View Full Version : War on Iraq in perspective
A letter to the London Observer from Terry Jones (yes, of Monty Python).
Sunday, January 26, 2003
I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's
running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really
pissed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.
Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me
queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me,
but so far I haven't been able to discover what.
I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's
got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel,
don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he
is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them
that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one.
Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the
police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need
evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours. They'll come up
with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a
pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his
plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly
murdering people. Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range
of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until
recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has
made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can
wade in and do whatever I want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is
the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one
certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US
or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.
That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and
children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in
peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way. Mr Bush
makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that
Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction -
even if no one can find them. I'm certain
I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children
as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq.
Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating
'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because
how can you ever know when you've achieved it?
How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every
single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once
he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These
are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known
terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves.
Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future
terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every
Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might
convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be
for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of
the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't
like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be
really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going
too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of
the United States. That shuts her up.
Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason
for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole
street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all
aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar
terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say
'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come.
It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in contrast
to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.
But does this "Mr. Johnson" have a track record of going to other places and taking them to enrich himself? Does he gas his neighbors and kill his children if they disagree with him? Does he try to convert his neighbors to his religion through force? Has he blatantly flaunted his "cooperation" with the "police" to cover his tail. Does he sponsor thievies tto terrorize his neighbors? Does the speaker go to the police and ask them to put a stop to his behavior? Has the speaker intervened before to protect the neighbors. Has "Mr. Johnson" ever destroyed natural resources and endangered the safety of the earth in which we all live? If the answer is yes he is like Iraq. if it is no then the article is wrong. Just trying to put this in perspective.
02-21-2003, 01:37 PM
Yeah, I received that in an email today. Very funny.
I agree with Greg, the writer is omitting some of the crimes against humanity that Mr Johnson (Hussein) has committed against his neighbor (Iran) and in his own household (Iraq).
I agree that the street (the world) would be a better place without Mr. Johnson. But we shouldn't act with haste, we should wait until either something is found or if the inspectors start receiving problems by Mr. Johnson. I do know that there are however Iraqi scientists who know about possible Iraqi progammes but are unwilling to speak out of the fear of Mr. Johnson. It's a tough one, but I think we should be vigilant. Of course we run the risk of killing many innocent members of Mr. Johnson's family in the persuit of him.
I was a little offended by the Muslim part seeing that I am one. We've been under so much scrutiny from the world since 9-11.
02-22-2003, 04:17 AM
Be more patient with Mr Johnson? FMS, that was the most stupid analogy I have ever started reading. I didn't even finish it.
More vigilant? What would you call hounding Saddam for the last 12 years to disarm? Screw waiting for him to quit playing games, and screw waiting for all the chicken sh*t countries to get on board. Do France and Germany think for a minute we actually care what they say? Please.. We will begin when we have everything in place, with them or without.
..you are either with us in the fight against terrorism, or you are against us...
02-22-2003, 06:49 AM
Jeff, Interesting of you to bring up the war on terrorism.
So what progress has been made in that? So we've rounded up a few militants and overthrown the Taliban. Yeah, but Al Qaeda is still elusive, we are at threat of a terrorist attack now more than ever. There are still groups operating in the middle east, pakistan, and southeast asia. And now we're going after Saddam? Your government has toiled endlessly to find a link between him and terrorism, this has yet to be found.
When Hussein threw out weapons inspectors in 1998 why didn't we overthrow him then? It would have been a more legitimate time to do that. So, you don't think you need the rest of the world. Your arrogance disgusts me. :shakehea:
Might I also add that you supported Iraq and Hussein in the 80s. You turned a blind eye to his crimes against humanity until after the gulf war. A bit of a double standard wouldn't you agree?
Look Jeff, I don't want to start a war of words. I just ask that you see things from other's perspectives. Look, just because others don't share Bush's belligerent opinion towards Iraq it doesn't mean that we support terrorism. I speak for us all when I say terrorism is evil and must be purged.
