serious about the sheer gall of using an atrocity carried out by seventeen of that countries citizens and financed by Saudis as an excuse to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Yes Iraq’s army killed Iranians and their own people – and who may I ask supported them in killing the Iranians, shipped arms, anthrax spores and chemical weapon precursors to them and finally tore up the bills? You tend to conveniently forget the guilt of those who supplied the weaponry and supported Saddam in his war on Iran.

Quote - “With four enormous, permanent US bases stationed in Iraq, the Syrians, Iranians, Saudis and other state-sponsors of Islamic terror will be kept on a very short lead.” Do Bush, Rumsfeld, or Powell know about these four bases? They have all categorically denied any intent to have bases in Iraq. Of course we know you are right and they are lying, but does this not prove my point of the invasion being about regional power?

Quote – “Bush has shown the will and the capacity to respond militarily if they do not” You are saying exactly what the rest of the world fears – if the USA does not like the way any country responds to her demands she will use military might to ensure the USA view prevails.

Finally terrorists are a constant threat in our world today; however you will never rid the world of terrorists by invading and occupying other countries, that merely convinces more to become terrorists. The West has to identify the underlying causes of terrorism, acknowledge them, deal with them and then terrorism will largely disappear.

Manc man – We have your opinion on the writer, now how about your opinion on what he wrote?

Logged
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 06 May 2003, 13:59:00 pm »

Publius I don't know how many Afghani women are really noticing a difference right now.  Sure some can work, for at least the time the CNN camera is shining away, but realistically as was pointed out elsewhere – the same religious fanatics still sit in judgement.  The country is run a bunch of thugs and warlords.  Whilst the Taliban were a collection of extremists, they would have stayed in power had they offered to help the US build gas pipes.  There is little more to it than that – the US isn't much interested in the plight of the Afghani people so much as it is in their resources.    

Pakistan is simply filling a role at the moment for the US, with any luck the recent rapprochement of India and Pakistan will result in some longer term improvement, however Pakistan should hold no hope at being a long term friend of the US.  In time they could very well find themselves in a new axis of evil.  

Maybe some extremists are being handed over to be extradited to Quantonimo with the help of a Pro US dictator, but realistically unless you look the conditions that force people into such a life, the arrest of six terrorists means diddlie because there are sixty more to replace them.

I think Saudi Arabia presents an interesting dilemma to the US govt, however for now the oil is needed.  

Human rights aren’t important there of course – the same examples cited else where are ignored when interest are at stake.  Principled US policy under the brave and noble Bush.  For now the US will continue to arm the Saudi’s as they do any other supporting regime (Iraq included).  Of course when Saudi Arabia is no longer necessary or if US interests so dictated, they would become our new ‘enemy’.  

Iraq’s standing army prior to Gulf War One, was certainly impressive and easily the strongest in the region save Israel.  By last year their military was badly equipped and posed little threat to any of their neighbours.  Of course the US message worked on many people around the world who actually believed that the Iraqi’s were a threat; that they would give WMD to terrorists, that they will soon be in a position to launch ballistic missiles.  I cant help but to think of Guns and Roses “look at leaders we’ve followed, look at the lies we’ve swallowed and I don't want to hear no more”.

The world is less safe today and going in a dangerous direction.  The US less safe – maybe? maybe not? But rights once taken for granted have been slowly eroded.  I believe the US has taken the wrong path as Tim said – the right response after Sep 11 was to track down the terrorists and those responsible and bring them to justice whilst working together as a community to rebuild stronger than before

Phil – you’re right the way to fight terrorism is to identify the underlying causes and attempt to work towards solutions.

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Publius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 411


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 06 May 2003, 14:02:00 pm »

Phil,

I agree with much (most) of what you write here -particularly about Pakistan. Can you see how we may BOTH be right on these same points? We emphasize different aspects of the same events and the respective motivations behind them, but I think on the issues we agree.

I am surprised that you believe that the US invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 though.

Joseph,

Your view that the US would have kept the Taliban "in power had they offered to help the US build gas pipes" is sheer fantasy. Afghanistan's fate was decided by 9/11 and the Taliban's wrong-headed decision to shield Al Qaeda and OBL. Absolutely NO American president would have refrained from invading Afghanistan on the morning of September 12th, 2001 -unless the Taliban handed over OBL immediately. Their leadership chose otherwise.    

[This message has been edited by Publius (edited 06-05-2003).]

Logged
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 06 May 2003, 15:43:00 pm »

Sep 11 was perpetrated by terrorists.  No state launched an attack on the US - Iraq didn't - Afghanistan didn't - Syria didn't - war is waged by state against state - not state against civilians cum terrorists.  Now the US goes around the world looking for a swarm of terrorists and attacks them with a sledge hammer.  Sure sometimes a few get hit but there is a great deal of collateral damage.

The point about the gaspipes is made because the Americans had planned an invasion of Afghanistan as early as May 2001.  This was a necessary move to ensure that the gas pipes could go through and be protected.  Sep 11 was a perfect justification for Bush to take America down the path followed by other right wing reactionaries.  There is only one place that that can ultimately lead.  I hope the American people are intelligent enough to get rid of his entire govt next year.  Mudah-mudahan  

[This message has been edited by Joseph27 (edited 06-05-2003).]

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
rolling ball
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 350


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: 07 May 2003, 13:53:00 pm »

" Americans had planned an invasion of Afghanistan as early as May 2001."

Can you give some info on where you read that?

Logged

If you want to hire someone you want him to have all these 3 qualities: Smart, Motivated and Ethical. If he lacks ethics, you really don't want him to be smart and motivated.
PhilM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1096


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: 07 May 2003, 15:07:00 pm »

Rolling Ball - It is mentioned in many International articles, below is just one.
http://atimes.com/c-asia/DA25Ag01.html
Logged
Manc Man
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 593


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: 07 May 2003, 15:14:00 pm »

I just skimmed that article, apart from the usual yawners about oil execs in the Administration it's all just speculation, inference and pure guess work.

It certainly does not state "The US planned invading Afghanistan in May 2001"

Or did I miss that paragraph?

Are you intentionally trying to mislead posters?

mm

Logged
Dolemite
Full Member
***
Posts: 222


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: 07 May 2003, 17:12:00 pm »

Come on, how can you take anything written by someone named "Pepe Escobar" seriously?
And Joseph, I don't think it's necessary to have a degree in journalism to know that there is a fundamental difference between "news" and "opinion".
Logged
PhilM
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1096


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: 07 May 2003, 18:03:00 pm »

Now ask yourself would Pepe Escobar take anyone called Dolomite or Manc man seriously either?  

Of course I do not believe everything I read in any newspaper, magazine and journal they are all coloured by the writers own ideology. I do believe in reading more than just the USA and UK press though. Try another article of his from Counterpunch the magazine that prides itself in muck racking behind the political masks.
http://www.counterpunch.org/escobar03212003.html

Logged
Bruno
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 317


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: 07 May 2003, 20:46:00 pm »

My favorite part.

``If you attack us, we will become stronger, cleaner, better educated, and more unified.''

Nothing like a regulation on clean water to dissuade terrorists who think mass murder will give them a shortcut to heaven.

The only chill wind people like Robbins are feeling is widespread scorn. Like many smug celebrities who are used to being adored for enitely frivolous accomplishments, he confuses criticism with censorship.  A free country is a rancorous one.

And, oh yeah, what happened to that war Osama said he started with 9/11.  Taliban gone. Saddam too. New talks in Israel. Syria closing down offices of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

And, personally, I feel a damn sight safer today than I did two years ago, no thanks to Bull Durham.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines