Mikey Loves Osama
There’s trouble a-brewin’ in the love triangle of Chris Matthews, John Kerry, and Michael Moore.
A remark by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews in which he said that Osama bin-Laden “sounds like an over-the-top Michael Moore here, if not a Michael Moore” has outraged opponents of the war in Iraq and leading Democrats including former presidential candidate John Kerry. Matthews made the comment during an interview with Sen. Joseph Biden on Hardball Thursday in which they discussed an audio tape by bin-Laden that aired earlier in the day on Al Jazeera, the Arab news channel. Kerry commented: “You’d think the only focus tonight would be on destroying Osama bin-Laden, not comparing him to an American who opposes the war. ... If the administration had done the job right in Tora Bora we might not be having discussions on Hardball about a new Bin Laden tape. How dare Scott McClellan tell America that this Administration puts terrorists out of business when had they put Osama bin-Laden out of business in Afghanistan when our troops wanted to, we wouldn’t have to hear this barbarian’s voice on tape.”
Okay, let’s begin by ignoring Kerry’s usual blustery idiocy regarding Tora Bora and focus on his haughty indignation regarding Matthew’s statement. The fact is, when you look at what OBL said and the crap that Michael Moore has been spewing for the past five years, there’s no a whole lot of difference between the two. Here’s just a few of the more glaring similarities. (The Osama bin Laden quotes below are all from the BBC News transcript. The Michael Moore quotes are as linked.) First there is praise for the Islamofascist forces currently fighting the United States.
OBL: “I say that despite all the barbaric methods, they have failed to ease resistance, and the number of mujahideen, praise be to God, is increasing.”
MM: “The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win.”
Bush has no plan.
OBL: “The wise ones know that Bush has no plan to achieve his alleged victory in Iraq.”
MM: “In your heart of hearts you know Bush is a miserable failure. From having no plan on what to do in Iraq once he conquered Baghdad to the 380 missing tons of explosives that could be used to kill our brave young men and women, this guy doesn’t have a clue how to fight and win a war.”
The war in Iraq has made America less safe by creating terrorists.
OBL: “Reality testifies that the war against America and its allies has not remained confined to Iraq, as he claims. In fact, Iraq has become a point of attraction and recruitment of qualified resources.”
MM: “We are hated, we are despised, we are less safe,” Moore said, inciting cheers and applause from the audience. “George W. Bush has made us less safe in this world.” Moore made it clear that the war on terror, or in his words, “the war on a noun,” is not making the world a safer place, but serving as a training ground for more terrorists. “You do not liberate a people with the barrel of a gun,” Moore said.
The war was all about corporate profit.
OBL: “There is no defect in this solution other than preventing the flow of hundreds of billions to the influential people and war merchants in America, who supported Bush’s election campaign with billions of dollars. Hence, we can understand the insistence of Bush and his gang to continue the war.”
MM: “Halliburton is not a “company” doing business in Iraq. It is a WAR PROFITEER, bilking millions from the pockets of average Americans. In past wars they would have been arrested—or worse.”
I could have posted twenty more similarities between the two, but these are sufficient for illustrative purposes. There are significant parallels between the rhetoric we hear coming from the Islamist terrorist camp and from the radical western left. There always have been.
Now, that being said, there’s more going on here. Basically OBL, with this “truce” offer, is playing to an audience. The offer isn’t aimed at Bush or the Muslim world. No, my friends, it’s aimed at the activist liberal left, the MoveOn and Michael Moore crowd, the bongo playing drum circle hippie asshats who stage a protest every five minutes because they have nothing better to do. Much like the USSR used the anti-war movement to great benefit during the Vietnam era, so the terrorists know that the useful idiots in the contemporary peace movement can serve the same purpose.
Bin Laden’s message is simple: “We are only fighting back against American imperialism and aggression, and for the liberation of Palestine from the Zionists. The so-called war on terror is a war Bush cannot win. Prolonging the war will only serve to enrich Bush’s corporate masters even further. I am offering you a truce. You might not like me, but I am willing to end this war right now. If you believe in peace you will support me.” This is EXACTLY the mantra of the peace movement. Go down the list of left-wing beliefs.
1) America is an aggressive imperialist which seeks global economic hegemony.
2) Israel does not have a right to exist, and the Palestinians are an oppressed group on par with black South Africans.
3) The war on terror is not an actual war, since terrorism is a tactic, and a war cannot be waged on a tactic. Therefore the war on terror cannot ever actually be won, and is used solely as a justification for endless war, resulting in massive corporate profits.
4) Peace is defines solely as the absence of conflict. Anyone should be trusted when they claim to have peaceful coexistence as their primary motivation.
