Email from Barney Frank on Iraq, Afghanistan, blivet** and Cheney

[Sydnie]

September 6, 2006

Dear Sydnie:

Because we have corresponded in the past about U.S. policy in
Iraq, I thought you might be interested in reading the attached op-
ed article I wrote, which was recently printed in the Boston Globe.



BARNEY FRANK

BF/ksa
ENCLOSURE


THE BOSTON GLOBE

Afghanistan ignored

by Barney Frank

August 30, 2006

A WAR is missing. Sadly, it is not missing from the physical location in
which it is taking place, and people continue to die as it is waged. But it
has largely disappeared from our national debate, and that debate has
been sorely distorted as a consequence.

The war in question is in Afghanistan, and it isn't missing because it's no
longer of consequence -- in fact, conditions there appear to be
deteriorating -- but because of a conscious, unfortunately successful
effort by the Bush administration and its conservative allies to ignore it.
That's because acknowledging the war there would invalidate their
charge that their political opponents are unwilling to take a forceful stand
against terrorism.

During the years after World War II, academics popularized the concept
of the ``big lie." This is a technique successfully used by some European
regimes to manipulate the public perception of reality. It turned out that if
enough people in official positions simply repeated things that were not
true, and found elements in the media ready to reinforce them, lies would
be believed and truths forgotten.

This approach surfaced in Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that
the defeat of Senator Joseph Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic
primary, largely but not entirely because of his support for the Iraq war,
demonstrated that Democrats were unwilling to use appropriate force
against terrorism. The theme has been a constant in this campaign
season, repeatedly asserted by the administration and its congressional
allies, and elaborated on by media figures. Their argument is that the
refusal of many Democrats to support the war in Iraq shows that
President Bush's opposition is unwilling to use force against terrorism.
There is, of course, one factual refutation of this partisan distortion.
Every Democratic senator and representative but one voted for the war
in Afghanistan. It is this war that represented America's reaction to the
murders of thousands of Americans on Sept. 11 . It was the Taliban
regime in Afghanistan that was sheltering Osama bin Laden. The
reaction of the overall majority of Americans, including virtually all
Democrats, was to support the Afghan war as a necessary act of self-
defense.

But the fact that the Bush-Cheney claims that Saddam Hussein was
involved in the 9/11 attacks have been totally repudiated does not stop
the administration and its allies from equating willingness to combat
terror with support for the war in Iraq.

Not only does support for the Afghan struggle demonstrate our
willingness to resort to war in self-defense, but one of the reasons why
the Iraq war does America so much harm is that it has diverted attention,
resources, and support from Afghanistan. Violence is rising there, along
with the drug trade, and support is eroding for what we had hoped to
establish as a democratic regime.

I feel particularly strongly about this effort to obliterate the Afghan war
from the national debate because I sat in a church in Raynham early last
month and watched a family grieve over the death of a brave young man
who had been killed there. I do not regret voting for the war in
Afghanistan. But I very much regret the necessity of having to do so. The
fact that I voted for the war in which that young man was killed weighs
heavily on me as a reminder that while war is sometimes necessary, it is
an instrument to use only with strong justification, and when alternatives
are not available.

Whether or not one subscribes to the geopolitical aims that motivated the
Bush administration's intervention in Iraq, it is clearly invalid to assert that
support for that war is the indispensable badge of one's willingness to
confront terrorism. Only by adopting the techniques of the big lie can the
vice president make his case that those opposed to the Iraqi war fail to
understand the importance of a firm response to terrorists. In fact, given
the deleterious effect it has had on our effort in Afghanistan, and the
enormous boost it has given to anti-American forces around the world,
the big truth is that the Iraq war has damaged our ability to fight
terrorism.

Americans were united in their response to the mass murders of 9/11.
The war in Iraq has weakened the United States internationally and
divided it domestically, while draining needed resources. It is precisely
because the Iraq war is not defensible on any other terms that the
Bush/Cheney approach uses the big lie to defend the war in Iraq on
grounds that in fact describe the war in Afghanistan.

US Representative Barney Frank serves in Massachusetts' 4th
Congressional District.


go Barney GO!!!

[AlamoDemoc]

1. BARNEY FRANK can kiss my ass

Barney claims democrat and fair yet he never visits across from his window of Dorchester

[Sydnie]

2. across from his window?

Can you elaborate on just what that means please?

[AlamoDemoc]

3. twenty five years after he went to washington

and 15 years after he survived a sex scandal in washington, he still represents small particular community in Massachusetts of newton and many on elder that reflect with Israel thinking including his late mother.