It's time to admit that our original goals in Iraq will not be achieved...
Francis Fukuyama has left the building. And now Bill Buckley has burned the building down. The house that Bush built - the "liberation" and "rebuilding" of Iraq into a stable, secular, pro-American, Western-style democracy - has been reduced to little more than charred embers. Whatever it was we were trying to accomplish in Iraq has failed.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - George Psalmanazar
"Unfortunately for most of you, you only know what you read in the papers, which no longer inform, but editorialize."
What all of us know is the false line the Bushies have been feeding us and the growing chasm between it and reality. Following the discrediting of the pretexts for an unprovoked invasion, the scoffing at "dead enders" in their "last throes" etc., whilst the violence and consequent body count mounts. The numbers are not an editorial fancy.
The neocon-stated scheme of imposing a permanent US military presence upon Iraq, masquerading as a pure, humanistic crusade (and, for some extremely naive dupes, it really was only that) has predictably failed. Would it were not so; nevertheless, that is the situation. Self-deception might endur, but it's objective is shattered.
Now, little remains but for the arrogantly righteous who contrived the fiasco to blame its victims for their folly.
77 - Aus trade
As for the being Nice to Saddam and he would give u oil comment above. Saddam had switched to taking Euros for Oil. Not US dollars. To make matters worse... at the time the Euros were doing very well against the the USD and other countries - particularly IRAN - were looking at moving across to Euro's as well... Google this - its quite well documented....
Its actually trite to say the war was about oil. It was about many things - Including Oil, protecting the US economy, distracting people from internal US issues, a belief in god will make us victorious and so on.
Nonetheless. As others have states. The war was based on Lies by people who believed in their faith and dogma more than in facts and expert advice.
Learn the lesson or things will KEEP getting worse. You can ignore reality - but reality WONT ignore you.
78 - nh
"those on the extreme left who... claimed the war was all about oil and American empire are just as wrong as they always were"
Ive been thinking about this today. Of course the Iraq war was about oil and the persuit of american interests in the middle east. Every war, ever, has been fought as a consequence of nations persuing their national interests: be they economic, military or political - or all three, as in the case of iraq.
The point is the iraq war was a misjudgement, as the author of this piece demonstrates. Anyone who knows the first thing about Islam and the West will realise that its never going to be as easy as toppling a brutal dictator and bringing in 'democracy'. It just doesn't work like that.
The reasons for this fill volumes and volumes of history books.
Its interesting because, although the vietnam comparison is a loaded and imperfect one, it does seem that one truth applies to both: The US misunderstood the culture of the country it was trying to intervene with. And, sadly, in this case perhaps more than the last, the outcome for the people involved is far from happy. You dont have to be on the 'extreme left' to recognise this.
79 - hawaiian_son
I must agree with SFC SKI. News outlets nowadays tend to be bias somewhat, when it comes to telling what it actually going on. And sometimes, the news media can become a liability to our troops when they disclose upcoming military operations to the GP.
I'd like to see a newspaper that is not afraid to print both sides of each story that happens in our world. Our local paper tends to "dress up" certain articles where it can make a person look good or bad. It'd be nice to know all the facts of a story, and shouldn't be "one-sided".
So unless you were (or are actually) there where the action is, and can (or saw) what is happening firsthand, let's not be too judgemental with how our government is doing it's business. I think we gotta give him the benefit of the doubt. If you think his (Bush's) job is easy, then why doesn't someone else try for his job?
Okay... I'll admit it. I was kind of being a critic about our government in my earlier posting, but now I think I'm gonna retrack what I said and not be quick to point the blame at anyone. It's easy to criticize when you aren't there in Iraq sacrificing your life for someone else.
As a former military soldier (MOS 11H-40; Co. B; 100th Batt.; 442nd Inf.), I support our troops and their efforts to make a difference in our world.
80 - MCH
"I think we gotta give him the benefit of the doubt. If you think his (Bush's) job is easy, then why doesn't someone else try for his job?"
That might be fine for you, hawaiin_son, but I will never give a deserter like that the benefit of the doubt.
"As a former military soldier (MOS 11H-40; Co. B; 100th Batt.; 442nd Inf.), I support our troops and their efforts to make a difference in our world."
Thanx for your service to our country, but as a vet myself (USN, NavCommStaHono, '71-73), I support the troops while opposing the policy.
See the Veterans Against The Iraq War web site, www.vaiw.org/vet
81 - George Psalmanazar
"I'd like to see a newspaper that is not afraid to print both sides of each story that happens in our world."
Why would anyone assume that a simplistic, contrived "balance" would reflect reality? "Let's hear Hitler's side of the story" is a bizarre standard.
Note the findings of the about-to-be-released Zogby poll of US troops serving in Iraq:
Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush’s position that they should stay as long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. troops should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they should withdraw “immediately.”
82 - hawaiian_son
Thanks MCH for that link. I just checked out that website and it certainly changed my mind again.
I think that after 9/11, we shouldn't have gone chasing after those responsible for committing such a violent crime against the US. After installing all of the high security measures at our nation's airports and harbors, we should've used our armed forces to strengthen our airports and harbors. In other words, beef up our defenses at home so that nothing like 9/11 could ever happen again.
But then again, what had happened on 9/11 cannot be compared to 12/7, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. What had happened back in '41, with the Naval fleet destroyed and the many lives lost back then (military and civilian), that was a valid reason for our nation to fight back. If the terrorist attacks on 9/11 had totally wiped out New York, then I can see a valid reason for getting out there and kicking ass to the troublemakers. The evidence against Iraq wasn't really 100% guaranteed, and was somewhat questionable. We should've just waited until the evidence was truly clear, and if it were so, wait and see if harm was actually going to come again to the US. And if there were actual harm coming towards us, then we should've flexed our muscles against those who threaten us.
As I said in an earlier posting, we (the United States), have to stop being the policemen of the world. Everytime a little country cries for help, we're sending our forces out. And if we keep stretching out our forces all over the world, who's gonna be protecting the homefront? Sooner or later, an enemy of ours will see that our front door will be wide open, and will hit us again when we least expect it.
83 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Hawaiian son wrote:
I'd like to see a newspaper that is not afraid to print both sides of each story that happens in our world.
When you live in Israel, the very first thing you learn is that there is almost always more than two sides to a story. The more players there are, the more sides.
Ther are quite a number of players in this little story, so getting all the sides would quite a task - especially when you consider that most reporters in America are not ythe best educated of folks.
84 - hawaiian_son
I guess when you work in a court of law, you need to hear both sides of the complaint in order to draw a fair judgement. If you only hear one side of the complaint, you may not be able to render a justifiable decision that would be beneficial to both parties involved.
With regards to newspaper articles that I have read locally, the paper tends to really make the public think that this person is really bad, or that the victim was really treated unfairly. From the other side of the coin, the people that the newspaper portrayed as being innocent are really trouble makers in life, and that is something that the GP doesn't know about, unless they know the individual personally.
That is why whenever I'm reading about a particular case, I always try to keep an open mind and not render any premature judgement until all the facts have been presented. Only then can a proper judgement be rendered to the parties involved. But not all judgements can satisfy everyone. There will be some who will argue the decision endlessly until they achieve what they want (Appeals).
Regarding the war in Iraq... did the United States have enough evidence to pursue this matter further? Was the GP fairly informed about such evidence? Was the United States justified about taking such a course of action against another country? It's hard for me to decide if our actions are justifiable in this case, because no proof was given about the WMD's. No proof that the WMD's was actually being aimed at us, or where they intended to point them. Sooner or later, there will come a time when the United States will have to admit being at fault and pay the price for flexing our muscles unnecessarily against others.
85 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Hawaiian son,
In a court of law, you have two sides - the plaintiff and the respondent. The rules of procedure are written that way. A trial is a battle using words in place of swords and maces.
On the real battlefield, you may have one attacker - but you still will have several sides. In addition, the issue in dispute tends to change over time.
In this case, in addition to the United States, you have the EU, the various Shiite factions, the Sunnis, the Kurds, the Persians, the Turks, the Saudis and on the periphery, looking in, the Russian Federation. We Israelis also have our hand in the game. So you have lots more than two sides to consider, and the media is incapable presently of accurately representing the interests or views of the various sides.
86 - Andy Marsh
RJ - I read your artical and then went looking for what I knew I'd find...a chicken hawk argument from MCH (diva). The more things change, the more they stay the same.
87 - George Psalmanazar
"I can see a valid reason for getting out there and kicking ass to the troublemakers. The evidence against Iraq wasn't really 100% guaranteed, and was somewhat questionable.
