He also says this in his interview:
I've never really understood the idea that any American government, any American elected official is responsible for protecting civilians who are not Americans. . . . . .
. . . . . My own opinion is we should err on the side of protecting Americans first. And if we make a mistake in that kind of action, I think the American people will accept that. It's — this is a matter of survival.
That sounds very . . . oh, I don't know. . . "Israeli," doesn't it?
In the days immediately after 9/11, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said this from the heart in the heat of the moment:
"We should be conscious of the superiority of our civilisation, which consists of a value system that has given people widespread prosperity in those countries that embrace it, and guarantees respect for human, political and religious rights. This respect certainly does not exist in the Islamic countries."
He had added, he hoped "the West will continue to conquer peoples, like it conquered communism."
In another thread some weeks ago I observed that Pakistani President Musharraf has given numerous speeches in the last few years on Muslims needing to take responsibility for their own misery. Like most Muslim leaders, religious or non-religious, his hands aren't exactly blood free but there's a growing chorus within that community for something different. We see that in the reaction in Arab media to the events in Breslin as well.
Some have also argued that the West is getting in the middle of a Muslim civil war, a conflict between the hardline elements and those who want to join the rest of the world, with 9/11 and other attacks the result as the West appears to favour one side over the other.
Comments?
Cowperson