Defending Rev. Wright - Part 1: McNamara / Buchanan / Paul

[jeffnfoxylady1]

while boy fox love trying to make this man look bad fuck you fox

[makepeaceu]

Thanks for this video. Why is Rev. Wright an idiot when everything he has said rings of truth and common sense? Black people were so starved to see their own image in the white house that they gave up all reason and now they are not even thought about in my opinion. Obama is an uplifting image however its business as usual. Mc Namara was repenting, Ron Paul has been bold for a while and was one of the only people spitting truth during the 2008 election. This video is wonderful. Peace.

[RileyE104]

I don't like Reverend Wright, but what he's saying in this video is very true.

[dzanier]

It's all TRUE.

[tarpumpphillips]

This is the most rational thing that I have ever heard pat Buchanan say in my lifetime.

Where Rev. Wright went against the grain of what the three men said is that he should NEVER have mentioned South Africa. That is the only thing he mentioned that the other three men did not mention, so I guess that is what made so many people call him anti-American and unpatrriotic.

[1Weltschmerz]

Jackass!

[FreethinkerAtl]

Those who cannot articulate a clear rational thought based on a factual, principled position, usually resort to name calling. I used to do that back in elementary school.

[dzanier]

Are you sure they weren't criticized by the manistream media in the same way? I'm an Italian-American who believes that EVERY WORD the Rev. Wright said was true. I haven't lived in the US since 2001 but I would imagine that it's the fact that he had at that moment a connection with a potential presidential candidate that made him more ripe for criticism. Because quite honestly, Buchanan gets criticized a lot, Ron Paul I think is generally ignored. The other guy I'd never heard of. Great post.

[Karma2Die4]

All of the gentlemen's assessement and context of their commentaries only differed in their delivery. Rev Wright's delivery was quite animated and theatrical, however, he spoke the truth. I believe that Americans are more accepting of a message when an individual delivers that mesaage with a smile and it is softly spoken. Although, I believe there comes a time when the speaker is compelled to shock the social conscientiousness of the listeners and Rev Wright did a grand job of in that regard.

[jolly113]

The comments from McNamara are taken out of context. He believes that in order to do good, you must be prepared to engage in evil. To know where the line is drawn, you must weight the good and the bad in the larger frame of things.

There is the distinction that McNamara saw the firebombing of Tokyo a necessary evil, for a greater good. He is rationalizing, not repenting, his actions.

[FreethinkerAtl]

You obviously didn't see the McNamara documentary "The Fog of War", which this clip is from, because the entire movie is about his reflections on war now that he is older and wiser. He realizes mistakes he has made as well as mistakes he has witnessed throughout his life, and questions things on a personal, strategic, as well as a moral level. And yes, he questioned the morality of bombing Tokyo, and in no way is "rationalizing" the bombing of Tokyo.

[jolly113]

If someone makes an accusation that a clip is taken out of context, you can infer that the individual is familiar with the context. Yes, I have seen the documentary. I studied his writing, heard him speak at UC Berkeley, and gave an undergraduate address about him from the very same podium as I graduated.

[jolly113]

Take the time to understand the word rationalizing. It means justifying, not dismissing. Of course McNamara feels horrible about Tokyo. Yes, he knows and says that it is evil what he and LeMay were doing. That is the very reason why he aptly states, In order to do good, be prepared to engage in evil.

[jolly113]

The scene in which he talks about Toyko is under the chapter Proportionality (Lesson #5) in both the documentary and the book. That is an example of what it means to rationalize evil. He revisits this idea in Lesson 9, The Paradox of Good and Evil in War.

To this day, McNamara declines to comment on Iraq , openly criticize any president, or apologize for his actions. McNamara is searching for ways to minimize the destructiveness of war, which he knows is an ugly fact of life.

[FreethinkerAtl]

You are absolutely wrong about his position on Tokyo. In addition, McNamara has openly criticized the war in Iraq. "It's just wrong what we're doing. It's morally wrong, it's politically wrong, it's economically wrong." Despite reading the book and watching the documentary, you still don't get what he was trying to say.

