Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Keep these quislings out: Calls from pro-war bloggers for Britain to grant asylum to Iraqi interpreters are truly nauseating”

From the Guardian’s Neil Clark:

[…] in Iraq, it was Britain that was the aggressor, and all those who aided the occupation are complicit in what the Nuremburg judgment laid down as “the supreme international crime”: the launching of an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign state.

The interpreters did not work for “us”, the British people, but for themselves – they are paid around £16 a day, an excellent wage in Iraq – and for an illegal occupying force. Let’s not cast them as heroes. The true heroes in Iraq are those who have resisted the invasion of their country.

As Seumas Milne wrote in yesterday’s Guardian: “More than any other single factor, it has been the war of attrition waged by Iraq’s armed resistance that has successfully challenged the world’s most powerful army and driven the demand for withdrawal to the top of the political agenda in Washington.”

Nevermind that the “armed resistance,” when it came from Iraqis and not al Qaeda-led foreign forces (who even the Sunnis have turned on of late), came from those Iraqis who weren’t terribly keen on being wrenched from power, representing, as they do, a substantial ethnic minority in Iraq — one that had used brutality to oppress the ethnic majority and keep its hold on a totalitarian state under whose previous political setup they’d benefited enormously.

Nevermind, too, that a large part of their “resistance” has been aimed at the majority of Iraqis who support a Constitutional republic, and against a government elected by that majority.

Such nitpicking troubles a good narrative of dogged determinism — and as we all know, one man’s stooges to a deposed dictator are another man’s sprightly band of patriotic freedom fighters.

If more Iraqis had followed the example of the interpreters and collaborated with British and American forces, it is likely that the cities of Iran and Syria would now be lying in rubble.

Before you rush to condemn Iraqis who feel ill disposed towards the interpreters, ask yourself a simple question: how would you view fellow Britons who worked for the forces of a foreign occupier, if Britain were ever invaded? History tells us that down through history, Quislings have – surprise, surprise – not been well received, and the Iraqi people’s animosity towards those who collaborated with US and British forces is only to be expected.

Because, evidently, the US and Britain are fascists, and the majority of Iraqis are their enablers.

For Clark, Iraqis who have taken part in an unprecedented push to move their country toward a democratic republic and the fraternity of free nations are cowards, and should be shunned as traitors.

Whereas those who blow up their fellow Iraqis in marketplaces because they prefer the iron boot to the representative vote? These are the real heroes — their bravery extolled for doing with arms what ideologues like Clark do with words: resisting western liberalism.

Up is down. Black is white. Seals is Crofts.

As one commenter on the Guardian blog site puts it:

Oh dear Neil.

You do realise that this isn’t our campaign, but one which is being run by sites which are and were strongly anti-war.

For example: Crooked Timber and Pickled Politics

What a nasty and stupid man you are.

I hate to make a partisan point out of this: but when people say “look how fvcked parts of the far Left are”, they’re talking about you.

(via LGF, h/t CJ Burch)

****
update: By the way, those of you who wish to see these opportunistic quislings in action, be sure to check out Bill’s fantastic self-shot video of “a day in the life of the Iraqi Police and their Marine advisor,” recorded during his first stint in Fallujah.

update 2: More, from Ace and Hot Air.

53 Replies to ““Keep these quislings out: Calls from pro-war bloggers for Britain to grant asylum to Iraqi interpreters are truly nauseating””

  1. corvan says:

    The far left? I thought the man was a respected journalist. And journalists are all centrists, unaffected by politics and people of integrity… just ask one.

  2. happyfeet says:

    He yearns for the genocide that will validate his righteousness.

  3. Mikey NTH says:

    So, according to this reasoning, when France signed an armistice with Germany in 1940, those French who joined the Free French Forces were the traitors because the duly authorized French government had signed the armistice?

    Well whadda you know, the United Kingdom was on the wrong side of that one also. By Mr. Clark’s lights they should have shipped DeGaulle back to Marsaille as a traitor to france.

