In response to my post of Monday this week, the subject of that post, John Chuckman, deposited the following comment on this site:
“Your comments on my piece demonstrate you have read with no understanding. The comparison made is between the USE of the flags, not the flags themselves.
No wonder America keeps being thrust into wars that have no relationship to the wellbeing of Americans themselves. Vietnam was a murderous disaster. Iraq is the same on a lesser scale.
There’s an old saying you’d be wise to take as your own: know the words to the music before you get up to sing.”
Chuckman may think I lack understanding and he has every right to express his opinion (that’s what’s good about opinions), but after reading his comments, I have to disagree.
First, every politician in America, when appearing before the camera, loves to place as many American flags in the background as he or she can possibly buy or rent. For that fact alone, we at Flagstuff are forever grateful. So there is nothing unusual about the President appearing with flags in the background and it certainly doesn’t say anything about his motives or political idealogy.
And secondly, flags are powerful symbols. As Mr. Chuckman pointed out, Hitler was well aware of that fact as are politicians the world over. In fact, at almost every public event in any part of the world, flags play an important role. If you saw the celebrations in the streets of Palestine following the Hamas victory at the polls yesterday, you may have noticed that there were Hamas flags everywhere. Drawing a parallel between George Bush and Adolph Hitler, citing flags as the common denominator, is just plain ridiculous.
As far as Mr. Chuckman’s motives go, he’s very put off by Christians, hence his special aversion to President Bush. And while he may or may not be right that the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the well being of Americans, he should be aware that some friends and neighbors of mine died on 9/11 because his country so freely provided the conduit for some of those terrorists to gain entry into the United States.
You may think I’m making Chuckman out to be rabidly anti-American, but I’m not alone. Al-Jazeerah, the preferred source of news for the radical Islamic world, has eagerly reprinted Chuckman’s article on their website: Read God Bless Canada.
**This comment has been edited for length**
Please read Chuckman’s whole comment here, which was a post from his blog.
THE LAST PART OF THIS COMMENT IS COMPLETELY MISINFORMED, ALMOST TO THE POINT OF BEING EMBARRASSING TO SOMONE WITH SOME SENSE.
FIRST, I AM PUBLISHED ON ALJAZEERA.INFO, NOT ALJAZEERA.COM. THEY ARE TWO UTTERLY DIFFERENT THINGS, AS AN EASY CHECK WOULD TELL YOU.
SECOND, ALJAZEERA. INFO, THE ONE PUBLISHING ME, IS PUBLISHED INSIDE THE UNITED STATES BY A VERY RESPECTABLE AMERICAN CITIZEN.
THIRD, I AM NOT “PICKED UP,” I AM A REGULAR CONTRIBUTOR, JUST AS I AM ON DOZENS OF SITES, OF MANY DIFFERING VIEWS, WORLDWIDE.
FOURTH, CALLING ALJAZEERA. COM (THE ONE YOU MISTAKENLY BELIEVE ME ON) THE PREFERRED NEWS SOURCE OF ISLAMIC RADICALS IS DUMB.
EVEN WERE IT TRUE, HOW COULD YOU KNOW SUCH A THING? DID YOU DO A STUDY? IN FACT, IT IS THE PREFERRED NEWS SOURCE, AS SHOULD BE OBVIOUS, FOR ARABIC PEOPLE BECAUSE IT SPEAKS THEIR LANGUAGE. IT IS ALSO PREFERRED BECAUSE IT DOES NOT SHARE AMERICAN BIAS ABOUT MIDDLE EASTERN AFFAIRS.
SO, IN ONE BRIEF PASSAGE OF ONE SMALL BLOG, YOU HAVE COMPOUNDED YOUR MISTAKES THROUGH LACK OF EASY INVESTIGATION AND PRESET PREJUDICES. NICE WORK.
IS IT ANY WONDER THE U.S. GETS ITSELF INTO SUCH TROUBLE ABROAD WHEN ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN YOUR COUNTRY DO JUST ABOUT AS POOR A JOB?