What Sarah really said In Interview

Site Issues 2008 Archive Room
#61

Hi Nick, Nick I think that is somewhat unfair to suggest that President Bush had he been in the Whitehouse at the time, would have ignored the situation in East Timor or not listened to anyone’s advice and just gone off to clear some tumbleweed on his ranch, much more likely he would have called Riyadh and asked the Saudis what to do in what was clearly a case of anti-Muslim persecution as graphically shown in this example of Muslims being persecuted by the fact of Kafirs [ ie non-Muslim ] piglets [ ie children ] being in a Muslim land ie Indonesia and Muslims having to cut their heads off in a desperate act of self defense against this defilement of the Dar al Islam by the presence of Kafir infidel swine.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/beheaded_girl.jpg

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

#62

And I thought I detected a strong whiff of rabid Islamophobia from you earlier, which you said was a “patently idiotic and offensive personal attack”. What was I thinking?

If I understand your irony correctly, Bush is in the pocket of the House of Saud and will do its bidding as part of the gigantic international Islamic conspiracy against Christians, or non-Muslims. This means that the Republicans are an anti-Christian, anti-American party. Who would have thought that?

So where does Sarah fit into this picture? Maybe a modern Joan d’Arc who will restore righteousness to the world with her Christian sword by pursuing the war in Iraq as a mission from her Christian god?

I suppose it doesn’t matter that that little exercise has produced a lot of dead, injured and permanently damaged children, because they’re only Muslims? Otherwise you would have posted a picture of a dead Muslim child from Iraq.

#63

As it is so happens, there is a gigantic International Islamofascist conspiracy against Christians, Jews, Hindus, non-believers, etc and most especially of all against decent Muslims. I personally, would not call it “Islamic”, in the sense I remain unconvinced that it derives any legitimacy whatsoever from a valid interpretation of the noble Koran or the actions of the Prophet Mohammed peace be up on him, in that Wahhabism e.g. is only an invention of the last couple of centuries and is radically different from the core strands of Islam, which preceded it. It would be nothing new, for a political party to contain people within it, that either because they were foolish or they saw no higher objective than lining their personal pockets with money or some mixture of the two, to pursue policies which could easily be seen to be un-necessary or frought with danger for their country e.g. the British Labour Party opposing the modest re-armament of British forces by the Conservative Government in response to the threat from Nazi Germany. So I can’t see why President George W Bush would somehow be immune from such matters.

As for Sarah Palin, we will have to wait for the people of America to decide whether they will vote McCain or Obama in to the Whitehouse before one could see, what she would do. As for the idea that, I would believe or hope that she would act like some sort of latter day Christian crusader, that is an invention of your imigination, as distinct from what I have actually written in this thread.

Last time I heard, it was the Wahabis that were deliberately blowing up men, women and children in Mosques in Iraq, rather than the Americans, so if you are genuinely upset by murdered Iraqi children, you might be better addressing your concerns to the Saudi Embassy in Canberra rather than me.

http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=_hBXHtQDxOo

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

#64

Pretty much, with New Zealand as the other major contributor to ground, sea and air forces in the crucial early stages which could have provoked armed conflict with Indonesia in East Timor or even a war. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/css/docs/Strategic_Briefing_Papers/Vol.2%20Feb%202000/East%20Timor.pdf

Around the same time we were fighting in Vietnam with the US, we were also fighting Indonesia in Malaya with the British, which didn’t exactly help friendly relations between Indonesia and us. http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/confrontation.asp

It was authorised by the UN, but it was not a UN peacekeeping force and significant military and other elements in Indonesia were strongly opposed to any Australian involvement in the the intervention, to the extent that there were rumblings of war from some quarters in Indonesia and certainly strong threats of armed conflict in East Timor between Australia and Indonesia even if it didn’t become a wider war.

15 September 1999

These troops will not wear the blue berets of UN peacekeepers. Instead they will engage in so-called peace enforcement operations, with orders to disarm and pacify hostile elements. Australian Prime Minister John Howard emphasised this when speaking on national television last night. “There is no way I will allow Australian forces to be exposed to an unreasonable level of risk,” he said. “They will be given adequate legal authority to defend themselves and take whatever action is necessary to implement their mandate.”