  4. Mikey NTH says:

    Wait a minute – another thought hit me. Those Germans who worked with the allies after the conquest of Germany? Quislings all. Shoot those still alive and dig up the dead ones’ and shoot them too. Give Adenauer a double tap to be sure.

    Sure is interestin’ to see what positions people will work themselves into so as not to question age-old dogma.

  5. Dave says:

    The most astonishing revelation in this for me is that Ted Rall apparently writes for the Guardian under a pseudonym.

  6. Pablo says:

    On the bright side, he’s getting hammered almost unanimously in the comments. Nice to see that there’s still some sanity possible in that crowd.

  7. BJTexs says:

    So, by Clark’s calculus, those mayors, interpreters, police, etc. who were targeted by the Werewolves in Germany during the late ’40’s were simply patriotic Germans defending the Fatherland.

    Of course, nothing says valiant minutemen like a car bombed market full of women and children. Just like colonial rebels, they are!

    I need to go throw up for a couple of hours to get the flinty taste of Neil Clark out of my mouth.

    tw: ment Creditor’s not credibility, Mr. Clark

  8. N. O'Brain says:

    Well…

    That was nauseating.

  9. mojo says:

    Meh. The “Gruaniad” can always be counted upon to undercut democracies, even nascent ones.

    SB unused republic

  10. How do you spell “hate”?…

    N-e-i-l C-l-a-r-k:
    A group of pro-war bloggers is playing a prominent role in a campaign to grant asylum to Iraqis who have been working as translators for the British forces in Iraq. Not all who back the campaign were in favour of the war, but some o…

  11. Crimso says:

    “Well whadda you know, the United Kingdom was on the wrong side of that one also.”

    Actually, by his logic, they would be by the very fact that it was they who declared war on Germany (when Germany hadn’t even attacked them), not the other way around. The problem I have with invoking Nuremberg is that, like history, it was authored by the victors. Telford Taylor’s book is quite illuminating (though he would argue, and did I believe, that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was illegal). After reading it, I was much less convinced that Nuremberg was a legitimate set of proceedings. They were pretty much making up the rules as they went along.

  12. ahem says:

    This story, An Iraqi Interpreter over at Totten’s adds extra poignancy:

    MJT: What will happen if the Americans leave next year?

    Hammer: Rivers of blood everywhere. Syria and Iran will take pieces of Iraq. Anti-American governments will laugh. You will be a joke of a country that no one will take seriously.

    I will kill myself if it happens. I am completely serious. The militias will hunt down and kill me and my family. I will beat them to it by killing myself.

    Clark and his Fellow Travellers is nauseatingly evil. And it is evil. There’s really no other word for it.

  13. dicentra says:

    They were pretty much making up the rules as they went along.

    They were pretty much dealing with an unprecedented event in modern history. Where were they supposed to get the rules from? The Book of Kells?

  14. Patrick Chester says:

    Best. Comment. Evar:

    Neil “Screw’Em” Clark: “Before you rush to condemn Iraqis who feel ill disposed towards the interpreters, ask yourself a simple question: how would you view fellow Britons who worked for the forces of a foreign occupier, if Britain were ever invaded?”

    Not quite an accurate analogy, though, is it.

    To be truly equivalent you would have to imagine that pre-invasion, Britain had fallen under the sway of a murderous dictator, who had slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own people; imprisoned and tortured god knows how many more; and treated the country’s economy as a vast slush fund for himself and his cronies.

    Then along came some busybody foreign superpower, that had the nerve to invade and depose the aforesaid murderous dictator; an action it followed up by mendaciously imposing elections on us liberated Britons so we had to choose our own government. Naturally it would be difficult for me to swallow such an affront to the sacrosant principle of British national sovereignty, no matter if undertaken against a genocidal maniac.

    Yet if there subsequently arose a so-called “resistance” who variously wanted to restore the deposed fascist regime, or better still impose a sociopathic theocratic tyranny, I hope I would have the guts to cooperate with any forces, occupying or otherwise, who were willing to fight against them. And I don’t think I would take kindly to having my patriotism impugned by an inflamed pile on the arsehole of humanity like Neil Clark.

