Political: Iraqi Soccer Players Mad About Bush Ad

Originally posted by wvrevy
Maybe Rove should have, you know, made sure these guys would have supported the idea before using them in a campaign commercial :rotfl:
----------------------------
Unwilling participants
Iraqi soccer players angered by Bush campaign ads featuring team
Posted: Thursday August 19, 2004 12:50PM; Updated: Thursday August 19, 2004 1:28PM

PATRAS, Greece -- Iraqi midfielder Salih Sadir scored a goal here on Wednesday night, setting off a rousing celebration among the 1,500 Iraqi soccer supporters at Pampeloponnisiako Stadium. Though Iraq -- the surprise team of the Olympics -- would lose to Morocco 2-1, it hardly mattered as the Iraqis won Group D with a 2-1 record and now face Australia in the quarterfinals on Sunday.

Afterward, Sadir had a message for U.S. president George W. Bush, who is using the Iraqi Olympic team in his latest re-election campaign advertisements.

In those spots, the flags of Iraq and Afghanistan appear as a narrator says, "At this Olympics there will be two more free nations -- and two fewer terrorist regimes."

"Iraq as a team does not want Mr. Bush to use us for the presidential campaign," Sadir told SI.com through a translator, speaking calmly and directly. "He can find another way to advertise himself."

Ahmed Manajid, who played as a midfielder on Wednesday, had an even stronger response when asked about Bush's TV advertisement. "How will he meet his god having slaughtered so many men and women?" Manajid told me. "He has committed so many crimes."

The Bush campaign was contacted about the Iraqi soccer player's statements, but has yet to respond.

To a man, members of the Iraqi Olympic delegation say they are glad that former Olympic committee head Uday Hussein, who was responsible for the serial torture of Iraqi athletes and was killed four months after the U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003, is no longer in power.

But they also find it offensive that Bush is using their team for his own gain when they do not support his administration's actions in Iraq. "My problems are not with the American people," says Iraqi soccer coach Adnan Hamad. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American army has killed so many people in Iraq. What is freedom when I go to the [national] stadium and there are shootings on the road?"

At a speech in Beaverton, Ore., last Friday, Bush attached himself to the Iraqi soccer team after its opening-game upset of Portugal. "The image of the Iraqi soccer team playing in this Olympics, it's fantastic, isn't it?" Bush said. "It wouldn't have been free if the United States had not acted."

Sadir, Wednesday's goal-scorer, used to be the star player for the professional soccer team in Najaf. In the city in which 20,000 fans used to fill the stadium and chant Sadir's name, U.S. and Iraqi forces have battled loyalists to rebel cleric Moktada al-Sadr for the past two weeks. Najaf lies in ruins.

"I want the violence and the war to go away from the city," says Sadir, 21. "We don't wish for the presence of Americans in our country. We want them to go away."

Manajid, 22, who nearly scored his own goal with a driven header on Wednesday, hails from the city of Fallujah. He says coalition forces killed Manajid's cousin, Omar Jabbar al-Aziz, who was fighting as an insurgent, and several of his friends. In fact, Manajid says, if he were not playing soccer he would "for sure" be fighting as part of the resistance.

"I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid says. "Everyone [in Fallujah] has been labeled a terrorist. These are all lies. Fallujah people are some of the best people in Iraq."

Everyone agrees that Iraq's soccer team is one of the Olympics' most remarkable stories. If the Iraqis beat Australia on Saturday -- which is entirely possible, given their performance so far -- they would reach the semifinals. Three of the four semifinalists will earn medals, a prospect that seemed unthinkable for Iraq before this tournament.

When the Games are over, though, Coach Hamad says, they will have to return home to a place where they fear walking the streets. "The war is not secure," says Hamad, 43. "Many people hate America now. The Americans have lost many people around the world--and that is what is happening in America also."

Isn't it wounderful that the soccer players from Iraq can now protest and complain without the fear of torture or death. That their families don't have to worry, and the sisters of all these players don't have to worry about being raped just because they could voice an opinion.

Thank God for President Bush and the American Military!:bounce:
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
I could have, but then again you could've chosen to attack him instead of me. I guess it's all a matter of priorities.

Perhaps you'd be kind enough to share with me just what was so offensive about my comment?

You know what I find offensive?

We've got someone on these boards advocating murdering an entire population and you take offense to MY post because I say that others feel the same as he does and that it concerns me.