[jolly113]

I dont know any succinct way to put this. McNamara was an advisor to Kennedy and Johnson, and this video is trying to make him into a political voice. My friend, a retired four-star general who took orders directly from three successive presidents, explained, warriors are not politicians. McNamara is trying to teach future generations about the nature of all war.

THE WHOLE QUOTE: Killing 50 to 90 percent of the people in 67 Japanese cities, and then bombing them with two nuclear bombs,

[jolly113]

is not proportional, in the minds of some people, to the objectives we were trying to achieve. I dont fault Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb. The U.S.-Japanese war was one of the most brutal wars in all of human history. Kamikaze pilots, suicide unbelievable. What one can criticize it that the human race prior to that time, and today, has not really grappled with what I call the rules of war.

[jolly113]

Was there a rule that said you shouldnt bomb, shouldnt kill, shouldnt burn to death a 100,000 civilians in a night?

Morris documentary is an analysis of the nature and systems of war, not a political commentary about right wars or wrong wars. You can pick and choose your wars, saying this one is moral and necessary and that one isnt. In practice, they all are the same. Thats the point.

[marsCubed]

I am an atheist, however if Christianity was like Rev. Wright then I would seriously consider this concept. He is the only priest I have ever heard angry at injustice, taking risks for other people, speaking the actual truth. If Obama has 1/10 of that courage then America is in the safest hands it has been in since the days of the founding fathers. He is up against one heck of a big evil machine.

Wright should have Hilary's job IMO.

Putin would be squarely trumped.

Iran would surrender.

[FreedomIsPopularLLC]

Of course, Ron Paul was also called, "unpatriotic". Unlike Wright however, his presidential campaign gave him a platform in which to respond. Meanwhile, the attention on Wright was done with an attempt to take down Obama.

[n0us3rn4m3s4v41l4bl3]

Ron Paul's comments were called unpatriotic. Gulliani demanded that he apologize and called him crazy. The moderator laughed at him and asked if the U.S. should take its marching orders from terrorists.

[FreethinkerAtl]

Yes, but there was nowhere near as much criticism by other politicians or the media that Reverend Wright received. He was portrayed as a hate monger and the most unpatriotic man in America. Ron Paul never received anywhere near as much criticism. I like Ron Paul on most issues, and I personally think Reverend Wright is an idiot, but he didn't deserve what he got for the statements he made... but that's just my opinion. Peace

[n0us3rn4m3s4v41l4bl3]

I agree. Fox smeared Wright all over the place and it was worse than Ron Paul got. He get on Cavuto all the time and is actually allowed to talk. Wright never was.

[Loadfaster]

This is the N word argument aswell! GodD@MNIT man!

IT is often asked by whites why blacks are aloud to say nigger but whites are not.

Why is it that whites are aloud to use the Chicken comes home to roost analogy but not blacks?

Then they say that its blacks that get away ityh saying whatever they want, You almost never hear any sort of media attention when guys lkike this use the X analogy or the blow back analogy.

[marsCubed]

Sometimes the ones it happened to are the only ones who can possibly know.

There are some things civilized people do not accessorize with.

The N word, is real families, real economic oppression and real injustice.

It's not a fashion.

Thing is, it isn't just black people who get called that word anymore.

many regular people, In many ways have a lot more in common, as low pay.

we also have a lot in common if we don't want to oppress anyone and respect each other's dignity.

Obama is part of that.

[0995971056]

politics are sad.....we should respect other peoples territory, customs etc., hate only grows hate....im so sad we havent figured that out.........

[bar95900]

If you don't know you history you have know history.

[ehaile23]

over the past three years MORE AMERICAN MONEY has gone to support the state of Israel than it has to New Orleans.

[ehaile23]

i usually hate and disagree with PAT, however, this time i fully support his theory about why terrorists hate us. Pat Buchanan makes perfect sense. "They dont attack our lifestyle, they attack our policies." Our continued support of 2 oppressive Israeli regimes since Yithak Rabin's assassination in 1995 has provoked these anti-US terrorist acts: (thousands of injuries not included)

SAUDI ARABIA: 100+ DEATHS

KENYA/TANZANIA: 400

USS COLE: 20-40?