The Australian government is proposing a UN mandate under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which allows troops to carry and use arms, rather than under the more restrictive Chapter 6 that constrained UN forces in Bosnia in the mid-1990s.

Conflict has erupted between Australia, Portugal and Indonesia over the composition of the UN force, with Indonesian cabinet ministers and generals publicly objecting to the dominant participation of the two Western powers.

At a media conference in New York, Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas declared that Australia was not the only country that could send in troops quickly. He argued that any force must have greater Asian participation. Speaking from Jakarta, Major-General Sudrajat was even more blunt. He insisted that Australia would not necessarily be “the major force” in the UN contingent. Other Indonesian military and political figures said the arrival of Australian troops might provoke retaliation and armed conflict in Timor.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/sep1999/timo-s15.shtml

It wasn’t some minor exercise like the US invasion of Grenada, which never threatened US security (although Clint Eastwood made it look the fate of the Free World hung on it). If East Timor went wrong, and there was plenty of scope for that to happen, we would have been in for an interesting time. And we’ll be paying the penalty for it from Al Qaeda adherents etc for a long time.

TONY JONES: Now, Australia is now routinely mentioned in these kinds of messages … also Osama bin Laden mentioned Australia not so long ago.

Have we become a bigger target because we took part in the war in Iraq?

ROHAN GUNARATNA: I think that Australia has remained a target for some time, even before the campaign in Iraq.

For instance, Osama bin Laden released a tape in 2001 where he said that Australia has waged a crusade against the Islamic nation and dismembered East Timor.

I believe that today Australia faces the same level of threat as any Western European country.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2003/s861720.htm

Our intervention in East Timor helped provoke the deaths of 202 Westerners, including 88 Australians, in a 2002 bombing in Bali by Islamic extremists.

Reciting from the Koran, and rambling in Indonesian, Arabic and Balinese dialect, the alleged Kuta bombing field commander, Imam Samudra, yesterday swore that he had no knowledge of the attacks but said they were justified as part of the Islamic struggle for freedom and respect.

Samudra, 33, a former textile salesman, read from hand-written notes and used Australia’s “invasion” of East Timor as part of his ideological rationale for the bombings.

“You should remember what was done by Australia and its allies over two years, or do you agree with the aggression against East Timor, that removed it from Indonesia,” he said.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/11/1060588321968.html

#65

Or, rather too late, the American and British governments, as well as my own which dutifully fell in with the US under our then lap dog neo-con government, which started the whole mess.

#66

There is a lot of it about. Typical rant:

[i]“the worst of the faults of the present Labour Government happens to be that they have in the past and are continueing to pro-actively co-operate with Islamofascists and Islamofascist Arab racial supremacists whose objective in relation to the United Kingdom is to destroy the United Kingdom as a Sovereign democratic State which operates to the morality of secular enlightenment and christian values and incorporate the United Kingdom territory in to a pan-European Wahabi colony of Saudi Arabia, with forced conversion to Wahabi Islam at the point of the sword for the United Kingdom’s non-Muslim citizens and very possably the extermination of the indigenous Anglo-Saxon and Celtic peoples of the British Isles on racial grounds”

“Presumably you would have Her Majesty’s British Government wait until British hospitals start overflowing with the victims of a Jihadi biological suicide bomber attack involving bio-engineered Smallpox with a genetic sequence configured to neutralize the protection provided by the conventional smallpox vaccine and cooked-up in a bio-weapons lab in Syria or Iran”[/i]

I am now closely watching my Muslim neighbours in case they attack my grandchildren!
I watched the Palin interview. The best that can be said is ‘nice but dim’ (Google it).

#67

Yes, well, it’s bound to happen isn’t it? I mean, they’re all mad bombers and beheaders and butchers and stuff, as can be seen in my local kebab shop where the owner always has a stubble beard and spends most of his day using a huge sharp knife to cut up the flesh of dead animals after he’s cooked them. I mean, how primitive is that? Obviously he’s practising for beheading a Christian child. I don’t know why we let them into the country. Normally we only let in convicted Mafia figures and WWII and FYROM war criminals.