It goes on and on and on. What remains to be seen is if Michael Moore and his ilk will repudiate this message. Don’t hold your breath.
Update: It appears that the fine folks over at Ankle Biting Pundits had exactly the same idea I did. Don’t miss their selection of Mikey quotes.
Comments
I’m glad it outraged John Kerry. It’s funny when he acts mad.
Anyway, I think this is kind of on topic, so I’ll put it here: I love how John Kerry kept crying and yelling like a little baby over the swift boat ads, demanding… DEMANDING that Bush condemn them (even after he did), but when it comes to F 9/11 (a two-hour long swift boat ad) nobody seemed to think it was incumbent upon Kerry to speak.
Well, at least NOW we know something about how he feels vis-a-vis Moore.
I’ve seen such a comparison several other places. You could have compared OBL’s comments to not just Moore, but several other liberals, including Dean and Murtha. However, Moore has more quotes that compare directly, that is true. Excellent post, good sir.
Damn, the left is in an uproar over this. Hell, just check out all the links on Moore’s site. *hint to Moorewatch - if you want more readers and therefor more donations, don’t just post about what Moore says, but also stories he links to, as it shows what he believes and supports as well.
So was that Matthews in a moment of honesty, whereas, now, he is beating a hasty retreat? He was misunderstood?
Well well. Looks like ever since the Hard Ball interview, liberals like Moore are going into high gear to show there distaste for bin Laden.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=5598
MM slanders whomever he wishes so he can make money off left wing nutbags and as soon as someone does the same to him he cries like a baby and puts silly pictures up on his website. MM’s face should be superimposed with OBL instead of Chris Matthews. They both would LOVE to see America on its knees. I am no fan of Chris Matthews, but he sure did nothing to apologize for! If MM can open his big mouth and say whatever he wants, so can every other American, including Chris Matthews!
4:43 PM
But notice how Michael Moore only insults Osama and company whenever his patriotism is called into question. Looks like he’s going into major damage control.
"4) Peace is defines solely as the absence of conflict.”
I think you got this one wrong.
Conservatives think that is what peace is.
Progressives talk about peace as something to ‘struggle towards’. In essence, you must fight for peace. Fight against conservatives and other political enemies… it breaks down into doublethink as you become more radical. You may even have to physically fight for revolution… for peace…
Think your link is not working. Where is the original comment?
A remark by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews in which he said that Osama bin-Laden “sounds like an over-the-top Michael Moore here, if not a Michael Moore” has outraged opponents of the war in Iraq
See, but here’s the thing… after comparing thier quotes, side-by-side, am I the only one who thinks that Michael Moore sounds like an over-the-top Osama?
Seriously. Bin Laden’s diatribe is not only a mirrored version of liberal sound bites, but it’s actually a toned-down one! If you look at the language, and the vitriol reflected in it, you’d be hard-pressed not to agree that the liberal politicos are actually sounding less reasonable than Osama Bin Laden.
And that, my friends, is frightening.
Progressives talk about peace as something to ‘struggle towards’. In essence, you must fight for peace. Fight against conservatives and other political enemies… it breaks down into doublethink as you become more radical. You may even have to physically fight for revolution… for peace…
Id say this is more of an example of liberal hypocrisy.
The only people liberals are agreesive towards are conservatives. But when it comes to actaully fighting a war for legitimate reasons, they spew rhtetoric of peace and nonn-violence.
The only ‘struggle’ liberals will ever engage in is one that may upset or undercut conservatives.
1) America is an aggressive imperialist which seeks global economic hegemony.
Er, yes… very true. Endless amounts of evidence to support this claim, however you’ve forgotten to mention the other developed nations who are in league with America (the EU, Japan, Russia to name a few).
2) Israel does not have a right to exist, and the Palestinians are an oppressed group on par with black South Africans.
The first part I don’t believe. I +do+ believe that Israel has a right to exist, however the expanionist policies of Israel since it’s inception have left the Palestinians an oppressed people (I have been and seen it first hand) who’s main grievances are purely associated with social issues (access to their places of work, freedom to travel etc) and not religion as our media hint.
3) The war on terror is not an actual war, since terrorism is a tactic, and a war cannot be waged on a tactic. Therefore the war on terror cannot ever actually be won, and is used solely as a justification for endless war, resulting in massive corporate profits.
And your point here is? Oh, I see… you’re suggesting that it’s NOT driven by profit? Strange, I thought this was always the point for the war, it’s the only reason that would make any sense and fit the facts - occum’s razor and all that!?
4) Peace is defines solely as the absence of conflict. Anyone should be trusted when they claim to have peaceful coexistence as their primary motivation.
