The Next Generation Of Hate, Powered By Bush

10:28 pm EST October 16th, 2007 | News | 10 Comments

The legacy.

At a Baghdad jail for prisoners who have attacked U.S. forces, everyone — to a man — says it was the U.S. occupation of Iraq that drove them to violence. And they are not alone. Across the Middle East and South Bush Asia, the same story can be heard in Internet cafes, mosques, safe houses and prisons.

“The U.S. says this war is part of the global war on terrorism,” Saedi Farhan, an Iraqi engineer who took part in an attack on U.S. forces, said in a weekend interview with NBC News. “But people here say that the war has increased fanaticism and brought terrorism to Iraq.”

Interviews with Farhan and other radicals reveal that many young men were torn when it came time to choose sides. Even though they fight alongside al-Qaida, they insist that — contrary to what U.S. officials say — they do not support al-Qaida. Many, in fact, say they hate al-Qaida.

But they hate the United States more.

Heck of a job, Bushie. You’re gonna get us all killed.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

10 Responses to “The Next Generation Of Hate, Powered By Bush”

  1. duros62 says:
    October 17, 2007 at 12:20 pm

    Imagine that. Actually talking to an enemy combatant to find out what drives them. Hm. Who’da thunk it?

  2. SaveFarris says:
    October 17, 2007 at 1:12 pm

    Taking a terrorist’s word at face value because hey, what possible motivation could he have to lie?: Priceless.

  3. SpiderJ says:
    October 17, 2007 at 1:25 pm

    I know, it’s much easier to assume that the radical jihadis are attacking us because of irrational hatred than to think that maybe anything the United States does could ever be a contributing factor. Why would anybody attack us? We’re such a nice, innocent country that only wants flowers and rainbows for the world.

  4. duros62 says:
    October 17, 2007 at 1:37 pm

    Taking a terrorist’s word at face value…

    …under torture make him sooo much more credible.

  5. duros62 says:
    October 17, 2007 at 1:41 pm

    Besides, Farris, the report talks about insurgents, not terrorists. There is a distinction, no matter how slight and no matter how much you wish it weren’t so.

    Even though they fight alongside al-Qaida, they insist that…they do not support al-Qaida. Many, in fact, say they hate al-Qaida.

  6. SpiderJ says:
    October 17, 2007 at 2:13 pm

    “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” What a fucking mess.

  7. Duder says:
    October 17, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    What’s really a shame is that we had no choice but to invade. Iraq had ties to Al Qaida, was an imminent threat, had nukes, aluminum tubes, plus all that oil could’ve ended up in the wrong hands! Sure, it’s a mess and lots of stuff coulda/shoulda/woulda been done differently, but what other possible choice did Our Leader have? At least he has the balls to admit that he would do it again, knowing what we know now. That’s leadership.

  8. Rounds77 says:
    October 17, 2007 at 9:26 pm

    I want to come back in 100 years to find out what the Bush legacy for America will turn out to be. Unfortunately, all I have is the present, and the legacy is looking more and more like worst president in history.

  9. (: Tom :) says:
    October 18, 2007 at 10:26 am

    SaveFarris said:

    Taking a terrorist’s word at face value because hey, what possible motivation could he have to lie?: Priceless.

    Taking a drunken cokeheaded deserter’s word at face value because hey, what possible motivation could he have to lie?: Priceless.

  10. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    October 19, 2007 at 1:23 am

    SaveFarris: “Taking a terrorist’s word at face value because hey, what possible motivation could he have to lie?: Priceless.”

    Short SaveFarris: “La la la. I can’t hear you!”

    This backs up other facts we have, like in increased number of terrorist attacks worldwide. The resurgent strength of Al Quada. Etc.

    If you want to be blind to the truth, that’s your business. But don’t think we’ll forget about this when the next attack comes.