Soo..... asking you "How many is many? Have any stats to back up that claim?" is an attack????

It was a legitmate question. You put forth a wide sweeping claim and all I was asking you to do was to back it up.

And you think I took offense to your post because I asked such a question??? Nope.

Clearly you're idea of is an attack is WAY different than mine. Way different.
 
The New York Post this morning is reporting the following:

A CBS poll shows Kerry's support among veterans has dropped 10 points since the group began advertising.

Kerry launched a new ad yesterday — after his first damage-control ad last week did little to raise his poll numbers.

The new ad features President Bush and John McCain, with a narrator saying, "Bush smeared John McCain four years ago. Now, he's doing it to John Kerry."

That spot, which implies that the Bush campaign is behind the Swift Boat ads, is designed to make it appear that McCain is bashing Bush. McCain heads Bush's re-election bid in Arizona and has asked Kerry not to use him in the Democratic ads.

The Bush campaign criticized the ad as "false and libelous."

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/29319.htm

If this claim turns out to be true, that McCain has asked Kerry not to use him in the Democratic ads, will those of you who have condemnded Bush's use of images of Iraq [against the wishes of the Iraqi soccer team) also condemn Kerry's use of Mccain in the Democratic ads?
 
Your link seems to be a story on Bob Dole's opinion of Kerry's Vietnam record. You know, that issue that you said we should stop discussing and move on to more important issues?

There's only a very vague reference to McCain and nothing that indicates his position on this particular ad.

<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>
 

Peachgirl, I've highlighted the relevant portion of the article (see my above post). Maybe you need to have your glasses checked?

Oh, and I brought this up again because your last post in my thread about Kerry's attendance records at Intelligence committee meetings apparently didn't interest you at all. You continued posting about THIS (the Swiftvets) issue, so I was just obliging you.
 
Soory to veer OT....


"Meanwhile, Kerry spent a profitable Saturday in the Hamptons, raising at least $2.5 million for the Democratic National Committee at three events.

Some 750 guests showed up for the main event, a $1,000-a-head fund-raiser at the home of venture capitalist Alan Patricof.

Kerry told the celebrity-studded crowd that his opponents are going after him personally "because in the last months, they have seen me climbing in America's understanding that I know how to fight a smarter and more effective war [on terror]."

Later in the day, Kerry headed to the home of "Sex and the City" creator Darren Star, who co-hosted a $25,000-per- person dinner. Some 250 guests turned out.

Kerry was a no-show for the third event, which took place at a local restaurant"


WOW!! And here I thought the Republicans were the party of the rich. $25K a plate fund-raiser with 250 showing up. Nice.

And $1k/head for the other one with $750 attending.

He was a no-show at the Denny's ($8/head).
 
Jimbo said
They're showing swimmers in the ad. Iraq doesn't even have a swimming team; it's a desert country
1) So's Australia, and they seem to do OK. and 2) Actually Iraq does have a swim team, and they sent one swimmer to Athens for the games
Other sports in which Iraqis qualified are track, boxing, swimming, tae kwon do and weightlifting -- but just one Iraqi will compete in each of those events. From http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/08/13/MNGVK87HAA1.DTL
Whether those athlete's were Iraqi or not really isn't the point. We all know (and the Iraqis know) that Bush was trying to link his deeds with Iraq's ability to participate in the games. (This is also erronious, because under Saddam Iraq participated in the previous games anyway). It smacks of political opportunism for one, and bad taste to invoke the athletes deeds to his own.

There are no Iraqi's in the ad. There is the flag of Iraq and the flag of Afghanistan. If I get upset because Kerry uses the US flag in his commercials, if I find it offensive, does that mean he should change it? After all, don't I have as much standing for our flag as the Iraqi players have? I don't understand this
How would you feel in the Taliban had used the US flag in their political campaigns just after 9/11? I think you'd quite rightly be outraged. Kerry is an American, using the American flag, in an American election, IMHO that is vastly different from someone using an other nations flag for their own political ends in a domestic election. The two acts are VERY different.

IMHO it doesn't matter if it's Kerry, Bush, Blair or the Pope , you shouldn't use a person or a group of people in an add without asking their permission to do so.
 
Originally posted by bsnyder
Peachgirl, I've highlighted the relevant portion of the article (see my above post). Maybe you need to have your glasses checked?

