May 29, 2006
World Opinion Remains Split On Serial Killing
I like to mark every Memorial Day by examining a few brazen lies by world leaders.
For instance, here's Tony Blair speaking in Washington on Friday about Iraq:
"The war, I know, split the world."
Of course, in a sense this is true. It's true in the same sense the world is split on the question of serial killing, pedophilia, bestiality, feeding asbestos to infants, etc. After all, there are obviously a few people somewhere who think such things are fantastic.
By non-insane standards, however, the invasion of Iraq did not "split the world." People interested in reality can find this out by consulting this January, 2003 Gallup International poll.
Gallup asked people in 41 countries whether they were in favor of military action against Iraq. They were given three options: (1) under no circumstances; (2) only if sanctioned by the United Nations; and (3) unilaterally by America and its allies.
Majorities in many countries chose #1. And there was no country on earth where a majority chose #3ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Âi.e., what Tony Blair supported and what actually happened. Even in the U.S., only 33% favored an invasion without U.N. sanction.
And the numbers drop sharply off from there. Here's the level of support elsewhere for Blair's war:
10% or less India, Russia, Germany, France, South Africa, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Iceland, Switzerland, Norway, Albania, Bosnia & Herzogovinia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Georgia, Macedonia, Romania, Yugoslavia, Argentina, Bolivia, Canada, Ecuador, Uruguay, Hong Kong, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Cameroon, and Nigeria
In fact, only 10% chose #3 in England, BLAIR'S OWN COUNTRY.
I'm absolutely certain more people than this would agree with the statement "Tony Blair should be hung for war crimes." I look forward to a proclamation by him that this issue has "split the world."
Posted at May 29, 2006 11:41 AM
Some people never wake up from their dream.
"We can argue forever about the merits of removing Saddam," but that is not the point, Blair said in the speech at Georgetown University.
Actually no one ever argued about the removal of Saddam, both conservatives and liberals were aware of his genocide and in fact plenty of people objected to the fact that our government supported Saddam in years past. The argument was about those WMD, remember those WMD?
"You may not agree with the original decision. You may believe mistakes have been made. You may even think, 'How can it be worth the sacrifice?"' Blair said. "But surely we must all accept this is a genuine attempt to run the race of liberty."
Actually no, many do not accept this as a genuine attempt to run the race of liberty, a meaningless phrase, and yes indeedy many believe mistakes were made beginning with voting in Bush and Blair.
Blair said he was impressed with Iraq's multiethnic leaders. "As long as they are willing to fight terrorism and violence, they should have the world's support," he said.
Translated this means there is a bloody civil war now in progress and the world seldom supports civil wars.
And as this well written Knight Ridder article states he said little about Iran because Iran is laying the groundwork for an Islamic fundamentalist government in Iraq. Blair, that bastion of honesty, should listen to what his own troop commanders say.
Iranian-backed militia groups take control of much of southern Iraq
Iranian influence is evident throughout the area. In one government office, an aide approached a Knight Ridder reporter and, mistaking him for an Iranian, said, "Don't be afraid to speak Farsi in Basra. We are a branch of Iran."
"We get an idea that (military training) courses are being run" in Iran, said Lt. Col. David Labouchere, who commands British units in the province of Maysan, north of Basra. "People are training on the other side of the border and then coming back."
Tony Blair should be hung for war crimes.
These people would agree with this statement, but I hope everyone concentrates on Bushco first. Blair was an accessory after the fact compared to the Bushco cabal.
Ah am grateful for the support by the good people of Uganda for our effort to bring democracy and freedom to the people of Iraq.Once we stand down in Iraq, we might just inflict these same goodies on the people of Uganda.
Semi-seriously, what the hell is up with Uganda & Kenya? Colombia's supposed to be sort of conservative and reflexively pro-USA, right? The Australian bit coincides with my image of it as being not unlike Texas, but sexier and with better beaches and cuter animals and less Church. In Romania I guess you could chalk that up to the vampires? But I can't figure out why Kenya and Uganda would be so pro-war.
It's absolutly wonderful for Bush and Blair to reminis the past FEW mistakes and to ponder the consequences to world opinion. A more fitting speach would have included a couple of ideas toward extraction, a serious effort toward a solution. (other than the same old rheteric of stand up or down) Prehaps actually listening to the Generals for once may help.
sk - do you mean you can get the death penalty for not wearing a seatbelt? Wow, that's harsh!
I think the worst thing about this speech by Blair is that it insults the intelligence of everyone. As Mike Meyer adroitly points out there have been more than just a few mistakes. And if anyone doubts there is a civil war in Iraq rather than a running of a race to liberty read this article in the WaPo.
Iraq Is the Republic of Fear
Every morning the streets of Baghdad are littered with dozens of bodies, bruised, torn, mutilated, executed only because they are Sunni or because they are Shiite. Power drills are an especially popular torture device...
I disagree. If you're goin' to hang im, he should be hanged. I'm astickelr for grammer. Spellin, not so much-- spellin is a boorgeois plot to be fussy about all sorts of crazy s***.
Unless you are saying that he has the moral presence of a paintin. Tthat's different.
Given that the margin of error on most polls is like 4%, I don't think we should take the numbers all THAT seriously for uganda, kenya, etc. Unless someone can show that the difference between them and, say, Estonia is statistically significant, there's no reason to start making up explanations.
Oh sk - and I thought we were getting on so well!
And then you go and mention that little boondoggle...
From that article about Melbourne:
...The City of Greater Dandenong is the most culturally diverse of all, so much so that no one nationality dominates. In Dandenong itself, the top three foreign-born groups in 2001 came from Sri Lanka, India and Yugoslavia but together they made up less than 20 per cent of the total residents born overseas.
Dandenong North's top three groups came from Sri Lanka, England and Italy (with a combined 21 per cent), while in Keysborough and Noble Park, it was the Vietnamese, Cambodians and Sri Lankans (combined 25-30 per cent).
In total, 54 per cent of the City of Greater Dandenong's residents are foreign-born, from 151 countries; 48 per cent have non-English-speaking backgrounds. The composition reflects the municipality's industrial base, which traditionally provided jobs for new arrivals over the past 50 years, relatively cheap housing and Immigration Department units providing temporary accommodation for refugees.
It ain't Sydney.
What honestly really scares me as a Brit is that while the Bush administration is somewhat cynical and manipulating, I strongly suspect that Blair believes everything he says. He's not doing it for oil or for money or for the sake of relations across the big pond, he's doing it because he thinks every death, not least hounding poor Dr David Kelly to suicide, is worth the sacrifice to save the world from global tyranny.
He's not lying when he says he believes the war split the world - what he believes he's doing is pandering to the pacifist left who can't see past their ideals, because what he really thinks is that the great 'silent majority' supports him and his war. And if they don't, well, it's only because they're misguided or ignorant, because they don't know like he does.
He's exactly the same on domestic issues.
To summarise: Seriously. He's a mentalist.
I agree that the war has split the world.
Half the people think Blair should be hanged.
The other half think he should be drawn and quartered.
I certainly don't believe that Blair should be hanged.
I think he should receive a fair trial and, if convicted, the penalty prescribed by law.
But it would be nice if he could join his pal Bush and the rest of the Bush Gang for their globally-televised ceremonial execution by firing squad (Marines in their dress uniforms) in the White House Rose Garden at dawn.
the most significant poll, not yet taken, would be
how many who were for Irakatak when it started are now against it? quite a few
how many who were against it when it started are now for it? not a single person on the planet