The Repulsive Statement of the Shoe Thrower
First seen by me on prader's blog, http://prader.livejournal.com/508091.html?view=2675131#t2675131, from http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/zaidi1.1.1.html
My main problems with Mutadhar al-Zaidi's statements?
(1) He talks as if there was universal happiness prevailing in Iraq under Saddam Hussein -- a grotesquely-evil dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of his own subjects, often by means of the most gruesome and agonizing tortures, and often simply for being related to someone who had dissented against him. Apparently, the suffering of Saddam's victims just didn't count.
(2) He talks as if America invaded Iraq in an inexplicible fit of aggression, ignoring the numerous acts of war first committed by Iraq against America and her allies, including the invasion of Kuwait, the violation of every term of the truce ending that first war, attacks on American aircraft, and an attempt to murder President George H. W. Bush after the end of the first war.
(3) It contains some outright lies, at least by omission. Among other things, (a) the "occupation" ended years ago (Iraq currently has an independent, democratically-elected government with which we are allied), (b) the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib by Americans were utterly dwarfed by the mass murders AT THE SAME PLACE by Saddam Hussein, (c) rapes of Iraqi women by American troops were almost vanishingly rare, and (d) American troops neither killed a million Iraqis nor created five million widows and orphans in that land (do the math!).
Mutadhar is in the exact same logical and moral position as a German Nazi, in 1947, bemoaning the fact that Germany had been invaded and occupied. Except, of course, that the German Nazi would have a better leg to stand on, as Germany's conquerors included the Russians, who really did do everything of which Mutadhar accused us -- and more.
We should regard Mutadhar with the same disgusted scorn that we would that hypothetical Nazi. And a dishonest Nazi, at that.
My main problems with Mutadhar al-Zaidi's statements?
(1) He talks as if there was universal happiness prevailing in Iraq under Saddam Hussein -- a grotesquely-evil dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of his own subjects, often by means of the most gruesome and agonizing tortures, and often simply for being related to someone who had dissented against him. Apparently, the suffering of Saddam's victims just didn't count.
(2) He talks as if America invaded Iraq in an inexplicible fit of aggression, ignoring the numerous acts of war first committed by Iraq against America and her allies, including the invasion of Kuwait, the violation of every term of the truce ending that first war, attacks on American aircraft, and an attempt to murder President George H. W. Bush after the end of the first war.
(3) It contains some outright lies, at least by omission. Among other things, (a) the "occupation" ended years ago (Iraq currently has an independent, democratically-elected government with which we are allied), (b) the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib by Americans were utterly dwarfed by the mass murders AT THE SAME PLACE by Saddam Hussein, (c) rapes of Iraqi women by American troops were almost vanishingly rare, and (d) American troops neither killed a million Iraqis nor created five million widows and orphans in that land (do the math!).
Mutadhar is in the exact same logical and moral position as a German Nazi, in 1947, bemoaning the fact that Germany had been invaded and occupied. Except, of course, that the German Nazi would have a better leg to stand on, as Germany's conquerors included the Russians, who really did do everything of which Mutadhar accused us -- and more.
We should regard Mutadhar with the same disgusted scorn that we would that hypothetical Nazi. And a dishonest Nazi, at that.