Defense Secretary Robert Gates has announced that he has come to agree with General Patraeus that reducing troop levels in Iraq to below surge numbers would not be appropriate at the moment.
As usual, my response to the situation is 180 degrees from the official position. It seems to me that our government has pushed our soldiers to the limit. It is common knowledge that military families are strained by the over long deployments boosted last year from the traditional 12 months to 15 months without relief. Long deployments including the additional troops we sent in for the surge mean that there are fewer troops available to provide relief for those already in-country. What’s next, another extension of deployment length?
The rate of our military personnel who are returning from Iraq with PTSD is phenomenal and we have already had reports of soldiers so diagnosed being returned to their units after rest without treatment for the disorder other than some ill-advised calmative prescriptions. What will happen to them or their platoon mates upon their return to combat situations is a matter of very unpleasant speculation, but there is no doubt that the situations to which they are subjected are traumatic and exteremely dangerous.
Top that off with the kind of orders they operate under, and it’s a wonder more of them don’t crack under the strain. We fill our children’s heads with tales of the uncommon valor and moral righteousness of the American soldier then we send them off to war where they are commanded to set bait like weapons in Iraqi streets and then shoot anyone who picks them up (Springfield News-Leader 2/11/08: Sniper Gets 10 Years for Killing Civilian); or station them in Abu Ghraib with orders to “soften up” prisoners for interrogation with inhumane and torturous methods. Then we expect them to someday come back home and rejoin “normal” society.
We teach our children to honor our soldiers, but then commit the troops to illegal and unjust wars topped off inhumane orders and abusive treatment of the disorders this duplicity necessarily generates.
The hypocritical enormity of the training of our children in this way struck me Sunday morning, and I began the day by writing a song about it. Here, it will have to suffice as a poem, but I hope in that form as well as in music, it will state its case with some impact.
AMERICAN LESSONS
Sing to me of freedom. Sing to me of love.
Sing to me of higher powers. Tell me of the dove.
Then give to me a rifle. Give us all a gun.
And we will teach the others the power of our love.
Sing to me of free speech. And sing to me of love.
Sing to me of democracy. And tell me of the dove.
Then pass the ammunition. And send me off to war,
And I will show the other side just what freedom’s for.
And I will show the other side just what freedom’s for.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Monday, February 11, 2008
Sunday, February 10, 2008
AMERICA’S SUDAN
The world is in an uproar over the Sudan. And well they should be. The president of Chad accuses the Sudanese of sheltering his enemies, and tribal warfare wreaks havoc in both countries. Over 200,000 people have been killed and 2 million have fled the region where Kikuyu’s who back the Chadean president are slaughtering Luo’s from which tribe the opposing candidate for that office arose and Luo’s are striking back at their past friends and old neighbors the Kikuyu. It is a scene of chaos and mayhem created by political nuances that must go back centuries. There can be no humane explanation for it; no reasonable argument for its continuation, but it still goes on. Eventually, I expect, both leaders will be called to account for fomenting and supporting this horror. Perhaps they will even be tried for war crimes.
Even President Bush has recognized the terrible nature of the mess and has labeled it genocide.
And yet – the world stands aside relatively quietly while the United States continues its invasion of Iraq. Compare Sudan’s losses to Iraq where over a million Iraqi’s have died since the first Gulf War – over 600,000 since 2003 and most of the others due not to fighting but to the destruction of infrastructure in the first war and the banning of trade and relief for Iraq between the two wars. Over two million Iraq’s have also fled their country and now live in squalor in host countries that won’t recognize their validity as human beings. There is no reasonable argument for continuation of this horror, either, but our politicians regularly try to make a case for it.
Yes, we now owe Iraq the courtesy of our help in putting their country back together, but we also owe them the courtesy of relinquishing claims to their resources that we have been trying to establish since the day we ran Saddam to ground, and concentrated effort to try and stanch the flow of blood and loss of security our destruction of their infrastructure has caused.
The same president who cries genocide about the Sudan has led the charge to cause even more deaths and displacement in Iraq. The same president who charges the leaders in Chad and Sudan with the crime of inhumanity to man daily stands proud in his self-proclaimed role as America’s “war president” and argues that continued death and destruction in Iraq is in America’s best interests.
Will criminal charges ever be laid in that direction? I believe they could and should be, but I also believe it will never happen.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Even President Bush has recognized the terrible nature of the mess and has labeled it genocide.
