Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Either you take them at their words when they condemn the attacks or you don't. I do. Apparently, you don't. It seems odd to me to scrutinize public statements and then treat them as dishonest, but I can't stop you.
|
You have zero reading comprehension and it is very annoying. I didn't say I didn't believe them. I questioned their timing and their tone. And I am not scrutinizing the public statement. You don't have to scrutinize it, you just simply have to read it to see that their condemnation was Tepid.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't understand at all your analogy to the Nazis. Except maybe for Slave, we should all be able to agree that there is a public diplomacy component to the war on terrorism. Do you take Karen Hughes' job seriously? I do. These people are pointing out that the Anglo-American Middle East policy is undercutting that task.
|
Yes, there is a public diplomacy aspect to the war on Terrorism. There is also a public diplomacy aspect to what the Muslims in England are doing. And they are doing it poorly. Now is not the time to state that one should change the Middle East policy or otherwise British people will get bombed. And of all people, when discussing the bombing, Muslims, if they want to influence British public opinion, need to be very vociferous in their condemnation. These people need a new public relations consultant, and if they don't have one they need to get one. They were trying to point out that Anglo-Middle east policy is losing hearts and minds in the middle east, but they are going about it the wrong way.
What they are doing is not helping their argument but hurting it among the British people. That Ad they was very poorly thought out. It is not that complicated.
