Ted Re..that as a senator acting in her official capacity, she should be required to state her employers position correctly.
Excuse me.......but who do you think is her employer?
She is a representative of the people for the gov, and when speaking to people in her position as a senator, she represents the gov. She is a liasion between the two. As a representative, when she represents the gov., she should reflect the policies that she, and her fellow representatives voted for. The senate voted for GW's Iraq resolution, the senate voted for the war against Afghanistan etc. and when representing the gov. she should reflect what the gov. stands for; not necessarily what she personally stands for. Or at the least, she should say that those are her personal views, not the views of the senate, or the president. Frankly, since she made those remarks, I have not heard one other person defend those remarks, other than you; no other senators, representatives or even half crazed liberals have defended those remarks. Why are you?
She is flat out wrong. The US is the biggest giver of aid to Afghanistan,
She wasn't talking about Afghanistan but rather other Muslim countries......on such a small point, you've misinterpreted what she said.
And neither was I. Here is that part of my post you are responding to,.
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.
You have isolated one part of one sentence of a paragraph, and claimed that I wasn't talking about donation to all poor countries. LIAR
Good point.......if that's the reason our good will is so low in the Middle East, then we need to change how we give out aid. That's what Ms. Murray was suggesting.
If Mz Murray was really suggesting that the US should stop supporting international relief agencies such as the Red Cross and UNICEFF; and start building schools for the clerics to preach hatred of the US; then you have a bigger problem that you think. Here is what a person of the International Red Cross thinks of her statements.
http://roperblog.blogspot.com/
Did you catch the remarks that Senator Patty Murray made to a group of high school students in Vancouver, Washington? Here's an excerpt from the Associated Press's report:
"Sen. Patty Murray intended to be provocative when she told a group of high school students terrorist leader Osama bin Laden is popular in poor countries because he helped pay for schools, roads and even day care centers.
'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?'"
In fairness to Senator Murray she did say that Osama Bin Laden was an evil man who had killed thousands of people, but the fact of the matter is that Senator Murray was attempting to portray the US in the most negative light by saying that even Osama Bin Laden, the murderer that he is, is admired around the world because he gives money to the poor while the US does not.
That seemed to be her message. Rightly or wrongly, that is how it came across. Well, of course Ms. Murray got a letter (I love to write letters). Here it is:
Ms. Murray
With all due respect you lied to those students. Here'a a piece from Collin May's weblog at innocentsabroad.blogspot.com that details how horribly wrong you are about America's generosity. I suggest you apologize to the American people for spreading lies about them. I further suggest you issue a retraction of what you said because, simply put, you lied to the world too.
Senator Murray, Check the Figures
In response to Senator Pat Murray’s recent comments claiming the US has, unlike Osama bin Laden, failed to provide aid to woo the sundry peoples of the world, I would like to note a few points. Until last October I worked for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva. My job was fundraising. I wrote funding requests and financial reports for one donor: the European Union. My division was one of six that secured funding for ICRC activities. Each year our divisions tallied the total amount of donations coming from the various nations and organizations. We then produced a bar graph that listed the largest donors beginning with the most generous. And each year, first place in donations went to one nation: the United States. Indeed, in terms of the bar graph, American contributions towered above all others. Before working for the ICRC, I also worked for the United Nations. The case there was similar to the Red Cross. The US alone stood out ahead of all other donors.
Of course, Murray is correct to note that Osama bin Laden has used his vast family fortune (one he did absolutely nothing to earn) to win converts to his cause. By comparison, the money provided by the American government comes from taxpayers of various degrees of wealth, from American billionaires to the guy selling hot dogs on the street.
And Murray is also correct to point out that America did drop bombs on Afghanistan. But perhaps in her smug wisdom she might go further and ask another question. What were the results of bin Laden’s stewardship in comparison to those American bombs? Again I can refer to my work at the Red Cross. During my time with the ICRC I wrote funding requests and reports on Afghanistan both prior to September 11 and after. Prior to September 11, Afghanistan had experienced periods of sustained drought especially in Ghor province and Herat. This situation was complicated by an interminable civil war. After September 11 and the eventual attack on Afghanistan, I had the opportunity to talk with people who worked directly in Afghanistan. All told me about the incredible change in Afghanistan. Almost overnight, the country went from a land living in fear of the Taliban and al Qaeda operatives to one where children were playing in the streets, often kicking around soccer balls given them by American, British or French soldiers. And what about the activities of the Red Cross? Well, as my source in the field told me, the Red Cross now had access to areas previously prohibited by the Taliban. The humanitarian activities of the Red Cross were ultimately aided by those American bombs.
By saying this, I don’t mean to speak for the International Committee of the Red Cross, nor do I mean to suggest that the US has never engaged in activities that ultimately harmed its reputation in various parts of the world. All I would suggest is that Senator Murray may wish to reflect a bit more the next time she makes an attempt at being provocative. To suggest that the US does not provide a substantial amount of aid to the developing world is blatantly foolish. To compound this foolishness by failing to take account of the difference between the motives and results of funding coming from Osama bin Laden and the United States is perverse.
Incidentally, my source in the field quipped, half jokingly half seriously, “I wish the US would invade a few more countries, it would make our job a hell of a lot easier.” He wasn’t an American by the way.
posted by Collin May at 12/20/2002 05:14:58 PM
A person of the Red Cross condemning what Murray said. Go figure.
That's right two can play the same game.....again that's what Sen. Murray was suggesting
That isn't at all what she was suggesting. GW, as she noted in her correction, already started up a department to get the US message out.
http://www.senate.gov/~murray/releases/02/12/2002C20843.html
The White House believes that we can do more, and has devoted an entire department to improving America's image in the Arab world.
Why would she suggest that we weren't doing that if she knows full well that GW had previously set up a department to do precisely that several months earlier. Is she trying to plagarize GW's ideas. Secondly, if that is what she was suggesting, why when she said we weren't doing that, was she referring to OBL building roads, schools and day centers. And if you believe I am the only one who misread her intentions read these posts.
http://www.asmallvictory.net/archives/001930.html
As you will note, there is a box for you to respond and set thoses poor misguided souls staight. Why don't you do that.
Are you really believing this crap, or do you just like to hear the sound of your own words? None of what you say in the paragraph above is grounded in reality........sorry.
I will believe it until you or anyone else can give me a better reason not to. I have posted several sites where there are postings from other people who agree with me. Why don't you give me the sites of people who agree with you. Why don't you try the sites of Carville and Begala; those two are looney enough, that they just might support you. |