    But then we are talking about a man who apparently has yet to encounter a despot or theocratic nutjob, without feeling the urge to pen a crawling apologia.

    Glad other people notice the fallacy in that stupid analogy used to excuse any number of atrocities committed by Micheal Moore’s Minutemen in Iraq.

    TW: cause cities

  15. ThomasD says:

    My favorite from the comments:

    Every bone in my body wants to bluntly invite Neil to consider the implications of his implied policy – that the most violent and nationalistic element of society should be given free reign to dish out rough justice to people they regard as traitors – for the long term survival of his own political party.

    Unfortunately I think DavidDaniels does not fully appreciate the irony.

    After all totalitarianism is as totalitarianism does.

  16. happyfeet says:

    The furriskey, he has been quiet of late.

  17. Dennis Miller says:

    Seals is Crofts? Seals is fuckin’ Crofts?!

    You’re this close to having a copyright infringement suit blowin’ through your mind there, Chachi.

    And what the hell is with your fuckin’ Rendezvous with Rama-lama-dingdong robot gatekeeper over here? “Godly Voconian?” That’s from a joke I did about A.C. Green in 1989!

    Oh, it is so on.

    …Babe.

  18. daleyrocks says:

    Quislings?

    Has he discovered an anomaly, Iraqis of Norwegian ancestry? Was Scandinavia the real cradle of civilization based on this revelation? Who knew, Scandis migrating to Iraq?

  19. Merovign says:

    You know, if Neil “Butcher of Fallujah” Clark isn’t willing to personally strap a bomb vest to a mentally disadvantaged child and send them off to blow up a market full of grocery shoppers, he’s just a poser.

    So how about it, Neil? Why not prove your “street cred” by murdering a school bus full of “quislings in training?”

    Calling Neil Clark a “useless piece of shit” would be a massively unjustified compliment.

    Anybody have a picture of this nimrod? I feel the need for a few Photoshops.

  20. cynn says:

    Wow. How can anyone think like that? Regardless of how one feels about the war itself, it is obvious to me that those Iraqis who work as interpreters are doing what they see as their part in rebuilding their society and nation. It’s a dangerous job, and these people are brave for doing it.

    We should be especially grateful for their help, because they are probably our only bridge to Iraqi culture and social dynamics, two important aspects that the occupation architects couldn’t be bothered to learn.

  21. Gabriel Fry says:

    So, now that we’ve all come to an agreement on the value of granting asylum to Iraqi translators, how do we differentiate between those who were advancing our noble ideals out of a desire to bring freedom to a blighted nation and those who were content to cash a steady paycheck from the occupiers in an otherwise sketchy job market while selling the names of collaborators to the Shi’a death squads in their free time? Are they equally welcome?

    Gee. Got so excited and patriotic we didn’t give that a lot of thought, huh.

  22. cynn says:

    I had seen references to such turncoats, but never saw substantiation. I would think they’d be outed pretty quickly.

  23. Patrick Chester says:

    Oh my, someone thinks he’s clever.

  24. BJTexs says:

    Gabriel Fry

    Gee. Got so excited and patriotic we didn’t give that a lot of thought, huh.

    Reading comprehension not your strong suit, eh?

    Nobody here was talking about the mechanics of granting asylum to translators. One hopes that there will be a vetting for that. Let’s keep our eye on the ball that Clark is essentially calling for all translators to be left to die, without so much as a how do you do. Them being traitors and all.

    But great shot at trying to change the subject while snarking at the ‘thugs.

