Posts
- Derek responds below to a query regarding his latest work.
- ****
- D. T. Devareaux said...
My interpretation is that both things are mutants and liberals who are taking comfort in the platitude, "At least we aren't hypocrites" in the aftermath of an Iranian attack on the west, presumably either the USA or Israel.
Precisely. I couldn't resist doing the piece after listening to an analyst on CNN discussing the merits of the Iranian nuke; namely, wouldn't it be hypocritical and unfair of us to deny the Islamic Republic of Iran nuclear technology? After all, America has nukes; India has nukes; the damn dirty Joooos have the nukes! Why not the Iranians? Never mind the doom-tongued proselytizing rumbling out of Iran for the past 30 years. Never mind Iran's proud contributions to worldwide jihad. Never mind the repeated threats to wipe an entire county off the face of the earth and to incinerate Washington with a fiery, nuclear Holocaust. Never mind Iran's contributions to the unrest in Iraq, the deaths of coalition troops and Iraqi civilians. None of that matters. What is paramount is that our foreign policy with proven belligerents must be sensitive, considerate and unequivocally non-judgmental.
Uproarious is the fact that in all other cases you can find these same backstabbers bemoaning nuclear proliferation yet here, for some unfathomable reason, with Iran they're encouraging it. I am reminded of Brian Williams' assertion that, apropos the Iranian revolutionaries of '79, our own founders could have been considered terrorists. I am reminded when Senator Kerry, during the last Presidential debate, lectured us about the need to set an example by eliminating our nuclear stockpiles; after which he tried to sell us on the virtues of his plan to provide the Iranians with nuclear fuel (they'd be trustworthy enough to return the spent fuel rods, of course; probably into the equally trustworthy hands of a steadfast U.N. bureaucrat, no doubt.) Hey, what could possibly go wrong? After all, it worked for Carter and Clinton and Kim Jong, didn't it? "Ok, naughty Communist dictator, if we give you all these nukie toy parts, you absolutely double-dog pinky swear have to promise not to make a super duper big bad bomb, ok?"
In any event, watching the CNN clip then turned into a lengthy discussion with an associate as to the legitimacy of asking such a question as, "Is it hypocritical to deny Iran nuclear technology?" Nazi that I am, I responded that such a question was "stupid and unnecessary," and that the "putative high-mindedness" of such a question represented a "dangerous waste of time." Of course, I was then accused of the jackbooted squelching of free speech; of being so narrow-minded as to be blind to the benefits of opening up policy discussions to such complex questions.
A team of U.S. commandos apprehends Osama bin Laden. During his arrest, a member of the team wonders whether bin Laden was justified or not in attacking America and whether or not he should be set free until we can be absolutely certain. Have fun walking home, solider.
What's even more nauseating is that the individual asking this question is not ignorant of the danger a nuclear Iran poses. Oh no, they're quite frightful. Nonetheless, they cannot—will not—defy their programming; instead they continue to rally behind the people and policies which helped create and continue to foster this very crisis! It's madness. It's defeatism. It's completely unnecessary but here we are: we've all become so crippled by the fetish of our own high-mindedness that making simple, prejudicial, but informed judgments about how best to insure our own survival are scoffed at as lacking "nuance." Instead, we must submit, lest we be accused of being hypocrites, the question of our very security to some perfectible process whereby our national interests must be weighed against the interests of polities that are unabashedly hostile to our own.
Well, don't let me stand in the way of your personal death wish. After 9/11 I was amazed that there were people who were convinced that "we deserved it." It really infuriated me that there was a not-insignificant-number of Americans who would so causally betray the lives of thousands of their own countrymen, unsuspectingly struck down by cowardly fanatics, in favor of attaching their loyalty to whatever illusory idea of karmic justice fit their political biases. Well, guess what? I agree with you! If you think we (and that's 'we' as in 'you;' not some other unfortunate, sacrificial slob) deserved 9/11 and that we deserve something similar yet again, I'm not going to argue with you. It's all our (i.e. "your") fault and we (remember, that means "you") deserve whatever horribly tragedy might be heading our way.
Similarly, if you think it selfish and hypocritical of us to deny the Iranians their natural right to nuclear technology (and to provide them with the benefit of the doubt that they'll use their nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, notwithstanding everything I've outlined above, to say nothing of their broader religious obligation to destroy us infidels,) then I hope that you get what you wish for. You're right. I'm wrong. Cities may crumble and flesh may burn--but by Marx's greasy carbuncles--never let it be said that we were hypocrites!
5/08/2006 3:09 PM
****
6 comments:
Uproarious is the fact that in all other cases you can find these same backstabbers bemoaning nuclear proliferation yet here, for some unfathomable reason, with Iran they're encouraging it.
CNN (aka Communist News Network) isn't worth watching, as far as I'm concerned. But I know a lot of people who faithfully follow CNN's stories.
Derek is not only a great illustrator, he is a witty and brilliant writer, as you see from his comment above and more particularly from his numerous comments at The Study of Revenge. If you go to look at his work and comments you'll have to click on the warning by-pass Google has posted on his page. Someone complained back in Jan., and now one must go through the warning system.
Around that time as well, BBC on-line had a thread about the Iranians spoiling for a fight with the world and therir pursuit of nuclear technology. Within hours there were roughly 800 comments, nearly all of them claiming that Iran has as much right to nuclear technology as does America, and that we are hypocrites for trying to deny it to them. At the Fortress here we can state that at least three posts arguing against that position were immediately deleted from BBC.
To argue that fair is fair and that Iran should have nuclear weapons becuase India and Israel do is to live in a world of mental illness. It is that world we find a vast number of our fellows residing in. They are beyond reason, and they are our own. What, then, do we do?
We have very little hope of effecting government policy as bloggers and letter writers. As shapers of public opinion we do have some greater power. Derek is talented enough to reach perhaps hunderds and even thousands of viewers daily. We need more than that. We need more than those on the streets proclaiming in public that mental illness is not a proper public opinion. We have to change not merely the opinion of the public but the voice of the people. When we tune in to CNN or BBC we should hear from exasperated fellows around us that the media is so far from reality that we would rather watch some other station's broadcasting, anything at all. There should be zero tolerance for public mental illness. To arrive at that stage we have to make our voices heard in public as a counter to the MSM so pople on the streets will know they are not alone in their opinions.
A public opinion we need is: "CNN? Turn that crap off." And it should be echoed by all in the room everywhere. The time is coming.
Derek's picture makes me strangely hungry for Kentucky extra crispy fried chicken. MMMMMMMM
Deep fried dhimmis. Lunch is on me, Stogie.
Dag, those Dhimmis are in sore need of a truckload of Jergen's lotion. Talk about dry skin!
I just read that we're "torturing" inmates in Cuba. Imagine the UN howler monkeys going off if we used Jergens hand lotion on them.
"Yes, a velvet glove-- covering the iron fist of Yanqui Imperialism!"
Castro? What a guy. Che? He's a saint. That other stuff? Well, it's for the good of all, unlike the yanqui torturers doing evil for the sake of the oil companies.
Stogie, I want to choke these people.
Post a Comment