Protesters Silence Iraqi Refugees

by DakotaRed 37 Replies latest social current

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    Dakota, prove the connection to 9/11 to Iraq, there has yet to be any real proof made.

    Proof? Like the claim from the left that it is all about oil? But, I did present evidence pointing to just that. Apparently, you don't wish to see it.

    Your stupid arguments don't hold any water, we're not after terrorist, we're after saddam at the moment,

    And Saddam is considered a what?

    and he's not the one threatening our country, it's Osama, or are you going senile, and forgeting that?

    Eloquent as usual.

    I guess you missed the statement in one of the other threads, where I said, I think we should have gone after Al Quida, after 9/11,

    And what have we been doing and still doing in Afghanistan? Iraq is just an extension of the same goal, to combat international terrorism.

    now why don't you put some glasses on, so you can see past your nose. I haven't used the Iraqi people, you have.

    You haven't? LOL. Why not comment on how the Iraqi refugees were shunned and silenced by those protesters in London instead of trying to hijack the thread and obscure the article? Maybe if you pulled the hair back from your eyes or removed some of the pins in your face, you could see what has been being said.

    You sure give your leftist cronies a good representation.

  • Trauma_Hound
    Trauma_Hound

    How about this, why the hell should we go out trying to "help" the rest of the world, when we can't even help ourselves right now?

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed

    Still trying to hijack the thread and obscure the article, huh Charlie? tsk, tsk.

  • siegswife
    siegswife

    Dakota, What I don't understand is what this has to do with the left wing in the US. Didn't this event happen in London? Why should all the antiwar people take the rap for this, specifically those of us who live in the US?

    I don't agree with not letting reasonable people with different opinions have their say, and I'm sure that many other people who aren't are suspicious of and not in support of the upcoming war feel the same way.

    I respect your opinion because you don't seem to be completely taken by the rhetoric coming from the far right, but I don't agree with you trying to lump us all into the same mold. People are people and they have different opinions and different ways of expressing them. I don't understand why you are using an event that happened in London to cast an unflattering light on the people here in the US that share the antiwar sentiments of those in London. Just because we might agree with the sentiment doesn't mean we agree with the tactics.

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    Dakota, What I don't understand is what this has to do with the left wing in the US. Didn't this event happen in London? Why should all the antiwar people take the rap for this, specifically those of us who live in the US?

    I have not accused all of the left of this, SW. But, may I ask, if you were at a rally here in the US and Iraqi refugess showed up with signs asking for Saddams ouster, would you allow them to speak or demand that the rally organizers do?

    There are always two sides to an issue and I have been wiling to listen to reasonable arguments from the left, but many from the left listen to nothing but their view and try to drown out the other side. I have seen most of the posts you write as reasonable, without undue insults and a willingness to be reasonable. If only all on both sides would act the same, maybe the issue could be resolved easier.

    Like some of the Iraqi refugess claimed in the article, I fear some on the left are very sincere, but may have been misled. I'm sure you feel the same about some on the right too.

    I don't really care for war myself, but realize that at times, it does become necessary. I would much prefer to see the world's condemnation aimed at Saddam and his administration and demanding they comply with UN resolutions instead of against the Bush administration who is trying to force him into compliance. I still feel if that condemantion was aimed at Saddam, he may have complied long ago and we wouldn't be discussing this today, except maybe as history.

  • siegswife
    siegswife
    But, may I ask, if you were at a rally here in the US and Iraqi refugess showed up with signs asking for Saddams ouster, would you allow them to speak or demand that the rally organizers do?

    I would have no problem with them protesting for the ouster of Saddam. I wouldn't demand that they not be allowed to speak either. I would wonder why they would think that people at a rally against the war wouldn't be suspicious or inclined to not to want them to speak though. I mean, if it's an anti war rally, most of the people there would be against the war, right?

    As far as what you're saying about being against Saddam rather than Bush, I don't think that's a fair comparison. Saddam isn't the leader of my country, Bush is. I see no reason to view him as a threat. Sheet, (excuse my french) I don't see the Middle Eastern countries rallying around Bush and decrying Saddam (other than the ones who actually support the wayward Islamic fundamentalists). We are saying that Saddam is evil because he killed some Kurds. I don't agree with what he did. I want to make that perfectly clear. BUT even Turkey is concerned about those Kurds. You know why? Because they tend to be wayward Islamic fundamentalists.

    Let me tell you a little story.

    My first introduction to internet message boards came at the time when Elian Gonzales was rescued from uncertain death after his mother kidnapped him and decided to come with her nutcase boyfriend to the US. I went on a board at another place because I felt that the boy should be with his father. There were people on both sides of the issue on that board, but the right wing fanatical Republicans were the ones who were screaming the loudest that he should be kept with his disfunctional family in Miami.