And yet – the world stands aside relatively quietly while the United States continues its invasion of Iraq. Compare Sudan’s losses to Iraq where over a million Iraqi’s have died since the first Gulf War – over 600,000 since 2003 and most of the others due not to fighting but to the destruction of infrastructure in the first war and the banning of trade and relief for Iraq between the two wars. Over two million Iraq’s have also fled their country and now live in squalor in host countries that won’t recognize their validity as human beings. There is no reasonable argument for continuation of this horror, either, but our politicians regularly try to make a case for it.
Yes, we now owe Iraq the courtesy of our help in putting their country back together, but we also owe them the courtesy of relinquishing claims to their resources that we have been trying to establish since the day we ran Saddam to ground, and concentrated effort to try and stanch the flow of blood and loss of security our destruction of their infrastructure has caused.
The same president who cries genocide about the Sudan has led the charge to cause even more deaths and displacement in Iraq. The same president who charges the leaders in Chad and Sudan with the crime of inhumanity to man daily stands proud in his self-proclaimed role as America’s “war president” and argues that continued death and destruction in Iraq is in America’s best interests.
Will criminal charges ever be laid in that direction? I believe they could and should be, but I also believe it will never happen.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Friday, February 8, 2008
Waterboarding Might Be OK
Attorney General Michael Mukasey this week made it clear that he is going to support or at least not question the BushCo torture policies. Both Bush and Cheney have spoken up this week, too, saying that the use of waterboarding, now revealed as having occurred at least three times during 2002 & 2003, is legal.
The fact is that it has been illegal since identified as torture under the Geneva Conventions, not to mention that it has been recognized around the world as torture since it was used during the Spanish Inquisition.
I oppose the use of waterboarding, but would make an exception for both W and little dick. In fact, I think that, as they are advocates of the technique, they have given their tacit approval to its being used on them. Besides, it is only fair that the two biggest proponents of the process should prove its viability for us.
Here is a simple proposal that should settle the question once and for all: Congress should set up a test under which our leaders would volunteer to undergo waterboarding to see if an investigating body headed by Mukasey can get them to admit that they were in any way involved in the 911 attacks on America. If they do admit to it, then we could declare waterboarding to be torture because they would never confess to such a thing unless tortured.
Additionally, if they do admit to it, we can allow their confessions to stand and can prosecute them on the grounds that they themselves have argued that waterboarding is a legitimate interrogation technique.
If they don’t confess and also emerge from the experience still convinced that the procedure is not torture, we could allow them to use it in the future, but only on one another.
That would be the democratic way to solve the issue, don’t you think?
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
The fact is that it has been illegal since identified as torture under the Geneva Conventions, not to mention that it has been recognized around the world as torture since it was used during the Spanish Inquisition.
I oppose the use of waterboarding, but would make an exception for both W and little dick. In fact, I think that, as they are advocates of the technique, they have given their tacit approval to its being used on them. Besides, it is only fair that the two biggest proponents of the process should prove its viability for us.
Here is a simple proposal that should settle the question once and for all: Congress should set up a test under which our leaders would volunteer to undergo waterboarding to see if an investigating body headed by Mukasey can get them to admit that they were in any way involved in the 911 attacks on America. If they do admit to it, then we could declare waterboarding to be torture because they would never confess to such a thing unless tortured.
Additionally, if they do admit to it, we can allow their confessions to stand and can prosecute them on the grounds that they themselves have argued that waterboarding is a legitimate interrogation technique.
If they don’t confess and also emerge from the experience still convinced that the procedure is not torture, we could allow them to use it in the future, but only on one another.
That would be the democratic way to solve the issue, don’t you think?
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Thursday, February 7, 2008
WHAT WE ARE WILLING TO FUND
The past couple of days have brought plenty of stories about the final budget proposal of the Bush administration. As I predicted the day he first gained the office (I almost said the day he was elected!!), the BushCo plan has always been and continues to be to cut domestic programs and spend the of money on “defense”.
Of the money the average tax payer sends to the IRS this year, $8,000 will be spent on defense. Don’t get me wrong, here. I don’t begrudge pay for our soldiers. I don’t begrudge expenditures in the VA, either – it’s not only our best health care system overall, but it is providing care to those who have been willing to put their lives on the line for us.
