[banjomike]

On 9/11/01 we should have learned that we cannot continue to actively support dictators and terrorists throughout the world without the turning on us from time to time. (Rememer we made Bin Laden what he is today so he could be an anti-soviet terrorist, and old Saddam Hussein's worst atrocities were carried out with the blessing, funding, and the intelligence support of the good ole USA) Remeber when the CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and install the Shah? We are still reaping the rewards of that. On another 9/11 the US, Kissinger in particular, reaped the rewards of several years of destabilization in Chile. 20 years of Pinochet 'disapearing' dissidents one result. Another result was an assasination carried out with a car-bomb right in our own nation's catpital in the late '70s. If we look at latin america, there is a direct correlation between our level of historical intervention and poverty. Hati is the country we have intervened in the most, and it is the poorest. This contimues through the list, Columbia, Nicaraugua, El Salvador... In southeast asia our active participation in the world (illegal carpet bombing of cambodia) led to the Khmer Rouge comming to power. Pol Pot and his thugs killed millions. The US is now the largest supplier of arms to the world, with over 60% of the market. And finally lets not forget how Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker served as key financiers of Hitler's rise to power.

It is not the lack of involvment, but the nature of the US involvment in the rest of the world that leads to attacks against us.

In fact around the planet people love America and what we represent. But they understand that just because they hate our foreign policy they don't have to hate us. Too bad people here can't make that distinction.