George
Bush Divides US or us?
Abul
Kasem
When John
Kerry, after conceding his defeat in the recently held election, called
President Bush he reminded George Bush of the deep chasm that has engulfed
the American nation like nothing before.
George Bush
agreed with John Kerry.
It looks like
this division has now spread to all parts of the world, except of course,
to the Muslim World. The Muslim World was solidly behind John Kerry. Even
the ex-Prime Minister of
Malaysia
, who often chastises Western leaders for meddling in his personal
property (i.e.,
Malaysia
), shamelessly harangued the Muslim Americans not to vote for George Bush.
To him, lecturing the citizens of the
USA
on how to vote is not interfering in the domestic affairs of the US, but
it is his religious duty to rid the world of the disciple of the Great
Satan. Did George Bush admonish the self-appointed 21st.
century Khalifa of the Muslims? No, he did not. He simply kept quiet,
preferring to let the American people decide. Imagine what the new Caliph
of the Muslim Ummah would do if George Bush had asked the Malaysians not
to vote the ex-Prime Minister during an election in
Malaysia
!
During the
election campaign Gorge Bush was portrayed as a liar, a war-monger, a
Muslim-hater, a Christian fundamentalist, a moron, the lowest I.Q
President, a Texan Cow-boy and whatnot.
So why did the
Americans vote in drove this Christian fundamentalist, a belligerent, a
non-apologist and a dunce for the White house for a second term? Let me
ponder on this matter, remembering the Australian election which was held
just a month ago (
9th October, 2004
).
While I may not
be very familiar with the American politics, I can, perhaps, relate this
bizarre American voters' attitude from the example of the Australian
voters. The Australians re-elected John Howard’s conservative party (the
Liberals) for the fourth time defying the pundit’s prediction (from
polls, of course) of a comfortable, if not a land-slide, victory for the
Labor Party of Australia (ALP). The readers may draw an analogy between
these two dominant parties of
Australia
with that of the two major parties of the
USA
thus:
The Australian
Liberal Party = the Republicans of the
USA
The Australian
Labor Party = the Democrats of the
USA
.
The incumbent Prime Minister John Howard was a Liberal candidate in this
election. The opposition was portrayed him as a liar, a war-monger, an
enemy of the Muslims, a dullard, a racist, a Christian bigot--simply
because he refused to call back the Australian troops from the war-ravaged
Iraq. He is uncompromising in chasing the Islamic Terrorists. He wants to
catch them and punish them with full force of the law. While the
Australian Labor Party was somewhat ambivalent on Islamic Terrorism, John
Howard is absolutely unyielding in dealing with them. He will not hesitate
to go to war with his neighboring countries if Islamic Terrorists attack
Australia
from their bases from any one of these countries—that is his
stand—crystal clear.
When the
election result was announced John Howard won the election with more seats
in the Parliament than the previous poll. Not only that but he also won a
comfortable majority in the Senate which will enable him to pass new laws
(to contain terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism) with extreme ease. Seems
like an exact duplicate situation of the
USA
, isn’t it?
When the election was over I
heard many BD Muslims calling the Australians ‘stupid’ for electing an
enemy of Islam as the Prime Minister of Australia. They preferred Mark
Latham, the opposition Leader and a candidate of the Australian Labor
party, who, as a sign of his love for the Muslims, even nominated Ed Husic,
a ‘non-practicing’ Muslim as a candidate for a
Sydney
suburban electorate. For the last couple of decades this electorate had
always been won by a Labor candidate. There was absolutely no way that
this ‘non-practicing Muslim’ would lose the election— every one
thought. If that happened then
Australia
would probably have its first ‘non-practicing Muslim’ in the Federal
Parliament.
1
2 3
> Next |
