The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Games People Play

3.18.04 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 5)

Once again David Hogberg has hit the nail on the head in describing John Kerry's recent behavior. The arrogance with which he is campaigning is amazing. I wouldn't let my husband talk to me the way he is talking to his audiences. He has proven he can dish it out but he sure can't take it. I have heard that Kerry is taking a little vacation. I am more inclined to believe he is taking a hiatus to remove his foot from his mouth. The one thing the Democrats should be rightfully concerned with about Kerry (together with 100 others of course) is his belief that some foreign countries should have a voice in our election process. Of course anyone who can think for themselves can understand why some of these foreign countries want Kerry to win. From what I have heard from Kerry's mouth in the last few weeks he doesn't even deserve to sit in the Senate. I sleep much better knowing George Bush is handling our security.
-- Jane
Connecticut

SPLENDID SPAIN
Re: Reid Collins's Spanish Flee and Reader Mail's The Neoconquistadors:

In response to "Spanish Flee" by Reid Collins:

The Washington Post reported that immediately after the attacks "outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar undertook an intense campaign to convince the Spanish public and world opinion-makers that the Basque separatist group ETA had carried out the attacks." This argument was made despite the fact that "Spanish intelligence services...had suspected al Qaeda from the beginning."

Just hours before the election, when it was announced that five suspects linked to al Qaeda had been arrested, it become clear that Aznar and his surrogates had attempted to manipulate information for their political convenience. It was then that "political allegiance shifted sharply to the opposition, especially because many Spaniards felt the government had not been completely forthcoming about the news." Nicolas Checa, a Spanish political expert, said on PBS that the number one factor behind the outcome was "the handling or mishandling of public information in the 48 hours after the tragic events of last Thursday."

While some now claim that Zapatero was never in the race until the terrorist attacks occurred, the conservative party's defeat was always a possibility. The last poll, conducted four days BEFORE the March 11 attacks, "showed that the gap had narrowed, giving the Popular Party 42%, compared with 38% for the Socialists." The four point spread is well within the standard margin of error for opinion polls.

In his first public announcement after his victory, incoming Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said, "My most immediate priority is to fight all forms of terrorism. And my first initiative, tomorrow, will be to seek a union of political forces to join us together in fighting it." From the beginning of his campaign, Zapatero promised to withdraw 1,300 Spanish troops from Iraq "on June 30 unless the force was sanctioned by the United Nations." But there is no evidence suggesting that placing more pressure on the Bush administration to secure international cooperation in Iraq is a victory for any terrorist.

The war in Iraq and the "war" against al Qaeda are two different problems. The President George W. Bush and his allies have used the bombing in Madrid as another opportunity to conflate operations in Iraq and the threat of al Qaeda. Yesterday, the President said, "al Qaeda has an interest in Iraq for a reason, and that interest is, they realize this is a front in the war on terror." The comments are part of a consistent pattern to confuse the separate issues of al Qaeda and Iraq. In September 2002, Bush said, "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terrorism." Meanwhile, as for any Iraq/al Qaeda connection before the war, Vice President Cheney says the "best source of information" was a Weekly Standard article based on leaked intelligence that has been discredited by the Department of Defense.
-- Patricia Flanagin
Cleveland, Ohio

Again, the truth seems to escape the Left, especially those writing in who were critical of the Spectator's views of Spain. What most of the complainants failed to acknowledge was that nowhere did President Bush claim that Iraq was an "imminent" threat (to the contrary, he said that we shouldn't wait until the threat was "imminent") and that if Bush did indeed lie to get us into war with Iraq, then so did Russian, German, French, Aussie, British, and Israeli intelligence, along with the UN and Hans Blix.

I also found it amusing that the letter writers were so proud of Spanish democracy that has been around for a quarter century, and yet took the time to berate the U.S. (democratic for 230 years and counting). After all, Europe has done so much with their democracies, electing fascist dictators and socialist appeasers. Obviously, something America should aspire to.
-- Joel Natzke
Kansas City, Missouri

N. Ziener ("Having a Good Day") thinks that the war was about oil. Actually France's version of peace was about oil. As information comes out about the Iraqi bribing of second rate powers like France and Russia, it is hard to take seriously a Euro-delusional idiot who seemed to be happy being Saddam's lackey. Mr. Ziener would be better off spending his time learning Arabic and studying up on the Koran. Cowards are hardly ever rewarded.

Have a nice day.
-- Clif Briner

On N. Ziener's statements:

"I am still very much convinced, like a lot of Europeans, that this war is about oil, and nothing else."

Well, yes, for France, Germany et. al. the war is about oil ... and other tradable products, e.g. land mines, rockets, all sorts of other arms and ammo -- in violation of "a lot of Europeans'" own U.N. resolutions and in support of the world's most evil despot of the last half of the 20th century.

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Mainstream Media, Religion, Islam, Iraq, Russia, Israel, NATO, Africa, Oil, Medicare