I thought the best that could be said for her was ‘glib, ill-informed, frighteningly simplistic, and a bigger danger to the world than Dubya if he got back on the grog while in office’. She makes Maggie Thatcher on the warpath look limp, and a highly desirable standard of world leader.

#68

Great! Just like Hillary who has a high NY approval rating, she can stay there! :smiley:

#69

Part of the problem with Quayle’s comments was that they comically played to the perception that he was a wealthy elitist that was “out-of-touch” and had no clue that most teenage mothers never bothered to watch Murphy Brown, and that while I agree the whole single mother thing is very dubious, I think Brown’s argument was that her character was also a positive role model in that she was a professional, educated women…

If Qualye was so concerned about moral values, than he could have launched some sort of education initiative targeting urban, teens instead of pandering to his base with some trite “culture wars” crap…He just seemed very disingenuous. Teen pregnancy wasn’t caused by Murphy Brown, it is caused by ignorance with a heavy dose of poverty…

And what about Palin’s “moral values” contributed to her daughter’s unwed, teenage pregnancy? Especially since it has been reported that she tried to force her daughter to marry her boyfriend (or whomever he was) and that they had a huge family row over it?

#70

Parents can try to impart moral and other values to their children, but in the end the children are independent human beings and make their own decisions.

I think it’s unfair for anyone to make an issue of Palin’s daughter getting up the duff as a backdoor way of trying to point out some failure in Palin as a parent, moralist, politician or whatever. It’s just one of those problems that some parents have to confront. It doesn’t necessarily reflect any deficiency in the parent’s upbringing of the child. Although how anyone can be a governor and and a proper parent at the same time is beyond me.

Her daughter’s pregnancy is not the same as if Palin gets caught playing hide the sausage with someone not her husband while proclaiming family values etc, which would relate to her behaviour and hypocrisy and be a proper subject for public comment.

Given the history of most self proclaimed paragons of virtue in politics, and especially the god-botherer variety, there’s a fair chance she’ll end up in front of the TV cameras tearfully begging her god’s forgiveness for straying down the path of forbidden sausage delights.

#71

That’s EXACTLY what he would have done! Before “the day that changed everything,” it was conservatives like Bush, and his very administration, that reviled and criticized Clinton’s emphasis on “Nation-Building.” And the idea that “that was in 99’ and under a Democrat” is also utter shit, because Clinton went into Haiti, Kosovo, and Bosnia. And he drew harsh, varying criticism from sectors on the American right for doing so! The latter two effectively cut off Islamicist fanatical violence by removing religious inspired Jihadists in Bosnia and depriving them of the propaganda of ‘Christians being allowed to ethnically cleanse and kill Muslims at will’…

…or not listened to anyone’s advice and just gone off to clear some tumbleweed on his ranch, much more likely he would have called Riyadh and asked the Saudis what to do in what was clearly a case of anti-Muslim persecution as graphically shown in this example of Muslims being persecuted by the fact of Kafirs [ ie non-Muslim ] piglets [ ie children ] being in a Muslim land ie Indonesia and Muslims having to cut their heads off in a desperate act of self defense against this defilement of the Dar al Islam by the presence of Kafir infidel swine.

Um, why don’t you provide a body count of Muslims killed by states composed of Christians, and Christians killed by Muslims?

In fact, Muslims seem much more interested in killing each other, and they wouldn’t even notice us if it were not for the oil they happen to live over…Just like we wouldn’t notice them either! And ignore a potential threat is exactly what Bush did, since he only called Riyad after 9/11 regarding terrorism, as supposedly (according to the conspiracy rumor) demand the arrest or death of certain Sheiks, and oddly enough, a spat of hundreds of dead Suadis began turing up dead “of thirst” (highly unlikely even for the richest of Bedouins) in the desert…

However, he largely ignored an August CIA threat briefing as the “chatter” was “blinking red” (the 9/11 Report). He, and Louis Freeh (the largest fail in the whole debacle and a shining example of a partisans blundering incompetence reducing the FBI to a parochial fiefdom, a very ineffective one! Possibly Clinton’s worst blunder of his Presidency as his intention of a gesture of good faith to placate the right’s paranoia and constant attack on his Justice Dep’t turned out to be a case of letting “the adder out of its shell”) apparently ignored the “Phoenix Memo” regarding Arab men in US flight schools.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-told-in-august-of-specific-threat-to-us-651658.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/beheaded_girl.jpg

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

Yes, Fundamentalist Christian websites that are hypercritical of Islamic cultural violence while ignoring their own.