Somewhat questionable? There was (and is) no evidence whatsoever that Saddam was involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. Junior Bush was forced to openly admit that on 9/18/2003 - after the Bushies had deliberately conflated Iraq with 9/11 in order to contrive their unprovoked attack. Along with the DubyaMD stockpiles, the mobile biolabs, the nuclear programme, etc., it was merely one more fraudulent pretext for the invasion and occupation they had long sought.
Be careful what you wish for.
88 - Bliffle
Tyler: "This was a war that took the taliban out of control of Afgahnistan and made Afgahnistan a democracy."
But GWB let OBL escape. And only Kabul is ruled by Our Chosen Leader, Karzai.
" This war also dismantled al quada as they are on the run and are getting little funding to pull off another big attack on the U.S."
Actually, AQ is growing in size, using Iraq as a recruiting ploy. And they get to learn their war-trade with OJT, while US troops are On Parade in Iraq: sitting ducks.
" Also removing saddam and ridding the wmd threat from him is worth the money that we will be paying back for years to come."
Saddam had NO WMD threat. Didn't you get the memo? All those inspectors, all those lies from the admin.
And this war will cost us a trillion dollars before it's over. How will that be repaid?
89 - hawaiian_son
I guess I'd better start paying more attention to world events, instead of just kicking back in the sun and watching the waves roll onto shore.
RJ: Point well received. Guess someone has to really sit down with all parties involved and listen to what each has to say about all of this.
Braddah George: Guess I must've been sleeping when Bush made his speech regarding the existence of WMD's. All I remember was seeing his face on the tube, and the next thing I know, it was time for me to get up and get ready for work. Oh well... my loss!
But I still say we should've kept the troops at home to beef up security where it's needed. If we were to show a strong front on our home turf, then maybe other countries would think twice about starting trouble with us. We gotta show them that we're ready to kick butt if someone messes around with the U.S.
But once again... it's just my own opion. I can't speak for everyone.
90 - MCH
"RJ - I read your artical and then went looking for what I knew I'd find...a chicken hawk argument from MCH (diva). The more things change, the more they stay the same."
- Andy Marsh
Consistency, Andy babe, consistency. And speaking of "looking" for things, actually one doesn't need to look that hard to find the "chicken hawk argument" regarding this cluster-fuck of an invasion and failed occupation, considering the fact that 95% of this administration is comprised of draft-dodgers and "perfumed princes," to borrow a term from the late Col. David Hackworth...
91 - RogerMDillon
"And this war will cost us a trillion dollars before it's over. How will that be repaid?"
Is the correct answer "tax cuts"?
92 - Dave Nalle
Sounds good to me, Roger.
Dave
93 - Bliffle
"Iraq - It Didn't Work"
Well, we'll just have to keep trying until we get it right! Next: Iran!
94 - Andy Marsh
I'll give you that...you are consistent...or would one of these words work better?
banausic, blah, boring, colorless, dreary, droning, dull, flat, ho hum, humdrum, monotone, nothing, pedestrian, plodding, prosaic, recurrent, reiterated, repetitious, repetitive, same, samely, sing-song, soporific, tedious, tiresome, toneless, treadmill, unchanged, unchanging, uniform, uninflected, uninteresting, unrelieved, unvaried, unvarying, wearisome, wearying
95 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Just curious, Andy,
Whch thesaurus did you drag these definitions out of? And from what word?
96 - td
After all this debate, it's a nice coincedence for the BBC to release a worldwide poll on whether Iraq worked.
Here are the Countries that believe the War in Iraq was effective at reducing terrorism:
Nigeria 49% (Decreased terrorism)
Here are the Countries that believe the War in Iraq either had no effect on reducing terrorism or was responcible for increasing terrorism:
United States - 76% (Increased/no effect on terrorism)
Canada - 91%
Argentina - 87%
Brazil - 83%
Chile 70%
Mexico 69%
Finland 93%
Italy 95%
Germany 94%
Spain 91%
Great britain 94%
Poland 88%
France 84%
Russia 84%
Egypt 89%
Iran 85%
Iraq 86%
Turkey 78%
Saudi Arabia 58%
Senegal 72%
Tanzania 56%
Zimbabwe 52%
Congo 65%
South Africa 52%
Ghana 47% (30% say decreased, 23% no answer)
Kenya 51%
China 91%
South Korea 96%
Australia 92%
Indonesia 82%
Philippines 69%
India 63%
Afganistan 59%
Sri Lanka 41% (6% say decreased, 53% no answer)
Average 75%
97 - nitpicker
"After all this debate, it's a nice coincedence for the BBC to release a worldwide poll on whether Iraq worked."