I do believe, however, that the bulk of our military budget is a waste. That’s right. Not just overdone, not just too high, but just flat thrown good after bad. If it was thrown to the wind I wouldn’t feel as angry about it as I do watching it being thrown into the coffers of the likes of Halliburton. Fact is we’d undoubtedly save a lot of money if we just gave it straight to them instead of using the Pentagon as a middle man. I also begrudge every penny that is being spent on the ever popular and ever impossible Star Wars program, and I just flat hate every penny that we put into nuclear weapons development and just about any other technological “advance” we keep spending on.
The idea of robotic weaponry is reprehensible to me, too. On the surface it sounds great to send machines into war instead of people, but you don’t have to think very deeply to recognize that such a capability would make it much easier for people like W to wage war. As I have said before, the lack of body bags, pictures of casualties and names of the dead returning from Iraq has been part of the reason the American people aren’t as upset about this war as they should be. The other side of the coin, too, is those folks who might one day look up to see a horde of American drones bearing down on them with guns blazing. How would you, as a farmer in Iran, cope with that?
Beyond the horror of being a nation of people who unquestioningly allow their tax dollars to fund the unhindered stockpiles of WMDs and radioactive ammunition, there is the disgrace of concurrently refusing to care for those among us who are unable to care for themselves.
Just yesterday the Republicans in the Senate defeated a budget bill designed to counter the Bush destruction of domestic programs by funding subsidies for poor people unable to heat their homes, disabled veterans, the unemployed and small businesses. They did this in support of the most dismally failed presidency in the history of the United States and in support of the increased military expenditures proposed by that presidency and in the face of rapidly growing deficits.
Then, just to top things off, that president endorsed the practice of waterboarding yesterday, saying that it was legal, wasn’t torture and had saved American lives. It may actually have saved a few American lives, but if so it was at the cost of the American soul. W himself often points out the savagery of Al Qaida’s behavior, but fails to recognize that sinking to the level of savagery ourselves automatically drives us off the high moral ground. Not to mention that his reckless endangerment of our military personnel in a politically motivated war has cost us more American lives than Al Qaida has taken in its entire history. And certainly we would never mention that estimates now put the Iraqi civilian death toll since 1990 as high as a million.
What grieves me most is that my country is so borderline paranoid that we cannot even consider taking any action other than the continued funding of an overly powerful military as a means of dealing with the hostility that exists in the world.
Violence begets violence and can never lead to peace. Why is that so hard to understand and act upon? Why is it so ingrained in our culture that I know without doubt that I can stir nearly anyone I encounter to great anger just by saying that we should pursue peace? What is so frightening about the concept of peace that people must ridicule those who put the idea forward even while they loudly proclaim to be followers of the Prince of Peace?
Jimi Hendrix said it best: “When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.”
Until that time, the unquestioning man on the street will always be easily led to fight in support of those whose love of power drives them to high public office. I understand that, but it doesn’t ease my anger at being forced by our tax system to pay more for the pursuit of war than for the benefit of my fellow citizens.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Of the money the average tax payer sends to the IRS this year, $8,000 will be spent on defense. Don’t get me wrong, here. I don’t begrudge pay for our soldiers. I don’t begrudge expenditures in the VA, either – it’s not only our best health care system overall, but it is providing care to those who have been willing to put their lives on the line for us.
I do believe, however, that the bulk of our military budget is a waste. That’s right. Not just overdone, not just too high, but just flat thrown good after bad. If it was thrown to the wind I wouldn’t feel as angry about it as I do watching it being thrown into the coffers of the likes of Halliburton. Fact is we’d undoubtedly save a lot of money if we just gave it straight to them instead of using the Pentagon as a middle man. I also begrudge every penny that is being spent on the ever popular and ever impossible Star Wars program, and I just flat hate every penny that we put into nuclear weapons development and just about any other technological “advance” we keep spending on.
The idea of robotic weaponry is reprehensible to me, too. On the surface it sounds great to send machines into war instead of people, but you don’t have to think very deeply to recognize that such a capability would make it much easier for people like W to wage war. As I have said before, the lack of body bags, pictures of casualties and names of the dead returning from Iraq has been part of the reason the American people aren’t as upset about this war as they should be. The other side of the coin, too, is those folks who might one day look up to see a horde of American drones bearing down on them with guns blazing. How would you, as a farmer in Iran, cope with that?
Beyond the horror of being a nation of people who unquestioningly allow their tax dollars to fund the unhindered stockpiles of WMDs and radioactive ammunition, there is the disgrace of concurrently refusing to care for those among us who are unable to care for themselves.