    I did some research on Cuba and the whole Florida Cubans vs. Castro situation. What I found out is that alot of people are much happier in Cuba since the Batistas (sp. not sure if I have the name right) were ousted by Castro. They have free education (even at college level) free health care, and to put it bluntly, are more free under Castro than they ever were under those fascists.

    One day a man showed up at the board and he called himself something...Nuke. I don't remember. This guy had been in the US navy for over 15 years and he was also trying to explain to those hard core right wingers that people in Cuba are much better off with Castro than they were with the Batistas (or whatever). He ripped them a new *ssh*le.

    My point is, we shouldn't interfere with the internal structure of ANY other country UNLESS they pose a direct threat to us. I'm sure that not all people in Iraq are happy with Saddam, most of them might disagree with his politics, just as it is here in the US. BUT they seem to have food in their markets, roofs over their heads and are able to eek out a reasonably happy existence with him in power. He IS a Capitalist after all. He believes in trade and markets and the like. THAT is why alot of Muslims don't even like him.

    Dakota, it breaks my heart that this country is headed on such an unprecidented course. We have NEVER overtly violated the concept of not being the agressor toward a country that has not posed a direct threat toward us or those we would consider allies.

    I hope it isn't leading where I think it is.

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    but the right wing fanatical Republicans were the ones who were screaming the loudest that he should be kept with his disfunctional family in Miami.

    As a right wing radical republican myself, (although I maintain an independent registration) and one who was also born and raised in South Florida (born in Dade County and grew up in Broward County and was there for the start of the Cuban refugee influx in the early sixties), I was in total agreement with the Clinton Administration on returning Elian to his Father. That the return was fought against so hard was an embarrassment to me, since we also wish other nations to return the children kidnapped and spirited off to their countries by non-custodial parents of that country.

    However, it did take government intervention for his return, did it not? Otherwise, the family in Miami could have and would have kept him.

    However, to say that Saddam poses no threat to us is not entirely true. I posted articles showing Iraqi defectors claims of a training camp outside Baghdad for training terrorist. There are even satellite photos of this camp, with the 727 aircraft they use for training to take over aircraft, as stated by defectors. He is not only raping and slaughtering his own people, but has been shown to help terrorist, monetarily if no other way, and does indeed pose a threat to us. One of the articles I posted also claimed it was more him behind September 11 than Osama Bin Ladin and made a pretty good argument, I thought.

    I also posted this article as we hear many times about the rallys being held to protect the Iraqi people, to prevent them from being murdered by the Americans. But, Saddam is murdering them by the droves and the same people wish all to turn a blind eye? The world turned pretty much a blind eye against Hitler too and we all know how that ended up.

    No, I don't think deposing Saddam will cure all the troubles in the Middle East, but it could give it a bit more breathing space as they hopefully cure their ills themselves, if that is even possible. But, there has been a connection made between Saddam and international terrorism and that is a threat outside of his own country, one I feel needs dealt with before another September 11 happens here.

    If not for the help from other nations in 1776, we would not have gotten our independence from England either.

    As I keep saying, if the world community stood against Saddam and his quest for more weapons and maltreatment of his own people, as they do against Bush, he would see he has no choice but to back down and comply with the 17 UN resolutions against him. His compliance is necessary to avert war.

    In closing, if the Iraqi peoples voices aren't worth listening to in this struggle, whose are? If truly anti-war, why is there absolutely no outcry against Saddam warring against his own people? The systematic murder of opposing thought inside Iraq is a war also.

  • Trauma_Hound
    Trauma_Hound
    I have not accused all of the left of this, SW. But, may I ask, if you were at a rally here in the US and Iraqi refugess showed up with signs asking for Saddams ouster, would you allow them to speak or demand that the rally organizers do?

    Ya ok, like you would let a anti-war protester speak at a pro-war ralley. LOL Hello, it's an anti-war ralley, where anti-war speakers come to speak, not pro war! That's like asking a Mormon, come speak to a congregation of JW's.

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed

    Charlie, I don't go to either sides rallies and have not tried to silence even you.

    If you go back and actually read the article, you may see that the Iraqi people wished to let the protesters know that they were being misled about Saddam and Iraq. However, since the left claims to be protesting this war to protect the Iraqis, why block them from speaking at a rally supposedly held in their name?

    Like I said in another thread, if truly anti-war, why no outcry against Saddam warring against his own people? Bush needs to be stopped to protect innocent Iraqi lives, the left says. Yet, the Iraqis are prevented from speaking at a rally held in their name. The left also cries that war is wrong and must be prevented, yet they also say nothing about Saddam warring against his own people the last 25 years or so. Seems rather selective and inconsistent to me.

  • Trauma_Hound
    Trauma_Hound

    Because Saddam isn't the dictator in charge of this country.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit