mr mahs Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 JOHN KERRY: THE ARAB HOPE? By AMIR TAHERI --------------------------------------------------------------------------------March 28, 2004 -- IF elected president, will John Kerry offer the Arabs a better deal? This is the question raised in the Arab media these days. Many different answers are given, but a consensus seems to be emerging that a Kerry presidency will lift what the Arab elite regards as its worst nightmare during the presidency of George W Bush. The Kerry debate was kicked off by the Saudi daily Al-Jazeera, which published a front-page photo of the Massachusetts senator with Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud, the Saudi ambassador in Washington. Several other Saudi papers later ran the "friendship photo" "the history of a long and close friendship between Sen. Kerry and the Saudi kingdom." The pan-Arab daily Asharq Alawsat, for example, claimed that Kerry's recent promise to end America's dependence on Saudi oil is merely an electoral tactic. The paper also claimed that Kerry was introduced to the Saudi ambassador by Edward Kennedy, the senior Massachusetts senator, in 1990. The two "worked hard" to organize an exhibition in Boston to introduce "Saudi culture and civilization" to Americans. The Saudi media also cite "official documents" that testify to the "close friendship" Kerry ostensibly developed with Riyadh for more than a decade. Kennedy's "Arab connection" is even older. In 1976, he toured several Arab capitals - including Baghdad, where he met Saddam Hussein, then Vice-President of Iraq. "Kennedy understands the Arabs because he has visited the region and developed relations with Arab leaders," says a Saudi official. "As the senior figure of the Democratic Party, Kennedy will help put a Kerry administration on the right track with regard to relations with the Arabs." Beyond Saudi Arabia, the assumption in Arab media and political circles is that Kerry as president will abandon Bush's "dreams of change" in the Middle East and restore Washington's traditional policy of support for the status quo in the Arab world. "We are certain that a Democratic administration will be more realistic," says a senior advisor to Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak. "Bush's talk of imposing democracy can only de-stabilize the region and produce catastrophe for all concerned." Arab chancelleries are doing all they can to freeze all issues pending the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. But some Arab politicians reject this "wait and see" position. "For decades, we have geared Arab politics to the rhythm of American presidential elections," says Lebanese politician Walid Jumbalat. "Each time, we deluded ourselves into believing that a change at the White House would lead to a change in our favor." Jumbalat is right. The deus ex machina of American elections has seldom helped save the Arab from a tight spot. Many Arab leaders also fail to understand the sea-change that 9/11 has produced in the average American's view of the world. What Bush has tried to do is to reflect that change - which, incidentally, goes against his original inclination to keep the United States as clear of international affairs as possible. Today, it is safe to say that no one can get elected president of the United States on an anti-war platform. The rise and rapid fall of Howard Dean, the anti-war populist, was a sure sign of that. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the most ardent of the anti-war hopefuls, has failed to rise above the 1 percent level in Democrat primaries. The Arabs should not delude themselves into believing that a Democratic administration will be able to abandon the War on Terror or ignore its root cause, which is the absence of democracy and human rights in countries where religious fascism has established itself as the key challenger to often corrupt and despotic ruling cliques. The Arabs are not alone in deluding themselves that a Democrat at the White House will let them do as they please. Kerry's claim that several foreign leaders told him they need him to beat Bush is not as fanciful as the Republicans pretend. Some "old Europe" politicians, including France's President Jacques Chirac, also hope a President Kerry will dance to their tune - not only on Iraq, but also on issues such as the Kyoto Protocol and the International Criminal Court. Dominique de Villepin, France's foreign minister, makes no secret of his belief that the Bush presidency has been an "aberration" and that a Democratic president will "lift the fog of war." What the outside world must understand is that most Americans now believe that they are threatened by enemies who can strike in the very heart of the United States. But the average American's reaction is quite different from that of the Spaniards who changed their votes because of the 3/11 terrorist attacks on Madrid. Few Americans are prepared to turn the other cheek for Osama bin Laden and societies that have helped breed, raise and finance him. Nor would they share the "old Europe" illusion that one can change the nature of a man-eater by feeding him vegetables and cuddling him. Sens. Kerry and Kennedy may be "sincere friends of the Arabs," as the Saudi media suggest. It is also quite possible that de Villepin told Kerry "you've got to beat Bush for all of us." But the problem that Arabs and some in the "old Europe" have is that they do not yet understand that, for a majority of Americans, the War on Terror is a real war - not a pose that can be altered with a change of administration.E-mail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 good read Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 for the majority of americans the war on terror is a real war, a real war that they will watch on TV and never fight in, never be a part of, never suffer from... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 Originally posted by marksimons for the majority of americans the war on terror is a real war, a real war that they will watch on TV and never fight in, never be a part of, never suffer from... The war started on the streets of New York you mess. I say there are 3k people who would disagree with you.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 are you telling me that 3,000 people or even the entire city, the state even, of new york, are a majority of americans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 Originally posted by marksimons are you telling me that 3,000 people or even the entire city, the state even, of new york, are a majority of americans? What? Bro seriously stop dropping pills like tic tacs it's rotting your brain... When do you think this whole thing started? The majority of americans aren't blind to the dangers in front of us unlike your peacnik bretheren who would rather run and hide in the face of danger. Mark my words son the day a terrorist attack hits london (God forbid) the English peoples sentiment will change and peaceniks like your sorry self will have a boat on your throats if you try pulling that "Vaginanism" with your govt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 when do i think this whole thing started...let me see... was it 9/11 2001... no it was...1954.UK and the US, CIA backed coup against the Iranian leader and installing the Shah of Iran.That's when this thing started, in my eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 Originally posted by marksimons when do i think this whole thing started...let me see... was it 9/11 2001... no it was...1954.UK and the US, CIA backed coup against the Iranian leader and installing the Shah of Iran.That's when this thing started, in my eyes. The fundamentalist govt took hold when we had the head of the Vaginaism movement Jimmy Carter. Old Jimmy boy slammed the door on the sha of Iran in the 70's. The despot Kohmeini is the real root of evil in the ME.. Where is your protests for Democracy in Iran? the majority of Iranians want it, where is your outcry for justice?? Thats why you one sided ant-american hatred is so lopsided that noone takes you seriously... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 I want to go to Iran later this year, to Terhan university, to speak to young Iranians, see how they feel, see what they want.That's my plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 Originally posted by marksimons I want to go to Iran later this year, to Terhan university, to speak to young Iranians, see how they feel, see what they want.That's my plan. I hope you don't get them killed for speaking out against thier gov't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 I'll be okay.They've been having demonstrations, quite big ones for a while now, it's not as dangerous as, well, a friend of mine got beaten up in Arizona by three guys for airing his views on Bush, for instance...I'm not going to go over there with a 'Fuck The Mullahs' t-shirt or anything like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 Im not talking abotu you Im talking about the people of Iran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 oh, them killed, misread that missed out the first 'them', nah, I don't think so, as I said they've been having pretty big demonstrations, and the government was less brutal than the US in Miami at the Nafta things... so I think they'll be alright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 Originally posted by marksimons oh, them killed, misread that missed out the first 'them', nah, I don't think so, as I said they've been having pretty big demonstrations, and the government was less brutal than the US in Miami at the Nafta things... so I think they'll be alright. did you just say the iranian Gov't is less brutal than the US? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 I very carefully avoided saying that.I was saying that they were less brutal in repressing recent demonstrations than America has been, with specific reference to the shit that went on in Miami to do with NAFTA.part of it was to get you, and others riled up, but part of it was to make a point, that fundamentalist christian, or fundamentalist muslim, they're fundamentalist, and don't take kindly to a mass, overt, protest against their policy.Domestically, the US govt, is not as brutal as Iran, not by a long shot, in foreign policy however, you could have an interesting debate on the comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 Im sorry these repression of demonstrations you talk about I just don't see... I mean It's just not prudent to let a bunch of wackos shut a city down for 10 hours. it affects people businesses it affects traffic I mean to be honest I wouldn't let these people any where on