Ted Re..D. Ray took it one step beyond criticism. He was outraged that she would make comments like the ones she made, and implicit behind his outrage was the suggestion that she not be allowed to speak to those hi school children. In other words, he wanted her censored.
While you didn't include me here, and I never asked that she be censored, I did state that as a senator acting in her official capacity, she should be required to state her employers position correctly. Here is my post to you.
To:tejek who wrote (156582)
From: hmaly Saturday, Dec 21, 2002 8:18 AM
View Replies (1) | Respond to of 156727
Ted rE....She's right. Its too bad, Fudd, your unable to see the implications of what the Senator is saying but instead have to put her down because she isn't politically correct by your standards
Here is what she said.
"We haven't done that," Murray said. "How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of that rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go to Afghanistan?"
She is flat out wrong. The US is the biggest giver of aid to Afghanistan, and has been long before the war. How many children would there be left, for those alledged schools, if the US didn't bring in food aid. Why not point out that the US also brings in aid, but different types. Isn't it quite possible the difference is how you give something. The US gives money to different aid organizations, such as charities and food banks, who then use the money to buy needed items. Thus the people connect the food with those charities, rather than the US; while OBL goes around personally sometimes and make a big deal about the pittance he gives them.. Sort of like some of the drug dealers did in Harlem so no one reported them to the police. And many of the Arab charitiies are run by OBL so he can skim off money to buy arms. Say, for every $1000 given to the charity, $200 might go to buying aid, and the rest for expenses and buying arms. OBL, just as many charities here do, have a big reason to advertize about their good deeds, so they can get even more donations and OBL can fund more arms. The fact that this woman is too dense to know these things is the problem. She is praising OBL use of charities to fund arms as a good thing for the people of Afghanistan; when in fact it was that type of funding which allowed OBL to destroy TWC, which led to Afghanistan being partially destroyed<
You will note that I pasted this part of what she said in my reply to you.
"We haven't done that," Murray said. "How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of that rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go to Afghanistan?"
That is the part of her statement I objected to. The US government is the largest giver of aid to the world monetarily wise; as the US gives approx. $10 billion yearly. In addition she overlooks all of the private aid donations of approximately $34 bil. Which means both the US gov. and the people, private and corp. give $43 bil. world wide each yr. Of the US gov. share, 2/3 goes to the middle east, with Egypt and Israel getting the lions share, but the rest of the gov. also get aid. The US gov. alone is contributing app. 200 mil to Afghanistan, the most of any country in the world. I do not have a figure on private donations, but I would assume US relief agencies also contribute a like amount. So when this bonehead Murray makes statements which are completely false, and a complete lie, that the US and its citizens don't give aid to the poor people, she is a flat out liar.
As I said in my reply to you, OBL has a reason to advertise his donations in road building etc. He is using that to obtain more donations through charitable agencies in the US and countries like SA, so that he can skim off some of the profits to fund his terrorism campaign. Some charities here in the US such as the Children's Relief Fund, also are scams where only ten cents on the dollar, or less is actually used to aid children; the rest going into the agency's pockets to fund advertising and line their pockets. Both are considered scams. However in OBL case, she didn't present it as such and that also is a problem. Does anyone know what percentage of donations OBL actually spent on charity work. That is the problem, she lauded the perception OBL pulled on the people of the world, as him doing good works, when he actually was funding terrorism. How can you, or the senator, possibly put a good spin on that.
So not only did they want to censor Ms. Murray but they slandered her as well by purposely misinterpreting her intent.
How so? I never said what her intent was. The publicist come up with the excuse afterward, that they were trying to get a discussion going, however any discussion participated in by a senator, should revolve around true facts. She purposely mislead the students into believing OBL was just doing charity work without having an ulterior motive. She purposely misstated that the US and its citizens weren't giving aid to the poor. Mz Murray also on her web site states her reasons why she voted against the Iraq war resolution. Nothing wrong with that. However, I believe she purposely misstated the facts about Us aid, and OBL's purpose for his charitable works, to justify her antiwar stance. In her speech to the students, she says that if the US gave aid to the poor like OBL, then we wouldn't have to go to war, when in fact, she knew OBL was doing his charitable works, for the purpose of collectiong money so he could afford to go to war. |