  25. Karl says:

    it has been the war of attrition waged by Iraq’s armed resistance that has successfully challenged the world’s most powerful army…

    Really? Neil couldn’t name a single military engagement where the insurgents/AQI/whoever didn’t get their asses handed to them. They have inflicted miniscule US casualties by any historical measure of any conflict of this size. The US has killed the enemy by orders of magnitude greater than the enemy has killed our troops — not that Neil’s fellow travelers ever bother to report it. The real “attrition” on the US side has been one of will, primarily on the part of the Left, who didn’t have much will for this invasion from the outset, and have done quite a bit to undermine it in the center of the political spectrum. Yet even now, the latest CNN poll shows that most Americans think that the war is winnable — but still don’t think that the US will win.

    The enemy is in the business of not challenging the world’s most powerful army. The enemy is in the business of attacking soft targets, primarily Iraqi civilians, esp. those who are trying to move their country forward.

  26. Karl says:

    Gabriel Fry

    Gee. Got so excited and patriotic we didn’t give that a lot of thought, huh.

    Shall I point out his tendency to equate patriotism with not thinking? And his apparent resulting disdain?

  27. N. O'Brain says:

    Comment by cynn on 8/10 @ 2:10 pm #

    Oh, cynn, for a minute you had me going there, actually nodding in agreement with something you posted.

    Of course you immediatelty had to piss in the puncbowl.

    Another illusion shattered.

  28. Squid says:

    I think I’m getting the hang of this nuance stuff, thanks to Gabe.

    Some Iraqi translators are bad guys; therefore, we should let all Iraqi translators and their families be tortured and murdered.

    Some Iraqi citizens don’t appreciate our presence in their country; therefore, all Iraqi citizens should be abandoned.

    Some soldiers are ignorant fuckups; therefore, all soldiers should be considered sociopathic murderers.

    Some Democratic leaders are perpetually drunken spoiled scions of corrupt privileged families, therefore all Democrats should be listened to and followed without question.

    Nope. Still can’t get my brain around that last one. Guess it’s back to Nuance School for me.

  29. Jeff G. says:

    Let Gabriel be. He was always picked last for kickball, and, well, that just stings.

  30. mojo says:

    Even the Guardian’s commenters are tossin’ every brick thay can scare up at this dweeb. THAT’S gotta be a first.

    SB: O’Brian francais
    Vous parlez français comme un Irlandais ivre

  31. dicentra says:

    But then we are talking about a man who apparently has yet to encounter a despot or theocratic nutjob, without feeling the urge to pen a crawling apologia.

    Peter. Pettigrew. The Man. The Rat. The Strangulation.

    TW: and naturalist; not unless you consider his fondness for being a rat half his life.

  32. Lurking Observer says:

    No, no, Squid.

    Some journalists are lying, deceiving hacks, aided and abetted by editors whose idea of fact-checking is putting on a sock-puppet and doing a junior high revival of a Señor Wences routine. Therefore all journalists’ stories should be viewed as the tripe that, uh, er,

    No, wait.

    Never mind.

  33. Merovign says:

    Oh, look, a dumbass telephone pole.

    Whee.

    Yeah, just skip over that part where “Strangler of Haditha” Clark labeled terrorists “heroes,” ’cause how stupid would you look if you went to bat for that one.

    I mean, hey, that’s what everyone else is talking about, but why bother actually responding to people’s arguments when you can just make up your own hypothetical opponent and DEFY THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVE!!!1!!ELEVEN!!!1!

  34. klrfz1 says:

    I have come to prefer the type of troll that drops one steaming turd and departs.

  35. cynn says:

    N. O’Brain: You can slur me at your leisure, but did Viceroy Bremer and his Bushie-vetted coterie ever venture into the very place they were tasked with stabilizing and reconstructing? Did they? Or did they just hunker in the bunker and send sniffy emails to the home crew?

    The wanton looting, callous upheaval of at least somewhat stable institutions, and the creation of disaffected, factional militias by the disbanding of the Iraqi military sure strikes me as brilliant occupation management. So, what’s your seat of the pants idea for our next brilliant plan?

  36. happyfeet says:

    Bremer had great hair. I hope I have hair that great when I’m a viceroy.

  37. Pablo says:

    I hope you’ll kiss all the grandmas and babies, like a good viceroy should.