NY/DC: 3000

MADRID/LONDON( ALLIES): 250

[annboylyn]

Maybe the Rev. has been said not to be the most patriotic,but the Ron Paul supporters have been called out right crazy.Please be intellegent enough not to let racial problems consume us so we can't focus on the real issue,Which is Freedom,Liberty and Justice for all.The Elite come in every color and creed. WAKE UP!

[rwalk2730]

And he laughs all the way to his multi-million dollar home and 2 Mercedes' each costing more than $142,000 each.

He is benefiting from the history of exploited labor more than most.

[14thfloormusic]

Come on cdizzle. wake up. These are not racist statements. These are statements of fact. Here you are taking Obama's middle name and exploiting it in an attempt to connect him to Saddam Hussain

And you know it. So get real. This what Hillary do when she says Obama is Christian "As far as she know..." clearly implying that he may not be Christian, but Muselim.

That's blatant racism! These are the ugly statements that put fear in people. Shameful.

[cdizzle42]

Ok, point taken. Now how do you defend him saying God damn America, US KKK of A, comparing all caucasians in America to the Roman occupiers of the time of Christ, and all of the other hateful and racist things he has said? There is NO defense or excuse for this blatant racism. Not only is Rev Wright a hate monger, but so is EVERYONE who willingly attends that church and listens to that garbage, including Mr Baraq Hussein Obama.

[JayRo704]

Great Video!

[atothap]

Excellent work. Well done. It clearly illustrates the hypocracy. When a Black man is critical of the American government, Whites become uncomfortable and defensive. He said nothing any worse than what these three men all have said, and many others. Wake up!

[iTellYouNoLie]

hey, when Ron Paul said it they scrutinized him to the fullest, fox even had a screen logo that said Rudy slaps down 9/11 truther, and other things attacking him, then they blocked him from the next debate. ANYONE talking about the real reason they hate us gets steamrolled.

[atothap]

Not the way they villified Jeremiah and Barack. Barack didn't even say it. Read the comments and look at how people are trying to make a difference between what Ron Paul and Pat Buchanon are saying. That's my point. When someone Black says something, White people who are afraid of Black people are reactionary even if they agree with Ron or Pat.

[DAKASA777]

Great job on this video Freethinker, truly brilliant! It is amazing to me that some whites view Rev Wright's sermons as racist when what the sermons are is anti-imperialist.I think that white America for the most part is oblivious to the foreign policies of their government.On what basis do you call Rev. Wright a racist?Because he said "GD America"?Last I checked America does not mean: White people!These misinformed people equate anti-imperialism with anti-white.Grow up and READ A GD BOOK!

[sjn7007]

America has done some very vicious things not only to it's citizens but all over the world. You blind Americans need to open your eyes and wake up to all the the governement is doing. Open a book or two!

[pinkwrld]

sounds like one of the problems.

"All we are saying is give peace a chance.

Love and Peace From Canada

[atheistnarnia]

This is nonsense.

So biased it stupid.

[FreethinkerAtl]

Biased? How so? Please explain.

[atheistnarnia]

biased?

Did you listen to the rev. speech?

Blaming whites anytime, anything bad happens to a blacks person or persons.

nonsense.

[FreethinkerAtl]

Blaming whites? What he's talking about is questioning our past actions in moral terms. It's about past actions and the moral responsibility we have as a nation. And the point is, that our past actions towards other cultures and other nations have consequences, and we shouldn't be shocked when there is retaliation. We can't be barbaric towards others, then cry foul when someone uses barbaric measures against us. It's about self refection and learning from past mistakes.

[atheistnarnia]

To what ends?

Reperations?

Look we treated East Asians very poorly as well, and look at them today, they outperform whites in the US practically across the board.

I don't think there is any significant correlation between past injustices and performence today, otherwise Asians would not be outperforming whites...

[FreethinkerAtl]

Are you seriously equating the treatment of East Asians to the treatment of blacks in this country for 150 years? And as I stated before, this is not about race. This is about foreign policy you idiot! Oh my goodness... I'm finished with this... (somebody help this poor child).

[newdayo]

he wasn't blaming white people of today. But to say that slavery,Jim Crow,Lynching of the negoro male and racism in America was not the fault of racist whites makes no sense to me. Truth is truth. It is more important to listen to Obama' speech on race other than listen to Rev Wright who is not running for President. Let's get out of all these racist divides.

[atheistnarnia]

no one is arguing that it wasn't racist...

The point is... so what? It doesn't happen now, it has nothing to do with where blacks are in society as a race today...

[JanTULU]

Brilliant!  It's sad that we've become such a sound bite nation.... Dumb & Dumber...

[celestialnubian]

This video was really good. If you would redo it with the background music somewhat lower it would be perfect.

[atheistnarnia]

Blacks brought much of their misfortune upon themselves

[atothap]

Are White people not to blame for anything? Anything at all? Are they completely innocent? Can White people see they have a priveledged position in society? Is it our fault we were hung from trees? sprayed with water hoses? had dogs sicked on us? for 100 years after slavery?

[atheistnarnia]

"Are White people not to blame for anything? Anything at all?"

Logical fallacy: Straw man.

Let us take lynching for example; blacks have killed more whites in the past 10 or so years than all of lynchings combined.

Is it white people fault that blacks rape white women at an astonishingly higher rate than whites rape black women?

Concerning crime I could go on and on.

[atothap]

So your answer is White people are innocent?

[atheistnarnia]

"White people are innocent"

Again, logical fallacy, straw man.

Why don't you look it up before you do it again.

[atothap]

White people do a lot of defending themselves as if they didn't bomb Black churces, sick dogs on us, fire hoses, 2nd class citizenship for 100 years after slavery. Not to mention legalized, insured, and profited from the slave trade. Over 20 million people in slavery and over 70 million people taken from their homes. All you can talk about is what we do after being destroyed? That's a shame you can't own up to anything.

[atheistnarnia]

Slaves were bought from *black slave owners*.

While whites made laws outlawing slavery, it still exists in Africa, don't you find it ironic that blacks always bring slavery up when explaining how evil whites are.

Destroyed? Your race ends up the same way in every multi-racial society you are in, you are at the bottem, and the country's you run yourselves are among the worst on the planet.

Unless you can point out where I'm wrong.

[fjenkins1]

What deception! Europeans bought African slaves from Africans? The Africans had two choices: fight or sell. If somone came up to you with a gun and said either sell me your shoes or I will shoot you for them...what would you do? The Europeans were kicking butt in Africa and suffering major casualties. They found much more profitable to buy rather than to fight. Your argument is weak on its face.

[atheistnarnia]

You are extremely uninformed; you just made up that 'sell or die' story on the spot. Slaves were individuals that were captured during tribal conflicts, if Europeans did not buy them they were usually executed. (males)

Any more fallacies?

[fjenkins1]

I made up the analogy, but the argument is sound. Also, did you just start taking classes in logic? If so, you may want to revisit the part on logical fallacies. Anywhoo. The Portuguese started their slave "trade" by 1st kidnapping Africans and then outright open conflict, but at great human cost. They then negotiated the "sell" of slaves. Before the Europeans and the Arabs, it was indeed possible for slaves to gain their freedom and some even inter-married. You're just factually off.

[atheistnarnia]

Of course in the US no slave had ever gained their freedom or inter-married...

Are you high?

[fjenkins1]

We're talking about slavery of indentured servitude between Africans. Not America slavery.

and No, I'm not high....I read books.

[fjenkins1]

"slavery or indentured servitude"

[fjenkins1]

Slaves in Africa were like indentured servants in Europe. There essentially is no difference in the terms. However, trade and sell are commercial terms that entered with foreign presence in Africa. To say that "Africans sold Africans" is very misleading because it implies that Africans were free to NOT sell their slaves, which would have ultimately led to their destruction, as the Europeans were much better armed, hence my analogy.

[atheistnarnia]

Of course the Europeans treated their slaves poorly and the African slaves lived a fruitful life. And today slavery still exists in Africa, which I'm sure you believe is the fault of whites.

The truth is slaves were won in battle, and many were put to death in Africa, in the US many slaves lived better off than working class indivduals in the north, because slaves were property and by rule people generally take good care of their own property.