How many pictures of children killed by errant US/NATO/Russian bombs do they have?

Do they even give a shit about Darfour, or is it okay for despotic regimes comprised on (mostly) Muslims to kill other Muslims? (provided they don’t have enough oil to make it worth our while to “liberate” it, er, them).

#72

I couldn’t agree more. But her policies which are extreme rightist and supposedly moralist derived and contradicts, clearly, the central reason she was chosen. To pander to the Religious Right. She’s against abortion FOR ANY REASON. Wants to keep children ignorant on sexuality by teaching abstinence and lip service leading to more teen pregnancy. And it’s even being reported that she used to force woman sexually abused to PAY FOR THEIR OWN RAPE KITS! All while over-funding her police dept. to the point of absurdity with -YUP!- federal “earmarks” (or pork).

(I think -but might be wrong- that her state has some of the highest levels of teen pregnancy, along with one of the highest welfare rates in the nation).

And you might not be aware that there are rumors of this variety already regarding Palin. The sort of rumors that conservatives couldn’t get enough of in the “liberal media” when they involved a certain ex-President, or John Edwards for that matter. But the minute anyone whispers this about Palin, and that she might be little more than a figurehead, window-dressing mannequin complete with designer glasses and shoes, certain people just can’t take it…

#73

Sorry. I think you took me up wrong on that, my feeling with relation to the former Yugoslavia is that, since it was Bush’s stated policy not to do “Nation Building” when he took office, it is far less likely had Bush been the President at the time rather than Clinton, that there would have been a US intervention in former Yugoslavia, furthermore the relationship between Bush and the Saudis would in my own view support a scenario of American non-Intervention in the former Yugoslavia, since it was in the best interests of the Saudis not to have a resolution i.e. a stop to the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in the former Yugoslavia but leave the situation as a festering store for the purpose of infiltrating the European Muslims of the former Yugoslavia with Wahabi and Arabist Jihadi ideology and promoting the wider propaganda value of Muslims being massacred on European soil by Europeans.

I am well aware that the majority of horrors inflicted on Muslims are by other Muslims but as there are increasingly large Muslim communities in many parts of Europe and North America, the problem of Muslim violence is increasingly starting to affect non-Muslims living in Western Europe. As for “dead Suadis” it is not I am disagreeing with you, I haven’t a clue what you are talking about.

Hello, the official Russian Orthodox Church in Russia has very close ties with the Russian state and as a result of that relationship preachers of other Christian denominations can come under attack via the Russian legal systems for engaging in perfectly legitimate activities. Frankly, I do not see any reason why an American Christian organization that would be bullied and intimidated by the Russian authorities, if it were to operate in Russia would have responsibility for the actions of the Russian Government. As for Darfur, it is my impression that numerous Christian organizations have sought to help the black Muslims of Darfur by providing food aid, medicine, tents, etc and raising the persecution of the black Muslims of Darfur on the international stage, you should also realize that as Christian organizations what they do in making public such efforts is constrained by the wish, not to give the Sudanese Government a propaganda weapon in being able to claim this is some sort of Christian trick to convert Muslims to Christanity. As for people being killed by US/NATO bombs are you suggesting that French, Italian, Dutch, German, Belgian, etc children were never killed by Allied bombs dropped during World War II. And I would respectfully suggest that it is somewhat different to drop a bomb from an aircraft against Wahabist insurgents in Iraq armed with AK-47s and RPGs and unintentionally kill children in a nearby building as co-lateral damage and to deliberately kidnap children and behead them.

With Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

#74

I live in Europe, England to be exact and I see no ‘Muslim violence’. There is no unrest in my area and I have yet to see any great examples of this ‘Muslim violence’ in the rest of the UK. True there are Muslim criminals but they are outnumbered by Christian criminals. If you want to bring up the Bombings caused by ‘Muslims’ then may I remind you that over 90% of all the bombings (and killings) in mainland UK were due to the troubles in Ireland and that is a classic example of Christian v Christian violence. Was not the largest bombing in the USA also the work of ‘Christians’?
As an aside I find that those that scream the loudest for a war on ‘Muslims’ simply do not have any personal experience of Muslims. We should all be wary of religious nuts of any denomination and I certainly do not want to live in the shadow of anyone who thinks the world is less that 4000 years old.

#75

Well if it is a numbers and statistics game you are after, the greatest bomb damage caused to the United Kingdom would be by Hitler’s Luftwaffe. Contrary to your implicit assertion that the campaign of Sinn Fein PIRA in the United Kingdom was religiously motivated it was not, in that Sinn Fein PIRA happens to be an extreme left wing terrorist organization, which merely used the religious angle as a subterfuge to its core aim of establishing a 32 county communist gulag in Ireland. Furthermore that was then, and this is now and with Sinn Fein PIRA basically given up on their so called “armed struggle” after the USSR imploded and things were not looking too promising in respect of support from the USA post 9/11, for an organization such as Sinn Fein PIRA with links to various Arab terror organizations such as the PLO and Gadafi’s Libya, the greatest threat to people in London and other large British cities lies from Islamofascist terror groups. Furthermore, as much as Sinn Fein PIRA was a disgusting and repelent organization the possibility of them seeking to explode a nuclear weapon in central London was just about zero, which unfortunately can not be said for adherents of Islamofascism.

Well you will have to actually give some information about who and what you are talking about, before I could you a comphrensive answer, to the best of my knowledge the largest bombing in the USA was carried out by al-Qaeda a Wahabist terror organization by Muslims who hijacked two aircraft and crashed them in to the World trade center on 9/11.

On the other hand there are plenty of muslims who are disgusted with these Islamofascists and the freedom the authorities allow them to threaten to murder and terrorize people.

I do find it hilarious that when somebody criticizes any aspect of Islam, they are often quickly branded a racist or a fascist or an Islamophobe or all three but at the same time is would seem perfectly acceptable ( at least in your eyes ) to brand people who might believe the World is less than 4000 years old as religious nuts and a danger to society. If you understood how a liberal civil society works and it appears that you probably do not from your remarks, you would know that people in a liberal civil society should be allowed the greatest freedom possible, in so far as it does not infringe on the rights of others. Blowing somebody to pieces on a London underground train with a bomb tends to infringe on their rights, believing that the World was created by a guy with a white beard that looks like Charlton Heston circa approximately something a little less than four thousand years ago does not.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

#76

Indeed. A couple of years back I spent a week living in a shell scrape with one, and she didn’t try to kill me once. I was most disappointed.

#77

I’m not a fan of the House of Saud either, but even they are not quite that ruthless. Corrupt, xenophobic assholes that shut off their society for fear of losing power, maybe. But they were supporting the Bosnian gov’t, not just Jihadists…

I am well aware that the majority of horrors inflicted on Muslims are by other Muslims but as there are increasingly large Muslim communities in many parts of Europe and North America, the problem of Muslim violence is increasingly starting to affect non-Muslims living in Western Europe. As for “dead Suadis” it is not I am disagreeing with you, I haven’t a clue what you are talking about.

Um, we have absolutely no problems with them in North America…In fact, the whole idea that “all Muslims” are the same is patently racist and so is the notion that they’re little Manchurian, or Mecca, Candidates whose Muslim religious upbringing somehow makes them inherently violent, irrational killers.