02-22-2003, 01:12 PM
Your government has toiled endlessly to find a link between him and terrorism, this has yet to be found. - Disagree, the link is clearly there.
When Hussein threw out weapons inspectors in 1998 why didn't we overthrow him then? - I agree, we should have, but think of what the "World" would have said........
So, you don't think you need the rest of the world. - To over throw a government like Iraq's using our military, no, we don't need anyones help.
Your arrogance disgusts me. - Your ignorance insults me.
Might I also add that you supported Iraq and Hussein in the 80s. - For reasons you should be well aware.......
There is no reason to see from the perspective or evil, sorry Richard.
Done with this...
02-22-2003, 02:23 PM
My ignorance insults you eh?
Well now, there's a statement. Yeah, well seeing that I see the issue from both sides. Both sides being that of the US and that of the UK, France, Germany, Russia, China et al.....And you call me ignorant? You couldn't have made more of a stupid statement especially seeing that you only see this issue from one perspective, Bush's.
Tell me Jeff, have you ever been out of the US? Have you ever been to a country outside of Canada and Mexico? Do you ever watch anything other than US programmes where the news is heavily distorted towards Bush?
And the US supported Hussein "for reasons you should be well aware".
Elaborate on these reasons. I am not well aware as to why your country at one point supported "evil".
And the link between Saddam and Terrorists? Obviously there? I humor your ignorance. Not even Bush and Powell have announced that. Come on, give me a break. What is this "clearly" visible link?
Oh, and let's not forget some of the other important points you blatantly omitted. Look, I can't knock some sense into you, you're too narrow-minded. When vigilantly I offer you the perspective of those opposing a war you call it a perspective of evil. Are you that stupid? YOU are the ignorant one here.
I don't expect a response from you, you obviously don't know much about the world around you. The "evil" and supposedly insignificant world around you.
02-22-2003, 06:23 PM
The only reason I am replying to you is strictly for the fun I have reading your pathetic responses.
If you actually live in Hong Kong that pretty much explains your views on the rest of the world, and your inability to get accurate news.
You assume for some odd reason I have not traveled outside of North America. I have been to many countries in Europe, and even Cuba. Would I ever want to live in any of them? Errrr.... why would anyone that has ever lived here as a citizen ever want to?
If you are so well educated and enlightened in the politics of the world, I would think you already know why we supported him, and the link I mentioned. Seems there is something lacking in your education, or maybe you were absent that day.
I really don't care to hear about your perspective, so save it for someone that can listen without vomiting. I oppose the war, but you don't seem to understand that the U.N. is powerless to stop Iraq from doing anything. If they enforced their resolutions 12 years ago we would not even be having this discussion would we? But, they can't, don't have the balls. So we will take care of him and move on.
Stay in school, you have a lot to learn. And this IS my last response to you, so go ahead and spill your guts......
Part of the reason why the world opposes war is that americans get egotistical about the situation. We don't listen to what they have to say because frankly we don't give a damn. This attitude has caused problems for people before. War of 1812 is a good example the superpower imposed because it had it's own agenda. Now Jeff before you go insulting me because of what I'm saying think for a second. I can see both sides of the argument and I have friends on both sides of the debate so their is no need to be nasty. On one hand the U.S. has spent a lot of money to get ready for war and if we don't attack it won't be good for the already looming deficits. But on the other hand preemptive strikes are generally the job of bad countries(Nazi Germany in Poland:1939 and Imperial japan at Pearl Harbour:1941) As with all human involved decision both are flawed but to remain set in one's own belief is bad and can lead to other conflicts. So in other words, Jeff don't fling mud and Richard don't egg him on.
02-23-2003, 07:48 AM
Someone who can listen without vomiting? Gee that's a heck of lot of people Jeff, or should is say Mr. Bush.
In case you don't know, accurate news are comprehensive and impartial. Not heavily distorted. I receive news of the former. You obviously know nothing about Hong Kong. Yes, we do have TV's here. No we don't hobble around in robes and pointed hats.....
