Bush Helps Islamic Terrorism

Bammx2

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
786
Reaction score
18
Location
London England
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Bush administration helps the cause of Islamic terrorism by failing to engage in serious dialogue with the international community, author Salman Rushdie says.

Rushdie -- infamous for living for years under threat of death after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1989 pronouncement that his novel "The Satanic Verses" was blasphemous -- said he believes U.S. isolationism has turned not just its enemies against America, but its allies too.

"What I think plays into Islamic terrorism is ... the curious ability of the current administration to unite people against it," Rushdie told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday.

Rushdie said he found it striking how the "colossal sympathy" the world felt for the United States after the September 11, 2001, attacks has been squandered so quickly.

"It seems really remarkable that the moment you leave America ... you find not just America's natural enemies, but America's natural allies talking in language more critical than I, in my life, have ever heard about the United States," he said.

The novelist, born in India and raised in Britain, attributed the shift in sentiment toward the United States to the Bush administration's "unilateralist policies" and its "unwillingness to engage with the rest of the world in a serious way."

"This go-it-alone attitude gets people's backs up," he said of President George W. Bush's foreign policy.

LACK OF LISTENING

As president of the PEN American Centre, a writers group, Rushdie helped organize an international literary festival this week in New York -- an event he hopes will help restore global dialogue.

"There seems to have been a breach in our ability to listen to each other," he said.

"It's really important at this particular moment in the history of the world that ordinary American people should get as broad a sense of how the world is thinking."

Such dialogue, he said, is "crucial, especially if at the political level there is a relative uninterest in maintaining that global dialogue."

The PEN World Voices festival, from April 16-22, is set to bring more than 100 international authors to New York to participate in more than 40 events, including readings and discussions on topics from politics and literature to erotica.

The event is the first international gathering organized by PEN since 1986, when Norman Mailer headed the group.

Rushdie, who wrote an op-ed in March syndicated by The New York Times calling for less religion in politics, took Bush to task on that issue too.

"It worries me more when religious discourse becomes the language of politics," he said. "I think it is happening a lot more here than it used to."

Rushdie said his latest novel, "Shalimar the Clown," will be published in September.

"I decided to murder an American ambassador," he said of its plot, in which a U.S. envoy to India is killed after he retires to America. "It seems to be a political murder, but actually it turns out to be completely personal."


I don't know if anyone else has read this,heard of this...or even know about it.
But it kinda struck a chord with me...
What do you thnik?
 
G

ghostdog2

Guest
Code:
 What do you thnik?
posted by Bammx2

I think it's a shame Khomeini missed.

Seriously, is this the answer? Anti-American rhetoric from a bunch of "international" writers on topics ranging from politics to erotica? Did he say "erotica"? That'll capture the attention of the Muslim world.
How, exactly, this meeting of America's critics (and you know it will be ) will give "ordinary Americans" a sense of how the "world" is thinking beats me. More likely, it will devolve into Bush-bashing, anti-U.S. posturing delivered from the halls of a luxury hotel in mid-town Manhattan and breathlessly reported by the New York Times.
Fittingly, the last guy to call such a meeting was that one hit wonder, Norman Mailer. And the one hit was on a broad.
Sorry, I'll take a pass.
 
R

raedyn

Guest
Disagreeing with the policies of a particular regime/administration does not make one Anti-American. By that logic, everyone who complained about Saddam Hussein's policies was anti-Iraqi, and that's just not true.
 

shesulsa

Columbia Martial Arts Academy
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
May 27, 2004
Messages
27,182
Reaction score
484
Location
Not BC, Not DC
ghostdog2 said:
Fittingly, the last guy to call such a meeting was that one hit wonder, Norman Mailer. And the one hit was on a broad.
Could you expound on your final sentence, please? Are you referring to hitting on a woman or did you mean "abroad" as in Europe?
 