The vast majority of the Islamic world rejects this, as no Islamic insurgency have ever toppled a gov’t. They whined up alienating the populace…

Hello, the official Russian Orthodox Church in Russia has very close ties with the Russian state and as a result of that relationship preachers of other Christian denominations can come under attack via the Russian legal systems for engaging in perfectly legitimate activities. Frankly, I do not see any reason why an American Christian organization that would be bullied and intimidated by the Russian authorities, if it were to operate in Russia would have responsibility for the actions of the Russian Government. As for Darfur, it is my impression that numerous Christian organizations have sought to help the black Muslims of Darfur by providing food aid, medicine, tents, etc and raising the persecution of the black Muslims of Darfur on the international stage, you should also realize that as Christian organizations what they do in making public such efforts is constrained by the wish, not to give the Sudanese Government a propaganda weapon in being able to claim this is some sort of Christian trick to convert Muslims to Christanity. As for people being killed by US/NATO bombs are you suggesting that French, Italian, Dutch, German, Belgian, etc children were never killed by Allied bombs dropped during World War II. And I would respectfully suggest that it is somewhat different to drop a bomb from an aircraft against Wahabist insurgents in Iraq armed with AK-47s and RPGs and unintentionally kill children in a nearby building as co-lateral damage and to deliberately kidnap children and behead them.

With the Russians, I was speaking of Chechnya, which was/is a vicious, brutal war waged on both sides. And spare me the Sudanese claims stuff, who would they even bother to try to appeal too?

And I never ‘suggested’ anything of the kind, of course they did…But I’m not the one running around the internet posting murder victims as some sort of effort to blame the religion of the perpetrators, as al-Qaida of Iraq has been defeated and lost all credibility and support in the Sunni-Iraqi communities precisely because of such outrages…

And the Sunnis themselves face the very real prospect of being destroyed under a Shiite dominated Iraq…

#78

Wow…This thread started about the media bias and ended up about the poor misunderstood peace loving Muslims. LOL…

#79

My last name is Kenny. I was born in Ireland (you yourself gave Ireland as your location on another board) I come from Drogheda and all my relatives live in and around Dundalk. Please do not be offended if I use my own initiative here in rejecting your attempt to paint this as a Right v Left conflict. I know enough to tell you it was overwhelmingly Catholic v Protestant. Your language is so out of date and I thought for a minute we back in the old cold war days where there were commies under every bed.

Furthermore that was then, and this is now and with Sinn Fein PIRA basically given up on their so called “armed struggle” after the USSR imploded and things were not looking too promising in respect of support from the USA post 9/11, for an organization such as Sinn Fein PIRA with links to various Arab terror organizations such as the PLO and Gadafi’s Libya

Quite the most bizzare distortion of the facts I have ever seen.

the greatest threat to people in London and other large British cities lies from Islamofascist terror groups. Furthermore, as much as Sinn Fein PIRA was a disgusting and repelent organization the possibility of them seeking to explode a nuclear weapon in central London was just about zero, which unfortunately can not be said for adherents of Islamofascism.

You are away with the fairies. You must live in constant fear. You really are just trying to whip up hatred.

Well you will have to actually give some information about who and what you are talking about, before I could you a comphrensive answer, to the best of my knowledge the largest bombing in the USA was carried out by al-Qaeda a Wahabist terror organization by Muslims who hijacked two aircraft and crashed them in to the World trade center on 9/11.

They never planted a bomb. Try again.

I do find it hilarious that when somebody criticizes any aspect of Islam, they are often quickly branded a racist or a fascist or an Islamophobe or all three but at the same time is would seem perfectly acceptable ( at least in your eyes ) to brand people who might believe the World is less than 4000 years old as religious nuts and a danger to society.

I will go one better for you. All reigious Fundementalists, Christian Islamic or Jewish, have a finger in the current situation in the Middle East. Jews who believe God personaly gave them the land, Christians who believe we are in the end times and support Israel to hasten the Appocolypse are just as culpable as any ‘mad’ Muslim Mullah.

If you understood how a liberal civil society works and it appears that you probably do not from your remarks,

I have read your blog. At best you are a very right wing Muslim-hater. I will take no lectures from you.

believing that the World was created by a guy with a white beard that looks like Charlton Heston circa approximately something a little less than four thousand years ago…

It does however fly full in the face of Scientific fact. With that in mind I stand by my original statement.

#80

The IRA Wainer was speaking of effectively ceased to exist in 1970, or there abouts…