I didn't knew who the writer of the text is, so I read it without "pre-opinion". I think the text is pretty much supported. How could you argue to these qoutes? (by David Duke):
"I think most Americans would be appalled if they were fully aware of the suffering caused by American policy. For instance, most Americans know nothing about the effect of our embargo of food and medicine to Iraq. We caused the death of at least half a million children. That's right; I repeat: we are directly responsible for the death of 500,000 kids. Some of you might not believe what I am telling you. Well, for those who don't believe it, here is an excerpt of an interview between Leslie Stahl of CBS and Madeline Albright when she was US Secretary of State. The segment was called PUNISHING Saddam and Stahl was asking if the death of 500,000 children was worth it to punish this one man.
Leslie Stahl, speaking of US sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And -- and you know, is the price worth it?"
Madeline Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."
How would you view anyone who is willing to cause the death of 500,000 children to punish one man?
How can we not understand why so many people hate the United States when our own Secretary of State says murdering 500,000 children is quote, "worth it?"
"This propagandizing has already had an effect. When CBS and CNN polled the American people and asked them if we should attack the suspected enemies of America even if it will, quote: "cost the lives of thousands of innocent people." Almost 70 percent said yes.
It hurts my heart to think that a vast majority of the American people now take exactly the same view toward innocent human life as did the terrorists of September 11.
How do you think the rest of the world views America when they hear the results of those polls?
So far, I have heard no one, not even one of the great moral media pontificators, the President of the United States, our church leaders, or anyone else of prominence -- courageous enough to point out this blatant moral hypocrisy.
So, we are now going to fight terrorism in a global war. And what happens when America goes out and bombs the hell out of countries and indiscriminately kills "thousands of innocent people?" Will we really end the threat of terrorism? America has done the same thing before. Let's take a look at how it has protected us from terrorism.
In 1986, the Israelis gave America false evidence against Libya and induced us to bomb the hell out of the country. We bombed a nation to "fight terrorism" for a crime it did not even commit. A year later, a couple of members of a radical group in Libya were alleged to have bombed Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, causing one of the worst air disasters of all time, killing 270.
We exact our revenge with B-1 bombers; they do it through suicide bombers.
There is no way to completely protect ourselves from those kinds of acts. Even one fanatic person, if he is willing to commit suicide, can easily, with a small amount (non-detectible) plastic explosives, crash a plane with 400 people on it. We live in an era in which deadly biological agents of mass destruction can be made in anyone's basement.
America must take heed; the next terroristic act can be committed by just one person and kill hundreds of thousands of people. The exercise of brute military force can no longer protect any nation.
Let me repeat, we send our B1 bombers and they send their suicide bombers. And now, unless cooler head prevail, we are ready to embark on another war on terrorism that may kill thousands of innocent people and escalate the cycle of violence"
"Bush says we must strike down terrorists wherever they are in the whole world, but he has shared tea and crumpets with Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, one of the world's leading most brutal and bloodthirsty terrorists. Sharon committed a number of crimes against humanity, among them the massacre of 2,000 men, women and children in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon. Mr. Bush did not strike Mr. Sharon, instead he toasted him"
"For instance, we now partially blame Afghanistan for what happened on September 11. Have we conveniently forgotten that we bombed Afghanistan (and killed many innocent civilians) three years ago when we tried to kill Osama Bin Laden. Afghanistan is led by the same people we previously helped against the Soviets. At that time, we actually supported the terroristic activities of Osama Bin Laden against the Soviets and their collaborators. When Bin Laden later turned against us, we attempted to kill him by bombing Afghanistan.
We have seen the intense reaction of Americans to the attack on the Trade Centers. What would be the reaction of Americans to any nation who fired Cruise missiles and dropped thousands of bombs on America?"
"May God Bless America!"
There are more interesting quates, however, I can't writethem all. However, please discuss with idea, not the people created it (please do not post things like "Bin Laden is dumb and Duke is also so, this text is stupid", instead, please say why do you think so).