The BBC forgot to include Israel where 100% say it worked for them.
98 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
The BBC would very much like to forget Israel - altogether.
And I'd like to forget them.
99 - nitpicker
Don't shoot the messenger because you don't like the message.
100 - Andy Marsh
thesaurus dot com...the word was monotonous
101 - nitpicker
#88
"And this war will cost us a trillion dollars before it's over. How will that be repaid?"
Answer: Inflation.
In ten years a trillion dollars will look like only a few billion.
Invest in the Yuan.
The Chinese yuan hit a new post-revaluation high against the dollar for the fourth straight day on Wednesday, amid talk from Beijing of freer convertibility and U.S. calls for a more flexibility.
The yuan closed at 8.0369 to the dollar, up from Tuesday's 8.0402. The yuan hit an intraday high of 8.0365, its strongest level since Beijing revalued it last July.
The currency has now strengthened 0.91 percent against the dollar since it was revalued to 8.11 per dollar.
102 - RJ Elliott
Thanks, everyone, for your comments.
I have avoided responding to your comments intentionally. I think my piece should stand alone, without devolving into an angry back-and-forth over minutiae.
I am commenting now only to draw your attention to this piece, which I feel is even-handed and realistic, and it comes from someone who has actually been in Iraq very recently, unlike me or 99% of the commenters here.
103 - Dave Nalle
My question is whether you still feel as you did when you wrote this piece, RJ - now that it seems pretty clear that the mosque attack may be what ends civil strife and brings the country together in their shared hatred of Wahabis?
My question is whether 5 years down the road when Iraq invades Saudi Arabia we're going to stand back and smile secretly.
Dave
104 - nitpicker
"...it seems pretty clear that the mosque attack may be what ends civil strife and brings the country together in their shared hatred of Wahabis?"
au contraire.
The hatred and the blame will be against the US.
That conforms with the law of unintended consequences.
105 - RJ Elliott
Dave:
I believe pulling out now would be disastrous. Such a retreat would only embolden the terrorists and ensure that al-Qaeda sets up permanent shop in Western Iraq from which to attack us in the future.
As Colin Powell once said, "You break it, you own it."
But the results on this invasion have been nothing like what we were led to expect.
If you had known, Dave, three years ago, before the invasion, that there would be no major stockpiles of WMDs found, that over 2,000 US military personnel would be killed, thousands more horribly wounded, and roughly 500 billion taxpayer dollars (and counting) would be spent, so that pro-Iranian Shiite religious parties could put sharia into the Iraqi Constitution while a full-scale sectarian civil war is possibly just another high-profile suicide bombing away, would you still have supported it?
I wouldn't have. At least not the way we chose to do it.
Perhaps just arming the Kurdish militia in the North and Shiite rebels in the South and providing air-support for them would have been better for everyone involved...
106 - nitpicker
"Perhaps just arming the Kurdish militia in the North and Shiite rebels in the South and providing air-support for them would have been better for everyone involved..."
Of course.
But how could our politicians profit from that?
107 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Nitpicker wrote,
"Don't shoot the messenger because you don't like the message."
Shoot the messenger? I wouldn't mind blowing them up! It's not that they are particularly worse in their one sidedness on covering Israel than ABC, CNN, NPR, Agence Press France, AP, the CBC, etc. etc. etc. - it's that they are so damned self righteous and smug about it. The BBC violated their royal charter with their biased news coverage long ago.
108 - nitpicker
The message was the BBC released a worldwide poll on whether Iraq worked without including Israel where 100% say it worked for them.
Where’s the bias?
109 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Where's the bias? Well, they could have mentioned that it worked for Israel - by whatever percentage. We do exist, you know.
This particular story is only a minor example. An Irishman who wants the Brits off the Emerald isle is a terrorist when he blows up the BBC building. An Arab killing 25 people at a Passover seder is a "militant?" Why isn't the Arab also a terrorist? Or are we Jews a lesser species of humanity, lower thasn Brits, perhaps.
