Saturday, September 17, 2011

George Bush, War Criminal "Has No Formal Training In Education Theory"!!!

Concerning the Tyndale Debacle (see posts below for context).

Overheard on a Tyndale blog: "... why is Mr. Bush speaking on Christian higher education? So far as I am aware, all of Mr. Bush’s higher education was from private, secular American universities. He has no formal training in education theory..." 

Ah, yes. The academy had done its job. You're either with us, or you have nothing to say.  As I recall, Jesus and his main-guy Peter had no formal degrees either...

Meanwhile, here is a voice of sweet reason (which was not followed):
First of all, it sounds like a donor of Tyndale, Prem Watsa, is arranging and will be funding the breakfast (if you don’t know who Prem is, you may want to Google him). It’s very likely that Tyndale did not initiate this, and that Prem wanted to do this to bring awareness to Tyndale and Christian Higher Education among his colleagues and potential supporters in Toronto. PersonallyI think it would be rude and irrational to turn down such a generous opportunity.
Rude and irrational indeed. Way to go, "Amy".


RkBall said...

1152: I thought you had posted on this, but nothing shows up.

Anon1152 said...

I'm not sure. I'm sure I started responding but got caught up with the other posts. I am suspicious of Bush's credentials when it comes to education. But I was suspicious of his credentials when it comes to being President of the USA. And I'm somewhat suspicious of "credentials" in general.

I can say that while it might be "rude and irrational" to turn down such a fundraising opportunity, it might be justified if one believes Bush to be a war criminal. It would be akin to... those British institutions accepting millions of dollars from Libya... I think my point is that not wanting to fundraise in this way may be irrational and rude, but it can still be principled.

RkBall said...

The idea that George W. Bush is a war criminal is leftist lunacy. The US

* authorized the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan via Congress

* went out of their way to minimize civilian casualties -- at the loss of American lives

* poured hundreds of millions of their own dollars into post-war reconstruction

* didn't take a drop of oil

* is seeking to give Iraq back to the Iraqis and Afghanistan to the Afghans

* is seeking to give both the Iraqis and Afghans a chance at freedom and democracy

The only other accusation is torture. And the evidence is that abuses were exactly that -- unlawful abuses of US policy. The US policy on torture itself appears to have been measured and proportionate -- not what you would expect from a foaming-at-the-mouth war criminal.

RkBall said...

Credentials -- you don't invite a powerful leader like the President of the US for formal academic credentials -- you invite him because he has sat in the chair of the most powerful human being on earth -- and seek to learn from his perspective.

Or, the topic of the speech is just a pretext, and you really just want to be in an event in which he is present, possibly get to meet him, have your picture taken, whatever.

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"