Just yesterday the Republicans in the Senate defeated a budget bill designed to counter the Bush destruction of domestic programs by funding subsidies for poor people unable to heat their homes, disabled veterans, the unemployed and small businesses. They did this in support of the most dismally failed presidency in the history of the United States and in support of the increased military expenditures proposed by that presidency and in the face of rapidly growing deficits.
Then, just to top things off, that president endorsed the practice of waterboarding yesterday, saying that it was legal, wasn’t torture and had saved American lives. It may actually have saved a few American lives, but if so it was at the cost of the American soul. W himself often points out the savagery of Al Qaida’s behavior, but fails to recognize that sinking to the level of savagery ourselves automatically drives us off the high moral ground. Not to mention that his reckless endangerment of our military personnel in a politically motivated war has cost us more American lives than Al Qaida has taken in its entire history. And certainly we would never mention that estimates now put the Iraqi civilian death toll since 1990 as high as a million.
What grieves me most is that my country is so borderline paranoid that we cannot even consider taking any action other than the continued funding of an overly powerful military as a means of dealing with the hostility that exists in the world.
Violence begets violence and can never lead to peace. Why is that so hard to understand and act upon? Why is it so ingrained in our culture that I know without doubt that I can stir nearly anyone I encounter to great anger just by saying that we should pursue peace? What is so frightening about the concept of peace that people must ridicule those who put the idea forward even while they loudly proclaim to be followers of the Prince of Peace?
Jimi Hendrix said it best: “When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.”
Until that time, the unquestioning man on the street will always be easily led to fight in support of those whose love of power drives them to high public office. I understand that, but it doesn’t ease my anger at being forced by our tax system to pay more for the pursuit of war than for the benefit of my fellow citizens.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
The Primaries -- Has the Tide Turned?
Today’s big news is the results of yesterday’s primaries. “Super Tuesday” turned out to be aptly named. It was super in terms of the turnout, at least, and perhaps in come other significant ways. I worked the polls as a poll judge at a site with 1,470 registered voters of whom 703 turned out to vote in spite of some pretty vicious weather. I was told that his precinct had turned out as few as 32 voters in previous elections, so this 48% turnout was really exceptional.
The national results were not terribly surprising what with Hillary and Obama registering an even split across the country while John McCain and Mitt Romney did the same. You’ve got wonder what the results would have looked like vis-à-vis the last two, though, if Huckabee wasn’t still in the race. Would Romney really pick up the vast majority of Huck’s voters as he claims he would? The very thought makes me shudder, but then so does the thought that it is even remotely possible that a man like McCain, who still thinks we should have won in Vietnam and could still win in Iraq and who has stated his willingness to remain in Iraq for 100 or even 1000 more years could be elected our next president. Which would be worse, a man who wants to stay in Iraq like McCain or a man who wants to stay in Iraq AND return the country to the glories(!?!?) of the Reagan years like Romney?
The main question in my mind about the Republican side is how so many people can remain loyal to that party in light of the way they have turned America inside out over the last eight years. A great many Republicans say they do not like the way BushCo has operated, but continue to support the GOP as though they weren’t involved.
My disgust with politics has been greatly enhanced over the past eight years because the Republicans failed to withdraw their support for BushCo while the Democrats failed to stand up and declare opposition to those policies. In my view that makes both parties enemies of the state. (The state being the people.) Of course I am an anachronism in that I still believe the state exists at the will of the people and should, as Lincoln declared, be operated by the people, of the people and for the people.
The only reason I can stomach voting for the Demorats is that they still operate with more of an eye toward the needs of the common man than the Repulsicans ever have. (That and the fact that there is no other choice except to throw your vote away!)
Beyond all that, though, my experience at the polls yesterday disturbed me in more personal ways. I was heartened by the numbers that turned out to vote. I think the combined electronic and paper ballot system in place in Greene County is the best and least manipulable option going, so I believe in the accuracy of the vote. I was also heartened by the faith the voters put into the system and the many expressions of gratitude we received from them for our work.
As a liberal, I was disheartened, though, by the great number – among them a lot of first time voters(!)-- who requested Republican ballots. It is so hard for me to understand why they don’t feel the same revulsion I do for the way that party has undercut their freedoms and risked – through its continued support for BushCo policies – the Constitutional governance that has made this country as great as it has been even given its shortcomings. At the same time I was heartened by my feeling that a lot more people than I expected were asking for Democratic Party ballots.