[fjenkins1]

LOL. "Slaves lived better off than working class individuals in the north." Now whose high? I guess that's why all those well-treated slaves in the south risked life and limb to get to the north? Thanks for that laugh. lol.

And for the record, slavery exists all over the world-even in the great USA. Sex exploitation and forced labor are synonyms for slavery. Yes, European imperialism made the problem worst, but the notion that Africans sold Africans is, as I said earlier, misleading.

[fjenkins1]

Mugabe is Great Britan's fault.

[atheistnarnia]

Of course, anytime a black person does anything wrong anywhere it must be the white mans fault, same nonsense time in and time out...

Of course Africa got worse AFTER they gained independence from European powers...

[fjenkins1]

Of course, you would take that to mean "the white man's fault." Indeed, had it not been for Great Britan, the Empire, there would have been no need for Mugabe, the Anti-Imperialist, and his eventual tyrannical rule. In this scenario, the imperialist were, yes, white, but so were the imperialists who forced the Americans to rise up against the tyranny of a British King. So the frustration is not directed at white people, but at imperialism, period. Racism was and is simply an evil byproduct.

[fjenkins1]

To the second point, look at South Africa. It went from an oppressive apartheid regime to one of the most progressive democracies in the world, yes, with faults, but so was America in its infancy. America went through two Constitutions and a bloody Civil War AFTER it gained its independence from England.

[Loadfaster]

Worse? Yeah Worse. They were Worse off before the Whiteman came. Then the Whiteman cleaned them up put them on there feat and all that...

Blacks were jungle bunnies till the whiteman saved them from themselves...

sure.... OF course they got worse... gimme a break.

[IntrinsicArt]

its not about color, its about karma.

[FunkWitYoMind]

this is the problem with states.

the karma of a state, because it represents the people within it, will affect the people even though they did not personally commit the actions. thisis the only solution to winning the war on terror: abolish the state

[genkijin]

Yes - I must say that this is one fine peice of work! It's so true but people are still blind.

[JanTULU]

I totally agree.

[DYWLBH]

Great video!

[frontpage78]

freethinkeratl it is extremely difficult to argue with those who are close-minded

[bheanue]

A patriot is "one who loves and defends his country". Pat Buchanan's criticism of US foreign policy is consistent with patriotic behavior. He loves his country and points towards a better, wiser path for his countrymen to follow.

Reverend Wright's criticism seems different. Based on other clips and transcripts, there seems to be a malice aimed at white people.

[FreethinkerAtl]

Thanks for the comment, and I understand your perspective. I don't agree with some of the things Rev. Wright has said, but the question I ask to everyone is, "What malice, and what has Reverend Wright said that was racist towards white people????

[bheanue]

"...and they will not only attack You, if you try to point out what's going on in White America, the US of KKK A ..." Rev. Wright

That's one of his comments that seems to have some malice behind it.

I don't understand why he hasn't just come forward and say " I have no malice against White people". It would defuse the whole situation and get this behind Obama.

But instead it comes across like Rev. Wright is in hiding or something.

[FreethinkerAtl]

I don't like that he said "US of KKK", but other than his terminology, he has a point...lol.

[bheanue]

I think his terminology weakens whatever point he wants to make.

Christianity calls us to rebuke sinful acts and encourage good acts.

With Rev. Wright, it seems he is more interested in rebuking history. How does that encourage his flock to do Good?

[FreethinkerAtl]

Well, without hearing the entire sermon, I don't think we can say that it did, or didn't encourage his flock to do good. All of these are small snippets from full sermons, and it's easy to make assumptions without hearing the entire sermon.

Now, as far as Christianity encouraging good acts... don't get me started on that one...lol.

[cmloz]

To suggest Buchanan is an advocate of the opinions of deluded bigots like Wright is sloppy thinking at best, outright intellectual dishonesty at worst. Read some of commentary Pat has written about Wright, look at some of the videos in which he comments on it. The instincts of penitents has run through western history - 'we are wrongdoers, we are not worty, punish us O Lord' - and the modern liberals are just the most recent and pathetic incarnation.