Oh, and I brought this up again because your last post in my thread about Kerry's attendance records at Intelligence committee meetings apparently didn't interest you at all. You continued posting about THIS (the Swiftvets) issue, so I was just obliging you.

Maybe if you feel so strongly about this you should frame your posts differently. Just ask the questions you want answered and don't bring up the extraneous comments.

Great idea, huh?

As it is, it was a one line comment and we have no idea how McCain feels about this particular ad.

Btw, was that an op ed piece because the title certainly wouldn't make it appear as though it was a unbiased article..

JOHN A VIET CON: DOLE
<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>
 
With all due respect, I'm voting Kerry, but Bush is basically the reason why this team is able to play in these games. On top of that, America financed their trip ... They'd do well to remember that.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Maybe if you feel so strongly about this you should frame your posts differently. Just ask the questions you want answered and don't bring up the extraneous comments.

Great idea, huh?

As it is, it was a one line comment and we have no idea how McCain feels about this particular ad.

Btw, was that an op ed piece because the title certainly wouldn't make it appear as though it was a unbiased article..


<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>

I don't feel strongly about it. You apparently do, because you brought it up here on this thread.


The article is listed under national news, not editorial or commentary. It doesn't appear to me to be an op-ed peice, but rather a straight news story. I'm not sure what to make of the headline, either.
 
Originally posted by Elwood Blues
"Meanwhile, Kerry spent a profitable Saturday in the Hamptons, raising at least $2.5 million for the Democratic National Committee at three events.


Kerry can't hold a candle to Bush's little groups of Rangers, Pioneers and Mavericks...

Forgive me, I'm probably just jealous 'cause I wanna be a Maverick for Bush..... :rotfl:
"Republicans have long had a multimillion-dollar advantage over the Democratic Party in the limited individual donations the national parties still can collect, "hard money" that ranges from $5 or $10 checks to the maximum $25,000 per year a person can give a to party committee."
"Bush brought out his volunteers last May, about six months after most of the Democratic hopefuls began raising money. By year's end he had taken in about $133 million, beating the presidential record of $106 million he set in the 2000 primaries. Bush raised almost as much as the original 10 Democratic candidates combined.

By late January, Bush's total topped $144 million. Should the recent pace of $2 million to $4 million a week continue, he can expect to have his $150 million by mid-February.

Bush is doing so with help from at least 423 volunteer fund-raisers. They include at least 156 "rangers"; 245 "pioneers," who collected at least $100,000 each; and 22 "mavericks," who brought in at least $50,000 each."


He's got himself a regular little posse going there, doesn't he??
:rotfl:
<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>
 
You apparently do, because you brought it up here on this thread.

I brought up McCain on this thread???

It's early. perhaps you could point me to where I did that, because I can't seem to find it.


<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>
 
Why is it that the overwhelming theme re: the Iraqi people seems to be that they should be "grateful" to us?

I'm not saying anything but that. I'm not arguing what we did for them, didn't do for them, anything. But bottom line is, they really didn't ask us for anything. We took it upon ourselves to give them what we thought they wanted, and now, by god, they better get down on their knees and kiss our feet! (No, I realize that no one actually said "they better get down on their knees and kiss our feet", but that is the prevalent attitude...I think we all try to conveniently hide behind the "I didn't SAY those exact words, therefore you cannot attribute any meaning I don't think sounds flattering to me!")

I think this quote says it best:

I believe the only thing to do is to take these Iraqis at their word, assume them to be the best at determining what is good for their citizenship, and not call them out for not doing what we think they ought to do. Anything less is imperialism, an assumption that we are the most intelligent, most compassionate, etc. And, it's this kind of position that angers so many people about US foreign policy.

As to the OP: I think we all know the intent of those ads (and any political ad), regardless of what the literal content is.
 
Originally posted by Maleficent13
Why is it that the overwhelming theme re: the Iraqi people seems to be that they should be "grateful" to us?

Perhaps not the Iraqi people at large, but the soccer team certainly should be, for their all-expenses paid junket to Greece.
 
Originally posted by Maleficent13
Why is it that the overwhelming theme re: the Iraqi people seems to be that they should be "grateful" to us?

Perhaps not the Iraqi people at large, but the soccer team certainly should be, for their all-expenses paid junket to Greece.
 