Sorry, I'm not buying into whatever line of bullshit they peddle. They are Jew hating pigs and I have no use for them. They are damned lucky I'm not premier here. If I were, they, and most of the foregn press would do their reporting about Israel from Nicosia. Most of them are anti-Israel scum who are unneeded and unwelcome.
110 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy has rather a subjective view of bias, although I suspect he means prejudice.
111 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chris, you can quibble over whether the BBC is biased or prejudiced. It is of no consequence to me.
Either way, they're still Jew-hating trash who do not belong in Israel.
112 - Christopher Rose
That could only be true if you are either deluded or extremist yourself, Ruvy, for I have watched the BBC news all my life and the thought has never occurred to me that it was the thing you said.
113 - Christopher Rose
Next you'll be siding with the loons that think the ACLU is evil...
114 - Christopher Rose
BBC NEWS search results for "Israel". Yes, on second thoughts, the blatant Jew-hating of the BBC shines so brightly I'm dazzled.
Your 3,307 search results for "Israel"
Arab party avoids Israel poll ban
An Israeli Arab party narrowly avoids disqualification from next month's Israeli parliamentary vote.
Q&A: Iran nuclear stand-off
BBC News examines what is behind the row between the UN and Tehran over Iran's nuclear programme.
Palestinians welcome EU aid deal
An EU aid package worth 120m euros is hailed by Palestinians and the US but condemned by Israel.
Blast at Israeli weapons centre
Several people are injured in an explosion at a major arms research facility in Israel, police say.
Israel's stricken Sharon turns 78
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon turns 78 while remaining critically ill in a coma in hospital.
Israel seeking goal with Arsenal
Arsenal football club signs a sponsorship deal to promote Israel as a tourism destination in its new stadium.
» 97% relevance | 26/02/2006 | similar stories
Palestinian leader issues warning
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas says he may resign if he feels too constrained by a Hamas administration.
» 86% relevance | 26/02/2006 | similar stories
Deal sought in Israel burial row
Israel's supreme court names a mediator in a row over the fate of an ancient Muslim cemetery in Jerusalem.
» 91% relevance | 23/02/2006 | similar stories
Israeli general in Jordan apology
An Israeli general apologises to Jordan's king for saying he might be the last Hashemite ruler.
» 83% relevance | 23/02/2006 | similar stories
115 - Andy Marsh
CR - the ACLU isn't evil...just really really fucked up!
116 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
The BBC is (are?) still Jew-hating trash. I wouldn't expect you to see that. The ACLU is in America. They deal with American issues that, for the most part, are no concern of mine.
117 - Christopher Rose
Well, now I'm confused. The main thing the ACLU does is defend the US Constitution from assault by powerful vested interests, to protect the rights and freedoms of Americans.
Most US folk swear up and down by the constitution yet so many of you seem to love to attack the one organisation that defends it. Yet another reason to marvel at your country.
118 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy: Substance or silence please. I'm not in the mood for mindless aand frankly racist insults. Put up or shut up...
119 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Put up or shut up...quoth the Comments Editor.
I went to the Honest Reporting Folder in my OE and just pulled up one piece at random, with the intent of picking up Honest Reporting's website.
I came up with...
BBC UPHOLDS COMPLAINT AGAINST PLETT'S TEARS FOR ARAFAT This is from 29 November 2005. This was the second item in the e-mail.
At the end of October 2004, HonestReporting highlighted BBC Mideast correspondent Barbara Plett's emotional attachment to Yasser Arafat following her public revelation that:
"when the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound, I started to cry... without warning."
Despite a flood of complaints from HonestReporting subscribers, the BBC initially cleared Plett of any wrongdoing. Following an appeal, however, the BBC Board of Governors has upheld part of the complaint, stating that Plett's comments "breached the requirements of due impartiality".
According to the BBC website, the BBC's director of news, Helen Boaden has apologized for what she described as an "editorial misjudgment". She said it appeared Plett "unintentionally gave the impression of over-identifying with Yasser Arafat and his cause".
While this begrudging apology certainly does not go far enough in addressing the BBC's Mideast coverage, which is the subject of the majority of complaints received by the corporation, congratulations to those who kept up the pressure on the BBC and also contributed to its Israeli-Palestinian Impartiality Review. Following the recent deadline for submissions on 25 November, HonestReporting awaits with interest the publication of the report in the spring.