  38. cynn says:

    I don’t even know what Bremer looked/looks like. For all I know, he’s a cardboard cutout, stationed vigilantly just inside the gates of the green zone. You know, where it’s safe.

  39. happyfeet says:

    I’ll be the bestest viceroy ever. Songs will be sung.

  40. Pablo says:

    Will there be dancing with peasants? I love that.

    cynn, Bremer looks like this. This thing they call “Google”, it’s magnificent!

  41. happyfeet says:

    Wow. His eyes. Such compassion.

  42. cynn says:

    Anyway, this has gone far afield. We need to protect and harbor those Iraqis who have tried to help us in this twisted mess. This Clark guy feels he can be a hardass because his country is bailing. Can’t say I blame Britain, but priorities, please.

  43. cynn says:

    Your attitudes about the Iraqi people are very interesting, to say the least. You seem to think they’re irrelevant. I happen to think they’re more interested in settling scores than establishing a viable nation. What do you know, could be a mutual brown-people bias.

    And no, I don’t give a shit about what Bremer looks like. I’d like to know what you think he and his did to advance any sustainable progress in his little viceroydom.

  44. Pablo says:

    Well, there was this.

  45. Pablo says:

    But enough about brown people interested in establishing a viable nation.

  46. cynn says:

    Cool, Pablo. Not sure of the Bremerator’s involvement in that. Government’s working out pretty well, what’s left of it that’s not on vaycay.

  47. Jeffersonian says:

    “Before you rush to condemn Iraqis who feel ill disposed towards the interpreters, ask yourself a simple question: how would you view fellow Britons who worked for the forces of a foreign occupier, if Britain were ever invaded?”

    You know, Neil’s right here. Some national institutions are worth defending, and dammit, we should say so. If you don’t think that taking up arms to protect your beloved dictator’s psychotic sons’ right to gang-fuck your sister and feed anyone who objects into a tree chipper is righteous, there’s just something wrong with you. How dare we trifle with a quaint Iraqi mannerism such as this.

  48. happyfeet says:

    Our policy is to close threads after three days. Comments have now been closed on this entry.

    Wonder what that’s all about. It was just posted today it says. Maybe they mean comment is free-ish.

  49. Sean M. says:

    There’s so much idiocy in this turd’s piece, but I loved this bit, from near the end:

    “Let’s not overlook a practical military issue here: who will ever work for the British army in a war zone if they know that later they will be tossed aside like a spent cartridge?” asks Adam Lebor.

    There is a simple answer to that “practical military issue”: let’s do all we can to keep the British army out of war zones.

    Um, and then what’s the British army supposed to do? I suppose they could help out with rescuing kittens from trees or working as crossing guards. So much more civilised that all that dirty war business, eh, Squiffy old chap?

  50. Kimberly says:

    From the comments: “…thanks for exposing your true nature, you strange, unpleasant man.”

    My faith in the Brits has been restored.

  51. stace says:

    American heiress/quisling Molly Bingham has this film coming out in the fall.

    http://newssophisticate.blogspot.com/2007/08/meeting-resistance-trailer-what-if.html

    The trailer shows insurgents making bombs for killing Americans.

  52. […] else could you call crap like this? Posted by Ian S. […]

  53. Gabriel Fry says:

    Sorry, went tubing over the weekend, missed the free-for-all. Yeah, I realize that in the theoretical realm, doing good by those who have helped us out is great, but in practical terms (the ignorance of which is what led us to invade Iraq), “some sort of vetting process” doesn’t exist, or at least works about as well as the “some sort of vetting process” that lets us differentiate between Iraqis who are speeding toward checkpoints with bombs and Iraqis who are speeding toward checkpoints to welcome us as liberators, so while we’re all ganging up on folks who aren’t exactly down with bleeding-heart asylum programs, how about a little time spent on the mechanics of the matter?

    And Karl, yes, it was disdain, seeing as how “patriot,” like “conservative,” is a term so horribly debased that its original meaning has been just about forgotten.

Comments are closed.