Originally posted by vernon
Jimbo said 1) So's Australia, and they seem to do OK. and 2) Actually Iraq does have a swim team, and they sent one swimmer to Athens for the games Whether those athlete's were Iraqi or not really isn't the point. We all know (and the Iraqis know) that Bush was trying to link his deeds with Iraq's ability to participate in the games. (This is also erroneous, because under Saddam Iraq participated in the previous games anyway). It smacks of political opportunism for one, and bad taste to invoke the athletes deeds to his own.


IMHO it doesn't matter if it's Kerry, Bush, Blair or the Pope , you shouldn't use a person or a group of people in an add without asking their permission to do so.



But there are no Iraqi's in the ad. Just a reference to the political state of their country. The ad was left wide open for interpretation. You see it one way, I see it another. I doubt they would have ever tried to specifically take credit for Iraq being in the Olympics. But chances are very good that they wouldn't have been there this year if SH was still in power.

I guess what bothers me most is that people can take such a positive message as what's being conveyed in the ad and twist it around by getting their political shorts in a bunch.

It's sad that I don't hear people who are criticizing this ad say...

"It's a good thing that Iraq can join the world stage at the Olympics."

"It's and even better thing that they won't get beaten (or worse) if they came back not winners".

Why can't the people opposed to the war in Iraq ever acknowledge something positive that came from it? And please don't anyone try to twist it around by saying that the people who only see positive things are ignorant of the bad things. We are quite aware (thanks to the mainstream media) of the bad things.


Food (beer) for thought...

I wonder if Fosters got permission from the Aussie government (or placed a referendum for the citizens of Australia) to use the phrase (it's how they advertise Fosters beer here in the US)

"Fosters, it's Australian for beer"

It's highly possible that many Aussie's hate that beer and don't want their country to be linked to lousy beer.
 
Wow, did this thread go off topic! In case you've forgotten, here's the OP:
Originally posted by wvrevy
Maybe Rove should have, you know, made sure these guys would have supported the idea before using them in a campaign commercial :rotfl:
"Those guys" aren't in the commercial. There aren't any Iraqi athletes in the commercial. No one who saw the commercial could possibly think that there were any Iraqi athletes in the commercial.

This whole thing is nothing more than a particularly misguided attempt at Bush bashing.
 
Originally posted by Jimbo
Wow, did this thread go off topic! In case you've forgotten, here's the OP: "Those guys" aren't in the commercial. There aren't any Iraqi athletes in the commercial. No one who saw the commercial could possibly think that there were any Iraqi athletes in the commercial.

This whole thing is nothing more than a particularly misguided attempt at Bush bashing.

Actually, I think it's developed into quite a bit more than Bush bashing, based on the number of people that have posted and expressed their misgivings at the audacity of these players to speak out against Bush exploiting their talents and winning streak.

If the whole point behind this invasion was to give Iraqis their freedom (as the administration is seeming to assert now that pre-war intelligence has failed), then part of that freedom is hearing statements from Iraqis in high-profile positions that you may disagree with.

That "these guys" aren't in the commercial doesn't change the fact the the Bush admistration is attempting to use thier high profile status at the games to support thier unilateral actions. The players expressed their disapproval with this- they may or may not have had the opportunity to see the ad for themselves. Am I pleased that they now have the right to this speech? Absolutely. But to expect to hear only gratitude is incredibly naive and to take a position, again, of imperialism. This war may have ousted those who were in a position to harm them, but it has also brought more hardships to them and their families.

Yes, it is a good thing that they can participate in the games. Yes, it is a good thing that they won't be beaten upon return. But do these two rights make up for the mess we've inflicted on their country? Does it make up for friends or family members who've lost thier homes, thier livlihoods, or even thier lives since this all started?

These are hard questions, and let's not answer them ourselves. Let's let the Iraqis answer them since they are the ones most directly effected by this situation. Let's assume that they are as intelligent, sensitive, loyal, kind, intuitive, and everything else as we are.
 
Actually, I think it's developed into quite a bit more than Bush bashing, based on the number of people that have posted and expressed their misgivings at the audacity of these players to speak out against Bush exploiting their talents and winning streak.

That's the understatment of the century when you consider that one of the suggestions was to murder them all.

Yeah, that's it...we don't like what they say, we'll just kill them.

Gosh that reminds me of someone else's method of controlling what people say and do......:rolleyes:

<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
That's the understatment of the century when you consider that one of the suggestions was to murder them all.
But that was a fortunate diversion for you, OTOH. It let you avoid addressing all of your misstatements on this thread.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top