Latest Entry: Mumbai terrorists aided by CNN (Victims compromised)     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Nagin's Plan | Main | 'Democrats Must Fight Illegal Immigration' »

May 4, 2006

Why No to Iraq But Yes To Sudan

Topics: Dhimmitude

clooney.bmpWhile no with an ounce of compassion can deny the need for quickly stepping in to stop the bloodshed in Darfur, it's hard not to wonder why it is that George "Dapper Dan man" Clooney and his fellow Hollywood liberal nutcases are so anti-action in Iraq and pro-action in Sudan.

In his note to actor, Dapper Dan man, celebrity dissident and bon vivant George Clooney, Austin Bay rips him a new one and suggest that Clooney not "get a moral high from the puff-piece media's bravura reviews of his soliloquy at last week's "Save Darfur" rally in Washington.""

"Looney" Clooney's "international education remains grievously inadequate and incomplete" says Bay, and he suggests that the "glitterati actor advocating military action in a very hard and chaotic corner of our planet should consider the following details":

The parallels between Sudan and Iraq are striking and informative. Substitute Sudan's Darfurian tribes for Iraqi Shias and Kurds. The international forces in Darfur are hapless African Union peacekeepers, who spend their time trying to avoid ambushes. In Iraq, the United States and Great Britain tried to protect the Kurd north and Shia south with air patrols -- it didn't work. Saddam's terror contacts among secular and sectarian terrorists were numerous. Sudan harbored Osama bin Laden. As for the WMD, recall the Clinton administration's strike on the Khartoum pharmaceuticals plant suspected of producing nerve gas. Former Clinton SecDef Bill Cohen still defends the attack. He didn't want to run the risk that terrorists would acquire WMD from a rogue tyranny. The Bush administration didn't want to run that risk with Iraq.
Read more about "pained consciences and weak spines" ...




Posted by Richard at May 4, 2006 8:13 AM


Articles Related to Dhimmitude: