From: Richard Ridge (richard_ridge@tao-group.com)
Date: Tue Jan 08 2002 - 04:42:47 MST
> Here in the Southwest United States, you will hear very little support for
> Israel. Frankly, we don't care.<snip> I don't see any way that an East
Coast politician could so much
> as suggest that Israelis are murdering people as opposed to defending
themselves
> and still have a job 6 months later.
Hmmm. I agree with much of your summary, but I'm not exactly under the
impression that the political correctness has ever been much favoured by the
Republicans (it seems easier to apply this to the Democrats) - for example,
why a Christian Fundamentalist like Jesse Helms would be so staunchly
pro-Israeli on that basis. I can only conclude that Hermit's arguments apply
in a case like that. Which east coast states do you see this kind of
pressure as having an influence in?
> WRONG - Osama is responsible for himself. It was not our training
> the birthed
> him, or taught him his hatreds. He is an independent individual.
> We gave him the
> tools to fight a battle that was genuinely good.
I take your point. One of the problems for the individuals you describe is
that they frequently denounce the supply and training of Afghan insurgents
against the Soviet incursion, but fall short of suggesting that the US
should have let Russia gain Afghanistan. To date, I've only come across one
writer one is an exception to this (and note that I am not necessarily
endorsing said piece):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,576657,00.html
"All you green-eyed "playa-haters" who loathe little me may not believe
this, but over the past month I've had loads of letters asking me why I
haven't given you my take on the events of September 11. Well, for one
thing, although I like saying "I told you so", I didn't think it would be in
the best possible taste to do so when the dust from the World Trade Centre
was still settling.
Nevertheless, it remains a fact that, even as a twentysomething
flibbertigibbet, I was the only British journalist I know of to back the
Soviets in Afghanistan, and to beg, to plead with the west to back the
forces of civilisation against the forces of barbarism, so that we could
stop the Islamofascists in their tracks as surely as the democracies could
have stopped the forces of fascism proper in Spain if only they hadn't
looked the other way. But worse than that, we were arming these maniacs up
to the hilt!
Basically, at the time, I was treated as some sort of plague-carrying loony;
I remember the super-smug Ken Follett on Radio 4 eulogising the forefathers
of the Taliban and saying how he chose them as the heroes of his latest
potboiler because there was a consensus that they were the good guys; when
my opposition was mentioned, you could hear the contempt drip off his voice
as he said, "Well, I don't think anyone pays any attention to what she
thinks." I've often had cause to wonder wryly since then whether that sexy
feminist wife of his has kept him up to speed with what his heroes have done
to innocent young women and girls in the name of their peculiar religion,
and whether he has the grace to shudder when he sees that novel on the
bookshop shelves. Probably not.
Then there was the time my then editor, Stewart Steven of the Mail On
Sunday, was at a luncheon at the Soviet Embassy. He was sitting next to
Geoffrey Howe, and they were getting on famously. Then the Soviet ambassador
stood up to speak. He spoke sadly of the way the British government and
press seemed to have no understanding of his country's mission in
Afghanistan - and then he brightened and dug in his pocket. Pulling out a
dog-eared piece of newsprint, he shook it triumphantly and crowed,
"Thankfully there are the exceptions, like Julie Burchill and her paper the
Mail On Sunday, who support us unreservedly!"
"I turned to Geoffrey" Stewart told me the next day, "and his eyes were deep
pools of hate."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:38 MDT