G

ghostdog2

Guest
Code:
Could you expound on your final sentence, please? Are you referring to hitting on a woman or did you mean "abroad" as in Europe?Today 09:29 AM


I was referring to Mailer's reputation (often self-promoted ) in the 50's and 60's as the ultimate male chauvinist pig. Booze, drugs and fist fights were his calling card and he presented himself as a tough guy, especially where women,i.e. "broads" were concerned. In 1960 he stabbed his then wife (he married six times) with a knife after a night of drinking and partying. So I was referencing his hitting women, as in physical assault, rather than hitting on them, as in propositioning or approaching them.
His politics were even more jumbled than his personal life and that's saying something.
 

shesulsa

Columbia Martial Arts Academy
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
May 27, 2004
Messages
27,182
Reaction score
484
Location
Not BC, Not DC
That's pretty much what I thought you were referring to - his violence.

If anyone is curious as to some more history on Mailer, here's one source which discusses mostly his literary contributions.
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Mailer was far more than a one-hit wonder (in all senwses, unfortunately) with a record of good books from, "The Naked and the Dead," to, "An American Dream," "The Deer Park," and "Why Are We in Vietnam?" But, "was," is pretty much correct---I mean, who the hell ever read, "Ancient Evenings," and that was twenty years ago.

Rushide continues to be a helluva writer (not to my taste, but still), who stood up for his beliefs and damn near got killed for them. They're never lifted the fatwa--see how you'd do, with all of the world's fundamentalist Muslims more or less ordered to kill you.

We don't have to like some of these guys. We do have to try and talk--because like it or lump it, this is one that force alone cannot possiby resolve.
 
T

TonyM.

Guest
Folks should read the satanic verses. Gives creedence to the assumption that the early roman church wrote the koran as mohamad was illiterate.
 
J

Jaymeister

Guest
Whatever you think of Rushdie, he brings up some valid points. America is more disliked now than ever before, and this is mainly because of the Bush administration. The war in Iraq, and the fact that religion now has such a huge influence on politics, has alienated America from its European allies.
 
A

Angelusmortis

Guest
I'm inclined to agree with this. It's unfortunate, but true. In part, America's unpopularity around the world is due to it being the big fish, i.e. simply because it is the most powerful,rich, etc etc. However, the anti-American sentiment I witnessed, and experienced directly, when I was in the Gulf, was quite telling. The British forces in the main were NOT subjected to the same treatment, as we were seen to be far more even handed and less likely to shoot first, ask questions later. Different military doctrine, produces different results I guess. When I asked a few of the Americans I had served with about their views on this situation, they were adamant that they were doing the right thing in "liberating" Iraq. There were numerous "I'm gonna bag me a rag-head" comments. I think it's a shame that the youth of America is being mislead into thinking this, by a total, utter chimpanzee like Bush. I wonder who ties his shoelaces in the morning...The feeling is growing world wide, and it seems that the US isn't helping itself. While 9/11 was a travesty of humanity, or rather lack of, parking carrier battle groups all over the place, doesn't engender a feeling of brotherly feeling. I'm rather fond of America, most Americans I've ever met have been good people, but their patriotism is being used by Dubya, like nothing I've ever seen before...Never, EVER, trust a politician, they only thing they care about is your vote, stuff all else. Along with lawyers and the media, are responsible for the decline of western "civilisation". That's why I'm in the process of emigrating to New Zealand. Beautiful...
 

Phoenix44

Master of Arts
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Messages
1,615
Reaction score
67
Location
Long Island
If you're interested in a different viewpoint, you don't have to listen to Rushdie. You can search foreign news organizations: BBC, Sydney Morning Herald. In fact, even CNN.com has an international version.

I think two of the most damaging acts the Bush Admin are contemplating right now are the following:

1. Appointment of Bolton as UN ambassador. Bolton is openly hostile to the UN. His nomination sends a message to the world that we are imperialistic, we believe we should rule the world, and that no one else's viewpoint or priorities matter at all. It shows utter contempt for the international community. This appointment will come back and bite us in the *** bigtime, as we will no longer receive the intel or cooperation we will need to fight terrorism.

2. Appointment of Negroponte as Intelligence Chief. As Ambassador to Honduras, this man looked the other way as death squads operated in Honduras, and actually socialized with some of the perpetrators. Now he pretends that he knew nothing about it.