CHANGES TO BBC COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE
Staying with the BBC, a number of HonestReporting readers inform us that complaints to the BBC are no longer accepted by direct e-mail. Instead, the complainant is now directed to a web-based procedure at http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints. We hope that you will not be discouraged from making your feelings known to the BBC in the future.
Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias.
HonestReporting www.honestreporting.com
It took a year for the bastards to finally admit media bias. I stand by my words. The BBC are anti-Jewish pigs who ought to be allowed to report on Israel - from Nicosia
120 - Christopher Rose
1. Actually, put up or shut up said I, not the Comments Editor, which is just a volunteer job I do. The two are clearly distinct and if you think I have exceeded the comments guidelines in my own remarks, you can complain -- in the first instance to the Comments Editor and, if still uncontent, to the bosses through the usual channels, as you already know, sir.
2. One case, based on "when the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound, I started to cry... without warning.", seems very thin evidence to make your ludicrous statement respectable.
3. I visited the honestreporting site and found it to be dogmatic and blinkered, so it came as no surprise that you select it as a source.
4. Why do I keep bashing my head against the walls of divisive dogmas?
121 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Asks Chris,
Why do I keep bashing my head against the walls of divisive dogmas?
Do you like how it feels when you stop?
122 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy, LOL!
I suspect I'm actually daft enough to believe that one day that fucker-of-a-wall is coming down, just like the one in Berlin did the day after my last visit there!
;-)
123 - nitpicker
It is likely that the BBC cannot forget that in 1946, Jewish terrorists led by Menachem Begin, blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem which housed British Army Headquarters. The attack was made at about 12 noon when most of the British officers were there.
The Near East terrorism of that time continues unabated.
124 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
While this begrudging apology certainly does not go far enough in addressing the BBC's Mideast coverage, which is the subject of the majority of complaints received by the corporation This begrudging apology took a year to get.
Chris whined that I gave merely one example of BBC's media bias. Truth is, I pulled up one e-mail with intent of copying scores of examples. And there it was in this e-mail.
Poor kid didn't like my source either. Too bad.
It still doesn't explain why when Jews die at the hands of Arabs, the Arabs doing the killing arew merely "militants" or "activists" and when Brits die at the hands of Arabs, the Arabs doing the killing are terrorists.
It is likely that the BBC cannot forget that in 1946, Jewish terrorists led by Menachem Begin, blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem which housed British Army Headquarters. The attack was made at about 12 noon when most of the British officers were there.
The Near East terrorism of that time continues unabated.
But you forget to note that the Etze"l called the King David Hotel and warned them, on Begin's orders.
The manager of the Sbarro Restaurant in J-lem had no such warning. The manager of the Dolphinarium or Mike's place in Tel Aviv had no such warning. The manager of the Park Hotel in Netanya had no such warning. Egged in Jerusalem had such warnings when the 18 bus was blown up, the 6 bus was blown up, the 19 bus was blown up, just to pick three off my immediate memory.
And Jews did not dance in th streets of Jerusalem when the King Davids blew up. Every damned time a Jew dies here Arabs dance in the streets and hand out candy in celbration. It tells you what they really want - what savages they truly are - and why they deserve to be driven out of this land.
The Arab terrorists who launched their murders against Jews get fistfuls of sympathy from a simpering British taxpayer supported corporation who kiss Arab ass and choke when talking about who it is in British society who mutilates the genitals of young girls.
No, sorry nitpicker - you seem to be missing one huge louse called the BBC that needs delousing. But they are in good company. There is CNN, PBS, ABC, Reuters, the AP - all of whom disply rank media bias when dealing with Israel. If you can't get out the DDT, maybe I should.
I get only one bit of satisfaction out of the news coverage these days. What we suffered in Israel is now being inflicted ten-fold in Iraq - the Arabs are dying at the hands of their own savages, and Americans are seeing that they do not really want to be part of the bloody mess.
And I still stand by my words. The BBC are anti-Jewish pigs who ought to be allowed to report on Israel - from Nicosia.
125 - nitpicker
"But you forget to note that the Etze"l called the King David Hotel and warned them, on Begin's orders."
Let's not forget that the warning came several seconds before the explosives were set off. No one got out as a result of this "warning".
You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own set of "facts."