This is just silly… you only need to look at Blair and his master prior to the Iraq invasion to see the number of times they assured their public that they’d do everything they could to promote a peacfeul diplomatic resolution to ‘the situation’ without ever actually trying. Apparently it was Saddam who tried to make contact through a middleman to try and reach an agreement, but he was turned down flat by the West who’s sole plan was to invade.
You have to laugh though when you see OBL playing Bush at his own political game and showing that game for what it is. Wait now for the build-up in coverage of the ‘clear and present danger’ posed by Iran and their vast stockpiles of ‘Nuclear Weapons’ and how they’re closely tied to Al Qaeda… I wonder if they used the plans to build a nuclear weapon which the CIA (during Clinton’s era) handed to them!!!???
Aaah, but I suppose you’re right. OBL sounds like Moore, sounds like Bush, sounds like Blair, sounds like Putin, sounds like everyone else you hear speak in the political arena these days - they’re ALL playing the game.
M-Res:
Brilliant satire! You have completely nailed left-wing idiocy in your post, as well as verifying the point of this thread. Man, you couldn’t have done any better if you actually, really believed what you wrote. Kudos for such an on-target imitation of the morons represented by Moore and OBL. Wow. Seriously, man, that must have been hard work....
What? You mean.... Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, couldn’t be, could it?
Seriously?
And your point here is? Oh, I see… you’re suggesting that it’s NOT driven by profit? Strange, I thought this was always the point for the war, it’s the only reason that would make any sense and fit the facts - occum’s razor and all that!?
Yes, that’s right, it’s obvious, isn’t it? I mean, Iraq has cost America $240 billion since 2003. Even if the USA were to steal all of Iraq’s oil from now on (which, despite what the moonbats might tell you, they’re NOT going to do) it’d take them at least 20 years to get that money back through oil revenue. Yes, it’s blindingly obvious that money was their motivation!
Matthews is using a simple guilt by association fallacy. He wants to silence opposition by smearing anyone opposed to the war as a terrorist. The similarities in opinion are made inconsequential by their basic differences in intent and methodologies. For instance, how many of the following apply to Michael Moore?
OBL wants to establish a Muslim Caliphate with himself as its head.
OBL uses his money and power to commit terrorist acts like 9/11.
Is MM a “danger to America”? No more than Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ed Shulz, or anyone else like Chris Matthews who can’t make their case without using ad hominem attacks.
Aw, look, another libtard fluttered in. It even used the “silence opposition” strawman, isn’t that cute?
By RoughRider:
Matthews is using a simple guilt by association fallacy. He wants to silence opposition by smearing anyone opposed to the war as a terrorist.
No he isn’t. He’s saying OBL is a Pinko Lefty, and could be one of MM’s mates. The insult is to Osama, not Mikey.
Libtard, pinko lefty… looks like a few people couldn’t come up with real reply and fell back on ad hominem attacks, as usual. By the way, the “silence opposition” part of my statement is not a strawman. A strawman fallacy is when you take your opponent’s argument, redifine it in a way that will make it sound weaker, and then disprove that point. A common strawman:
Speaker A “Guns should be legal for lawabiding citizens.” Speaker B “Speaker A thinks everyone should have guns!”
The silence opposition part of my statement was my opinion on why Chris Matthews said what he did.
Gee, considering that Moore himself mentioned that Osama’s rhetoric mimiced his own just before the election:
“There he was, OBL, all tan and rested and on videotape (hey, did you get the feeling that he had a bootleg of my movie? Are there DVD players in those caves in Afghanistan?)”
http://moorewatch.com/index.php/just_as_the_founding_fathers_intended/
Matthews was doing nothing more than stating the obvious.
Rough Rider-
No. A strawman argument is an argument that uses a subject not part of the original point. Usually, this involves something similar to your example, but not exactly. It attempts to make take someone’s position, and then fashion a “point” out of the position that doesn’t exist for the EXPRESS PURPOSE of knocking it down.
Matthews was not making a strawman argument. And of all people, Matthews is NOT one to attempt to “silence the opposition.” He is the opposition. He is very left-leaning, and was only making an observation that is, truth be told, very accurate. It does not surprise me that bin Laden is making some of the same remarks individuals like Moore (and Kerry, and Murtha, etc., etc., etc.) are making. He is very much attempting to repeat what they are saying. It is just that people don’t like the comparison, though accurate, because it is someone we can all agree we dislike. (For the most part).
M Mooron said of Halliburton;
[...]In past wars they would have been arrested—or worse.”
I really doubt that, but on the other hand,
in past wars MOST DEFINITELY Michael Mooron would have been arrested or worse…
Michael Moore is helping the ennemy, he is encouraging the ennemy, he is giving them more resolve and he is rooting for them, and if this was a war of the 19th century, he would be hanged or shot by a firing squad...in fact many Americans (and Canadians too) would have gladly volunteered to execute him...him an a few democrats…
IndieKid, excellent point, I totally agree, I’ve been saying more or less the same thing for a while now.
