The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #82028   Message #2053499
Posted By: Dickey
16-May-07 - 09:52 AM
Thread Name: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration
As ususal Amos avoids direct answers or any independant logical thinking an reverts back echoing the thoughts and opinions of others, even if they are based on history which Amos himself has deemed irrelavant.

If he can build the pile high enough it will conceal everything else.

This latest GEM presented by Amos was written by Thomas Freidman who previously supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq and wrote that the establishment of a democratic state in the Middle East would force other countries in the region to liberalize and modernize. In his February 9, 2003 column for The New York Times, Friedman also pointed to the lack of compliance with the United Nations Security Council Resolution regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction:

    "The French position is utterly incoherent. The inspections have not worked yet, says Mr. de Villepin, because Saddam has not fully cooperated, and, therefore, we should triple the number of inspectors. But the inspections have failed not because of a shortage of inspectors. They have failed because of a shortage of compliance on Saddam's part, as the French know. The way you get that compliance out of a thug like Saddam is not by tripling the inspectors, but by tripling the threat that if he does not comply he will be faced with a U.N.-approved war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Friedman

After the 7 July 2005 London bombings, Friedman called for the U.S. State Department to to "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears," create a quarterly "War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting violence against others." Friedman said the governmental speech monitoring should go beyond those who actually advocate violence, and also include what former State Department spokesperson Jamie Rubin calls "excuse makers." In his 25 July column, Friedman wrote against the "excuses" made by terrorists or apologists who blame their actions on third-party influences or pressures.

    After every major terrorist incident, the excuse makers come out to tell us...why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the notion that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction between legitimate dissent and terrorism" Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society needs to maintain a clear wall between them."

http://www.answers.com/topic/thomas-l-friedman

Now that the war in Iraq that he supported has not gone the way he wanted, Friedman is backpedaling and looking for a scapegoat.