Oh yeah, America's going to be real popular.
 

ginshun

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Nov 10, 2004
Messages
809
Reaction score
26
Location
Merrill, WI
You mean the head of a group of international writers doesn't like Bush?

How shocking.


1. Appointment of Bolton as UN ambassador. Bolton is openly hostile to the UN. His nomination sends a message to the world that we are imperialistic, we believe we should rule the world, and that no one else's viewpoint or priorities matter at all. It shows utter contempt for the international community. This appointment will come back and bite us in the *** bigtime, as we will no longer receive the intel or cooperation we will need to fight terrorism.
Either that or it shows that the UN is a corrupt institution and that changes need to be made.

Take your pick I guess.
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Yeah, it'd be a shame if the UN weren't reformed by the government that brought us Enron, Halliburton--and Tom de Lay. And oh, by the way, did you happen to notice that a Texas oil gazillionaire (fortunately, Hizzoner is IN NO WAY connected to Texas, the oil industry, or energy crooks....hey wait a minnit) got indicted today for his sending kickbacks to Saddam Hussien so he could get arounbd the UN Oil For Food Program?

Thi is precisely the kind of arrogant crap that makes other countries a little testy.
 

ginshun

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Nov 10, 2004
Messages
809
Reaction score
26
Location
Merrill, WI
rmcrobertson said:
Yeah, it'd be a shame if the UN weren't reformed by the government that brought us Enron, Halliburton--and Tom de Lay. And oh, by the way, did you happen to notice that a Texas oil gazillionaire (fortunately, Hizzoner is IN NO WAY connected to Texas, the oil industry, or energy crooks....hey wait a minnit) got indicted today for his sending kickbacks to Saddam Hussien so he could get arounbd the UN Oil For Food Program?

Thi is precisely the kind of arrogant crap that makes other countries a little testy.
At least you agree that the UN should be reformed, thats a start at least. But some other country should lead the changes right? Great plan.

Who should be in charge of the reforms? Nobody claimed that the current US administration was perfect, certainly not me at least, but somebody has to do something, and nobody else seems to want to.

Where exactly would the UN be right now without the USA? Probably right next to the League of Nations... in history books.
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
1. Please show proofs that, "somebody has to do something," with particular attention to demonstrating that the UN is significantly more corrupt than our current government.

2. Please explain why this country, "has," to be in charge of any needed reform. Who died and left us Pope?
 

Ray

Master Black Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,391
Reaction score
53
Location
Creston, IA
rmcrobertson said:
Yeah, it'd be a shame if the UN weren't reformed by the government that brought us Enron
You're right. It's a darned shame that the profits of Enron for the period of 1997 to 2000 were restated to a 600 million dollar loss; the restatement took place in or around Oct 2001 {if I'm not mistaken} as a result of an investigation into the dealings of Enron.

So, during the Clinton admin, Enron did dirty dealing. During the Bush admin, it was investigated and the dirty dealings were brought to light.

Bad George!
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
What were Enron and the energy industry's contributions to Bush's election campaign? Did he and members of his administration have close ties to these guys?

Do you have any proofs that a) the UN must be reformed, b) the United States must take charge of the reform?

Incidentally, I don't believe that Pres. Clinton put up an Ambassador to the UN who was on record--repeatedly--as saying that the UN was completely worthless. Did he?
 
G

ghostdog2

Guest
Why is it that liberals think that all they have to do is shout: "Enron, Halliburton" or "Halliburton, Enron" and they've made a point.
Do better, please.
Or, as others put it:
What proof do you have that the U.N. does not need reform, and
Who/whom is the source of your opinion and what facts do you/they have in support of that position.
Pretty silly, huh?
p.s. What proof do you have that Enron made contributions to the Presidential campaign; how much were they, when sent, by whom received?
And what proof do you have that there is a correlation between the mystery donation and any specific act or failure to act of this administration?
Please be specific. The usual liberal response is to shout louder: ENRON, HALLIBURTON.
Don't forget the part about " Bush lied ", Alllah knows we haven't heard that enough.
 
Top