I couldn’t confirm that statistically yesterday, but today’s News-Leader did so by reporting that in Greene County 36,411 people voted Republican while 32,566 voted Democrat. In this heavily Republican territory, I think that speaks volumes for what the turnout will look like nationally in November.
Statewide in Missouri, 797,456 voted Democrat. (49% Obama to 48% Clinton) and 575,078 voted Republican (33% McCain, 32% Huckabee, 29% Romney). I read the other day that Missouri has picked the winner in 38 of the last 39 presidential elections. If that ability holds and voter sentiments don’t change between now and then, there is no doubt that a Democrat will win the Whitehouse in November.
Missouri used to be considered a Democratic state. Could it be that those days are back? Are the people more perceptive than I have given them credit for? Have they quietly decided that the trend the Republican Party has set for the nation over the past forty years has been negative and that it is time to seek a more populist approach to governance?
I’m not a superstitious man, but my fingers and toes are crossed!!
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
The national results were not terribly surprising what with Hillary and Obama registering an even split across the country while John McCain and Mitt Romney did the same. You’ve got wonder what the results would have looked like vis-à-vis the last two, though, if Huckabee wasn’t still in the race. Would Romney really pick up the vast majority of Huck’s voters as he claims he would? The very thought makes me shudder, but then so does the thought that it is even remotely possible that a man like McCain, who still thinks we should have won in Vietnam and could still win in Iraq and who has stated his willingness to remain in Iraq for 100 or even 1000 more years could be elected our next president. Which would be worse, a man who wants to stay in Iraq like McCain or a man who wants to stay in Iraq AND return the country to the glories(!?!?) of the Reagan years like Romney?
The main question in my mind about the Republican side is how so many people can remain loyal to that party in light of the way they have turned America inside out over the last eight years. A great many Republicans say they do not like the way BushCo has operated, but continue to support the GOP as though they weren’t involved.
My disgust with politics has been greatly enhanced over the past eight years because the Republicans failed to withdraw their support for BushCo while the Democrats failed to stand up and declare opposition to those policies. In my view that makes both parties enemies of the state. (The state being the people.) Of course I am an anachronism in that I still believe the state exists at the will of the people and should, as Lincoln declared, be operated by the people, of the people and for the people.
The only reason I can stomach voting for the Demorats is that they still operate with more of an eye toward the needs of the common man than the Repulsicans ever have. (That and the fact that there is no other choice except to throw your vote away!)
Beyond all that, though, my experience at the polls yesterday disturbed me in more personal ways. I was heartened by the numbers that turned out to vote. I think the combined electronic and paper ballot system in place in Greene County is the best and least manipulable option going, so I believe in the accuracy of the vote. I was also heartened by the faith the voters put into the system and the many expressions of gratitude we received from them for our work.
As a liberal, I was disheartened, though, by the great number – among them a lot of first time voters(!)-- who requested Republican ballots. It is so hard for me to understand why they don’t feel the same revulsion I do for the way that party has undercut their freedoms and risked – through its continued support for BushCo policies – the Constitutional governance that has made this country as great as it has been even given its shortcomings. At the same time I was heartened by my feeling that a lot more people than I expected were asking for Democratic Party ballots.
I couldn’t confirm that statistically yesterday, but today’s News-Leader did so by reporting that in Greene County 36,411 people voted Republican while 32,566 voted Democrat. In this heavily Republican territory, I think that speaks volumes for what the turnout will look like nationally in November.
Statewide in Missouri, 797,456 voted Democrat. (49% Obama to 48% Clinton) and 575,078 voted Republican (33% McCain, 32% Huckabee, 29% Romney). I read the other day that Missouri has picked the winner in 38 of the last 39 presidential elections. If that ability holds and voter sentiments don’t change between now and then, there is no doubt that a Democrat will win the Whitehouse in November.
Missouri used to be considered a Democratic state. Could it be that those days are back? Are the people more perceptive than I have given them credit for? Have they quietly decided that the trend the Republican Party has set for the nation over the past forty years has been negative and that it is time to seek a more populist approach to governance?
I’m not a superstitious man, but my fingers and toes are crossed!!