the street except in the evening during the weekends if I was a mayor of any major city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London.He encouraged people to demonstrate against the war.He shut down central london for a whole day last year, he made sure the protestors could demonstrate and exercise their rights.he is a very popular mayor.Did you see the footage of the police in riot gear in miami? of the police undercover dragging protestors off? people being shot with rubber bullets? beaten?did you see that? or don't you care if it's 'whackos' being beaten up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 29 Author Report Share Posted March 29 Originally posted by marksimons Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London.He encouraged people to demonstrate against the war.He shut down central london for a whole day last year, he made sure the protestors could demonstrate and exercise their rights.he is a very popular mayor.Did you see the footage of the police in riot gear in miami? of the police undercover dragging protestors off? people being shot with rubber bullets? beaten?did you see that? or don't you care if it's 'whackos' being beaten up. I would pay money to fire rubber bullets at you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 yeah, 'cause shooting people who say what they wanna say is funny, and the american way!hur hur hur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 Originally posted by mr mahs I would pay money to fire rubber bullets at you... :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 29 Author Report Share Posted March 29 Originally posted by marksimons yeah, 'cause shooting people who say what they wanna say is funny, and the american way!hur hur hur. Are you going to cry about it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 no, I just find it a bit sickening that you would get pleasure from doing that, which I'm pretty sure you would, you'd laugh as I ran into a corner, covering my head, curled up in a ball, bullets bouncing off me, bruises appearing, skin being broken, shouts of pain and writhing around wondering when it's going to stop.then perhaps you'd like to walk over with your batton and give the fucking hippy a good kicking, a good few cracks to the back of the skull why not? and a good few shots to the ribs, perhaps hear one or two of them crunch, then why not kick me, give me a good fucking shoeing to teach me a lesson, a good kick to the jaw, see the blood splatter agaist the wall as the side of my face hits it.then you turn and walk leaving me a bloody, broken, crumpled mess on the floor.is that what you'd like to do? get rid of some of that anger on me, on a fucking dumbass peacenick who doesn't know what it's like to be a real man, fireing rubber bullets at someone who is defenceless whilst you stand there in body armour and a helmet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 29 Author Report Share Posted March 29 Originally posted by marksimons no, I just find it a bit sickening that you would get pleasure from doing that, which I'm pretty sure you would, you'd laugh as I ran into a corner, covering my head, curled up in a ball, bullets bouncing off me, bruises appearing, skin being broken, shouts of pain and writhing around wondering when it's going to stop.then perhaps you'd like to walk over with your batton and give the fucking hippy a good kicking, a good few cracks to the back of the skull why not? and a good few shots to the ribs, perhaps hear one or two of them crunch, then why not kick me, give me a good fucking shoeing to teach me a lesson, a good kick to the jaw, see the blood splatter agaist the wall as the side of my face hits it.then you turn and walk leaving me a bloody, broken, crumpled mess on the floor.is that what you'd like to do? get rid of some of that anger on me, on a fucking dumbass peacenick who doesn't know what it's like to be a real man, fireing rubber bullets at someone who is defenceless whilst you stand there in body armour and a helmet. Yep! :laugh: Next time don't demonstrate while us normal people are trying to go to work and feed the social programs you mooch off of.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted March 29 Report Share Posted March 29 I don't think anyone who would take pleasure in beating a defenceless human being could be described as 'normal'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted March 29 Author Report Share Posted March 29 Originally posted by marksimons I don't think anyone who would take pleasure in beating a defenceless human being could be described as 'normal'. Every action has a reaction.....You step out of line and cause anarchy like your bretheren have done time and time again then the response is warranted. It's every human being right to dissent but when you turn cars upside down and cause riots then the rules change... For the safety of the cities citizens the law breakers should be punished and if that means a boot to the throat then so be it. Whats the diffrence? breaking the law is breaking the law? if you don't lkike the end result of your wrong doings then don't do it in the first place...Should the rule of law be suspended because you would like to protest? These idiots at these demonstrations causes thousands of dollars of damage, thats right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.