Why waste hundreds of billions while no petrol or very little petrol is being produced in Iraq?
And why waste the life of over 2000 soldiers?
And why would have Bush done something that made him an hated man BEFORE the 2004 elections?
it does not make sense, no one would waste all that for a little petrol, especially when you take into account that Canada has recently been confirmed to be the second largest oil reserve in the world ( I can find the link if anyone is doubting ) and Canadians are bending over backwards to sell their petrol to the USA.
Digging in Alaska is another cheaper and much safer alternative.
There is one difference between OBL and moonbats like MM,
OBL is more polite.
up4 do I have to explain everything?
Yes I know terrorists kill people, but the American left does not kill people ( well not directly anyway, but that is another topic ), we all know that, and that is NOT AT ALL what I was talking about.
I was NOT making a joke about killing innocent Americans, I was making a joke about MM and people like Cindy Sheehan and other foaming-at-the-mouth anti-Americans moonbats such as those on Kos or DU that say very mean, impolite things about Bush, Republicans or America in general.
I thought it would have been funny to mention that the tone of OBL on his tapes is more calm and polite than the average’s Sheehan admirer.
OBL speaks in a more calm and polite way than the average moonbat.
I was pointing to the irony of that.
OBL does not use words such as “fuck”.
But you did.
Which kind of helped me prove my point.
OBL does not use words such as “fuck”.
But you did.
Which kind of helped me prove my point.
And what is your fucking point? Fuck, that is such a fucking stupid thing to say I dont even know where to begin! bin laden is in some way better than me, or even michael moore, because you consider him calm and polite??? You do know what happened on sept 11, right? Calm? Polite?
Look, i know there are people on here that really really really hate michael moore, and probably cindy sheehan. but when you start saying things like ‘well, even osama isnt that bad!’ .... well, you have seriously lost your perspective.
people who say bush = hitler are idiots. this is pretty much the same thing.
Yeah, but Bush doesn’t go around saying “Sig heil!” while Moore does go around saying “The US needs to lose this war!”, so the comparison is a bit more apt.
I cant believe that anyone is actually suggesting that in any way, shape, or form, Bin Laden is somehow a “better” person than MM because he is polite and calm when he speeks. Or even that Bin Laden is somehow “better” than me because I use the work ‘fuck’. Believe me, Im not offended, I take the source into consideration. But really, get some perspective people!
OBL speaks in a more calm and polite way than the average moonbat.
I was pointing to the irony of that.
Where did I say OBL was a better person?
I know OBL is a monster.
Don’t you know by now I am a Conservative? which means I can tell who the real bad guys are?
The irony I was pointing to, is that some American and Canadian “ peace activists “ act and speak in very unpeacefull ways,
they shout “ fuck you baby killers” at American soldier’s funerals ,
they proudly wear “fuck Bush” t-shirts,
they phyisically intimidate Bush supporters at pro-Bush rallies,
they throw rocks at policemen at WTO protests,
and so on, and so on...all for peace…
I know OBL wants to see us all die in a gigantic 9/11, but isn’t it ironic that he acts in a more calm and polite way than “ peace activists” on the left?
Isn’t the contrast between OBL’s calm composure and the foaming at the mouth - bouncing off the walls attitude of
“ pro-peace-left” ironic?
I was not giving OBL any credit, I was “taking away” credits from the left
and it was humour, not a thesis, for crying out loud!
Can’t you see that up4?
Rann did understand it, why can’t you?
I guess I could buy that it was just a very poor attempt at humour, except for this…
OBL does not use words such as “fuck”.
But you did.
Which kind of helped me prove my point.
Was it humour or where you trying to make a point? And again, what is the point? Terrorists speak peacefully, while people who want peace people speak, ummm, terribly? Haha?
“ fuck you baby killers”
Quoting Ann Coulter wont get you anywhere with me :) (yes, that was a joke).
But honestly, if you know of websites of any groups who go to soldiers funerals and yell that, please let me know. Post it here. I would personally like to tell them to fuck off (pardon the language).
Up4,
In response to your statement
But honestly, if you know of websites of any groups who go to soldiers funerals and yell that, please let me know. Post it here. I would personally like to tell them to fuck off (pardon the language).
http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/
Maybe they don’t shout F-you at their funerals, but look at the signs they carry.
http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=91255
In my opinion, these so called “Christians” are just as bad as MM and the rest of his libtards. I am a BAC, and their behavior at this church is insulting and shameful.
RSS (Subscribe)
Saw MM’s homesite he is pissed off :p