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Monday, February 4, 2008
The Bush Legacy
The headline on today’s “Nation/World” page in the Springfield News-Leader proclaims. “Last Bush Budget Aims to Seal Legacy”, but the first line reveals that reporting still refuses to recognize the true legacy of this administration. That line proclaims that the legacy is “. . .a strong defense to fight terrorism and tax cuts to spur the economy.”
Handing a nearly unlimited expense account to the Pentagon and waging war for reasons of political and economic gain are not the same as fighting terrorism any more than thumping a Bible proves that you have ever read it or understood its meaning. Cutting taxes for the wealthiest among us while depriving the poorest among us of the means for self-sustenance is not a spur for the economy even if Wall Street temporarily dances and the Dow Jones soars.
The Bush Legacy is not one of a meaningful fight against terrorism. The BushCo war in Iraq is, in cold hard fact, a legacy of the growth of power of terroristic factions. Iraq is torn by civil war between insurgent factions whose only means of fighting is through terroristic methods. Iraq has also served as a recruiting and training ground for Al Qaida foot soldiers. Afghanistan, the only legitimate active battleground in the war against terror, is largely being ignored – though we are still putting American soldiers at risk there, and the Taliban, whom we went there to eradicate, have just announced that they now have an active army of 40,000 soldiers poised to fight for control of Pakistan and Afghanistan. So much for any legacy of success in the so called “War on Terror”. All in all, it has not been a war on terror at all, but an attempt to control some key territory in the war for control of the world’s oil supply with a little protectionism for Israel thrown in for good measure.
The legacy of BushCo with regard to the economy is not one of positive growth for the country but one of profitable endeavor for our war machine. (Read “Military/Industrial Complex”) Positive growth for America would entail the advancement of the well-being of its people, but the fact is that only the upper 10% or so of the people have gained anything in the last eight years. The rest of us suffer from the decreasing power of the few American dollars we can get our hands on. Many of our poorest working families are finding that even two of the jobs they can find are not enough to feed, cloth, house and educate their children.
The lowest earners among us are finding that their incomes are not up to maintaining their “American dream”. Those of us who are retired or on the edge of retirement are faced with a shakily uncertain future while our children and their children are likely to have to deal with much less pleasant lives than we have been blessed to lead – thanks to the mountains of debt and the heaps of enmity that the BushCo neo-cons have built for us.
The primary responsibility of a government is to take care of its people. This administration has put us at risk instead -- both economically and militarily.
That’s the Bush legacy, and if we don’t get out and vote these fools out of office, we have only ourselves to blame. The world that waited and watched and then screamed in protest while we re-elected G. W. Bush in 2004 will solidly turn its back to us next year in complete disgust if we don’t show some responsibility by voting in a candidate who shows some understanding of the horrifically tangled web that BushCo has gotten us into.
That, too, is part of the Bush Legacy, but the American people have to take some responsibility for their role in it. We, as voters, enabled the fools/criminals that now lead our country, and it is our job to rectify the mess we have made.
I have thought a couple of times in the past that upcoming elections were critical, but there has never been one in my lifetime that carried more import. I believe that the future of our nation lies in the balance. Please get out and vote this Tuesday and in the November election, but for God's sake do so responsibly.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Handing a nearly unlimited expense account to the Pentagon and waging war for reasons of political and economic gain are not the same as fighting terrorism any more than thumping a Bible proves that you have ever read it or understood its meaning. Cutting taxes for the wealthiest among us while depriving the poorest among us of the means for self-sustenance is not a spur for the economy even if Wall Street temporarily dances and the Dow Jones soars.
The Bush Legacy is not one of a meaningful fight against terrorism. The BushCo war in Iraq is, in cold hard fact, a legacy of the growth of power of terroristic factions. Iraq is torn by civil war between insurgent factions whose only means of fighting is through terroristic methods. Iraq has also served as a recruiting and training ground for Al Qaida foot soldiers. Afghanistan, the only legitimate active battleground in the war against terror, is largely being ignored – though we are still putting American soldiers at risk there, and the Taliban, whom we went there to eradicate, have just announced that they now have an active army of 40,000 soldiers poised to fight for control of Pakistan and Afghanistan. So much for any legacy of success in the so called “War on Terror”. All in all, it has not been a war on terror at all, but an attempt to control some key territory in the war for control of the world’s oil supply with a little protectionism for Israel thrown in for good measure.