[FreethinkerAtl]

Well, I think it's outright intellectual dishonesty to ignore that they are saying essentially the same thing about our foreign policy. I'm not saying that they both share the same views on anything else... but it's willfully ignorant to deny that both say our foreign policy was a contributing factor in the attacks on 9/11. I don't agree with everything Rev. Wright says, but on this topic, I agree 100%.

[RMMHS4RP]

I understand the point you're making with the final comment at the end about how Buchanan and Paul haven't been labeled as unpatriotic. But in point of fact, Bill Kristol called Paul "un-American" in video clip that can be found on YouTube.

The point Wright makes in this clip is certainly well taken, but he seems to buy into the idea of collective guilt. Just who is the "we" he is talking about? Most of those atrocities he cited were perpetrated long before I could vote!

[FreethinkerAtl]

One statement by Bill Kristol doesn't equal the mass media coverage Reverend Wright received. And he says "we" because "we" are all Americans and he is including himself.

And the reason he talks about past atrocities is to show that we have a history of violence and somewhat questionable actions against other nations. And it's this history of questionable actions in our foreign policy that eventually comes back to bite us on 9/11, and we'll probably see more due to the war in Iraq.

[RMMHS4RP]

Again, who is "we"? Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened before my parents were born. How can they or I be blamed for them in any sense?

I agree that 9/11 was a result of our foreign policy, but shouldn't we blame the people who implemented that policy instead of the entire nation?

As to the inordinate amount of coverage of Wright's comments: The squeaky wheel gets the most oil. I suspect his goofy, racially charged brand of liberation theology has something to do with it, too.

[FreethinkerAtl]

He is talking about our history of violence and questionable actions because we have paid consequences for those actions, and if "we" as U.S. citizens allow our government to continue such actions, then we will see more retaliation in the future. We as citizens are responsible for the actions of our government, and it calls for us to be engaged and involved in what our government is doing. Rev. Wright is calling upon us to learn from the past, so we don't make the same mistakes in the future.

[TheCZMan]

Good comment. I like that questioning of the use of 'we'. When it comes to achievements that are considered positive, hey, suddenly people have no concern about using 'we', be these achievements present or past times.

But suddenly, when it is used for achievements perceived as negative, you got the usual dissociation for past achievements.

Addition: if this preacher used the 'US' or 'they', mess for him. Already he took flak for his comments but here 'they' would have being interpreated...

[TheCZMan]

even more shamelessly as 'white people'

This preacher tried to get people think about responsability, accountability and stuff like that using a 'we' including himself in the making of the actions, and poof, he took blame.

Another evidence that US Blacks are not considered as 100% US citizens since everytime they take a step against their group, they are considered as unamerican.

[bammbamm12]

You'd think not a single American soldier ever died for his country listening to this racist.

[pigoprha]

good video. can you prove Rev Wright said something racist or anti american? click on my name for the RACIST CONTEST

[raleighb53]

If you don't know Reverend Wright is right, it is because you are not wise enough yet.

[Naughtyjug]

Perhaps the most difficult and courageous action a person can take is to look at their own behaviour, listen to others' assessment of it and then honestly define themselves. This is even more difficult when one has appropriated a mantle of righteousnous; one that largely prevents self-critical analysis but rather promotes the notion that he/she is incapable of doing wrong. When we deconstruct ourselves, our notions of what we are, we often find people we don't recognise.

[raleighb53]

Superbly put. Superb.

[Photophobia]

amazing video! thanks a lot for uploading this. reverend wright was only restating what malcolm x said. even mlk jr. was saying the very same things during the final years of his life.

[TheCZMan]

Considering the US set of mind, it is easy to understand that you have three US citizens criticizing their country and a traitor in disguise pouring its hatred and spiteful against the US.

That is the way it is.

[FreethinkerAtl]

In my opinion, it's people who fail to criticize aspects of our country who are unpatriotic.

And whether you are talking about criticism of our country, our government, or our president, a true patriot will stand up and speak their mind. Theodore Roosevelt once said,

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

[radiofriendly]

well done. you aren't going to hear Obama speaking the truth like Ron Paul...Obama voted for the "Patriot" Act (Expansion in 2006).