And as a matter of fact. I know why America supported Hussein in the 80s. I was expecting that you'd know this yourself as you sound so overzealous. Well, in 1979 America's great ally, the Shah of Iran was deservingly deposed. Why? Because he was a despot who ruled with an iron fist inflicting his secret police on dissenters asking for democracy. And the Iranian people hated the Shah so much that they overthrew him and wanted nothing more to do with him or his boss, America. Might I also add that the Shah came to power in 1953 as a result of a CIA coup which toppled the DEMOCRATIC government and installed an absolute monarchy. Well it was unfortunate that a fanatical theocracy was conceived out of the revolution and it was also unfortunate that the hostage crisis occurred. Because of that, your government supported the Iraqis (under the rule of Saddam Hussein) when they declared war on Iran and committed crimes against humanity against the Iranian people. You knew that the Iraqi's were simply being belligerent agressors. Your government sold the Iraqi's light weapons and even covertly gave them BIOLOGICAL and CHEMICAL weapons secrets. Yes, your country did that. And now you look to punish Hussein for supposedly possessing something you gave him?
Oh, I really don't know do I? Lacking Education Eh? Good one.....
And that link you described? Unsubstaniated and Subjective at best. Good one.........
Look, you are so convinced that Iraq has hoards of Chemical and Biological weapons. Well, UN weapons inspectors arent. What do you think has been going on in those seven years that inspectors have been monitoring Iraqi weapons, well lets see......Disarmament!. Let's not forget that when Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions allied force was used in 1994, 1996, and 1998 to keep the Iraqis in order. And the UN has no balls? Come on.....The US could have done something to make weapons inspectors return to Iraq in 1998, they didn't. Oh, and what do you call the no-fly zones? UN mandated, well-enforced with the rare skirmish. No balls eh?
You are obviously unaware of the hypocrisy of your government. You attack me for being a student? Well that's all fine considering the fact that students have some of the most open minds. OK, I watch the news daily, I keep track of the events in the UN, I read the papers, even the IHT. Just because I am a student it doesn't mean I don't know anything about the world. I don't mean to gloat, but my school is one of the best in the world. Disagree? Fine. If you do, it shows the level of your intellect. If you were intellectual, You'd be like FMS, or Greg, or Myself and understand both sides of the story as opposed to rejecting one side as "evil" and superficial.
I pity people like you. I honestly do. Go ahead, go on living in your propagated life. Maybe for people like yourself, Ignorance is bliss. Thanks for your facts and statements, as if I don't get enough of that through Bush's repetitive rhetoric.
Jeff, I'm glad that this is your last post, you have nothing good to say.
02-23-2003, 07:49 AM
Greg, sorry if I'm egging Jeff on. But there are certain points that cannot go unanswered and must be addressed.
02-23-2003, 08:03 AM
Stay in school, you have a lot to learn.
hey!!! quit kicking students!. they know as much, if not more about such stuff.
btw, the only reason bush wants to attack iraq is because he has a big ego problem. lets see if this strikes a bell in ur memory; george bush senior attacked iraq, and vowed to oust saddam. he failed, miserably. now, a few years later, georgie junior has come back to take revenge on behalf of his dad.
chemical and other such weapons of mass destruction are just useless pretexts.
02-23-2003, 06:16 PM
Terry Jones - The Observer - Iraq.
Now, why did I guess correctly the tenor of the letter before I even read it?
Of course the naked organist can make a few amusing remarks about a deadly serious situation because he has no responsibility whatsoever for actually doing anything.
FMS, that was the most stupid analogy I have ever started reading. I didn't even finish it
Does the word sarcasm mean anything to you?? This was written by Mr. Terry Jones from Monty Python...It's his job to put things in perspective using humour as his tool. Maybe it's not your kind of humour, but for a lot of people it is. Me for example, so I decided to share it on this site.
Don't take everything so seriously mate.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.