An indictment?
Linda Heard in Gulf News excoriates Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani. One of the interesting things about the article is that it reads almost equally well as an indictment or endorsement of Giuliani, depending on which perspective you bring to the table:
In recent months the mask has come off. In short, Giuliani is no benign patriotic do-gooder. He’s a hawkish, sabre-rattling, pro-Israel, nationalistic neocon. A clue to Giuliani’s leanings emerged during the visit of Prince Al Walid Bin Talal to Ground Zero in October 2001. Bearing a $10 million donation for disaster relief, the Saudi prince suggested the US reexamine its Middle East policies and adopt a balanced stance towards Palestinian aspirations. Giuliani’s response was to hand back the cheque…
Giuliani makes no bones about the fact he would use military force to set-back Iran’s nuclear programme. In September, he promised to use America’s military might to prevent Iran pursuing its nuclear ambitions should he be elected president…
Giuliani is talking tough when it comes to Pakistan, too. He recently urged the president to be more aggressive in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden within Pakistan even if such a move would result in alienating the Pakistani government. On Iraq, Giuliani has been consistently gung ho. He supported the war from the outset, backed the so-called surge and believes American troops should stay in Iraq for the foreseeable future. And if my worst fears are realised and Giuliani moves into the White House there will be no Palestinian state for the foreseeable future either. He has declared in no uncertain terms his antipathy towards a two-state solution because a Palestinian entity would “support terrorism” and threaten US security…
in 1995, he banned the former Palestinian president Yasser Arafat from attending events held in New York to celebrate the UN’s 50th anniversary and ordered his removal from a concert held at the Lincoln Centre. It’s not surprising that a panel of eight Israeli experts assembled by the daily Ha’aretz determined Giuliani is the best presidential candidate for Israel…His team, says the [NYT] article, includes “Norman Podhoretz, a prominent neoconservative who advocates bombing Iran as soon as it is logically possible; Daniel Pipes, the director of the Middle East Forum, who has called for profiling Muslims at airports and scrutinising American Muslims in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps; and Michael Rubin who has written in favour of revoking the United States’ ban on assassination”. Giuliani recently took the Democrats to task for avoiding use of the term “Islamic terrorism” during four debates; an omission he describes as taking political correctness to extremes.
A Giuliani presidential tenure would also be extremely bad news for Americans who value the few civil liberties they have left. He strongly backs the controversial Patriot Act; is an advocate for wire-tapping and domestic spying, and isn’t sure whether “water-boarding” or sleep deprivation should be considered as “torture”.
In a letter to a blog, Ms. Heard had some other observations on the so-called “democratic” and “free” United States, as well as on the relations among the major religions, which might also provide a little context for her criticisms of Mr. Giuliani.
For the record, and amusingly, Giuliani foreign policy adviser, Professor Charles Hill of Yale noted: “I don’t know of a single person on the campaign besides Norman who is a self-identified, card carrying member of this neocon cabal with its secret handshakes.”
October 30th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Wow! I could not decide who I wanted for president, but now Giuliani is my man! That is the most endorsing endorsement I have yet to hear of any candidiate. In fact, I see substantial bias in the writing. He could not really be that good.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Ditto on what the Gasman said. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Giuliani people used the Heard piece as campaign literature!
October 30th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Ditto. And I thank the author for helping me make up my mind.
October 31st, 2007 at 8:45 am
Rudy’s not my first choice, but I can definately vote for him after reading this. As the other david said, Guiliani should use this as campaign literature.
November 4th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
I was sent here from http://dissectleft.blogspot.com for a good laugh, and it really *is* funny. I live in NYC. I own a small art and desgisn studio. On 911 a tradeshow I was signed up for was cancelled because the huge convention center downtown by the river was covered in ash. That set me back a year, basically. My girlfriend walked home, 50 blocks, to where we live by Columbia University, where nowdays there are student protests *against* an Islamic extremist being invited to speak, just as in the old days a Christian extremist (anti-gay etc.) would have been protested. The tide has turned. The Establishment that kids are rebelling against, the Authority they are resisting is now on the Left instead of the Right, as was true for many decades before the 1960s.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:14 am
Before the US allowed a few thousand zionist jews to take over a country called palestine and threw out the palestinians from their homeland a few decades ago, there was no tensions or problems between jews, muslims, and christians.. all this was causes by the creation of israel on palastinian land.. remember, only the minority of jews are zionists, even they condemn zionism. If the US stopped its outright blind support for israel, and was completely fair in its dealings with the middle east, alot could be achieved.. i mean, who do we need more as friends, the arabs with all thier oil reserves, or an israel that is embarrassing the US with their human rights and breaking international laws on a regular basis, which is giving the US a bad name, whilst sucking up billions upon billions of US tax payers dollars.. is it worth it??
Open your eyes people..