The legacy of BushCo with regard to the economy is not one of positive growth for the country but one of profitable endeavor for our war machine. (Read “Military/Industrial Complex”) Positive growth for America would entail the advancement of the well-being of its people, but the fact is that only the upper 10% or so of the people have gained anything in the last eight years. The rest of us suffer from the decreasing power of the few American dollars we can get our hands on. Many of our poorest working families are finding that even two of the jobs they can find are not enough to feed, cloth, house and educate their children.
The lowest earners among us are finding that their incomes are not up to maintaining their “American dream”. Those of us who are retired or on the edge of retirement are faced with a shakily uncertain future while our children and their children are likely to have to deal with much less pleasant lives than we have been blessed to lead – thanks to the mountains of debt and the heaps of enmity that the BushCo neo-cons have built for us.
The primary responsibility of a government is to take care of its people. This administration has put us at risk instead -- both economically and militarily.
That’s the Bush legacy, and if we don’t get out and vote these fools out of office, we have only ourselves to blame. The world that waited and watched and then screamed in protest while we re-elected G. W. Bush in 2004 will solidly turn its back to us next year in complete disgust if we don’t show some responsibility by voting in a candidate who shows some understanding of the horrifically tangled web that BushCo has gotten us into.
That, too, is part of the Bush Legacy, but the American people have to take some responsibility for their role in it. We, as voters, enabled the fools/criminals that now lead our country, and it is our job to rectify the mess we have made.
I have thought a couple of times in the past that upcoming elections were critical, but there has never been one in my lifetime that carried more import. I believe that the future of our nation lies in the balance. Please get out and vote this Tuesday and in the November election, but for God's sake do so responsibly.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Friday, February 1, 2008
Can Atrocity Still Shock Us?
Today marks the fortieth anniversary of the creation of a photograph from Vietnam that helped stop the war. The photo was taken by a fellow named Eddie Adams who was chronicling the war in Vietnam.
Like all event-changing photos, it was the product of both skill and luck. It takes skill to be in the right place at the right time, but it takes luck to capture the right image when all the time the photographer has is the tick it takes for a bullet to travel two feet. That’s what Adams did when he froze forever in time the moment when a South Vietnamese officer fired a bullet into the brain of a young man standing next to him with his hands tied behind his back. He was supposedly a Viet Cong, but that was beside the point. Our citizens reacted to the barbarity of the act.
The other world shaking photo was of a young girl running naked down a village street screaming in pain from the napalm burns inflicted upon her by our Air Force.
The U.S. was already in turmoil over the war in Vietnam when the photos were published, but there is no doubt that so many Americans were appalled by those images that their support for the war disappeared. The people wanted no more part in the barbaric slaughter that they saw daily on the evening body count and so graphically in those horrific photographs.
I wonder, though, what the reaction would be to similar images today. Would we see the same moral indignation in this nation as we did in 1968?
I think not. After all, we’ve already let the disgrace of Abu Ghraib slip into oblivion. Every day we ignore what’s going on in Guantanamo Bay. They don’t give us body counts any more. We aren’t even allowed to see the coffins of our own soldiers coming home for burial, let alone the rows of body bags we saw in Vietnam. We accept the idea of torturing prisoners as though it was business as usual. Just this week we have been subjected to Attorney General Mukasey’s slimy Congressional testimony when he repeatedly side-stepped making a definitive statement about waterboarding. Our children spend their free time in front of TVs and computers pushing buttons to fire AK-47s at the human beings pictured on the screen while imagining that they are pulling the trigger to kill whoever the programmer has put in front of them.
We go to church on Sunday and pray to the Prince of Peace then go home and send checks of support to candidates who pledge to keep us in Iraq for another 100 years if “necessary”. We cry crocodile tears over the “heroic sacrifice” of nearly 4,000 our own children in an entirely unnecessary war and completely ignore the thousands and thousands of Iraqi lives that have been taken as a result of our reckless abandonment of the principles we used to hold dear.
So would a photo of the cold-blooded assassination of a supposed Al Qaida soldier cause us to say enough is enough and get ourselves out of Iraq?
Not a chance. Not while there is still an SUV to drive. Not while there is still oil to be sucked out of the desert sands. Not while there is a neo-con anywhere near the Whitehouse. And not while the American people remain blind to the possibility that their biggest enemy is not in a cave somewhere in Pakistan, but in a mansion somewhere on the coast of this country; in a ranch house somewhere in Texas; in Washington lobbying for an arms manufacturer; on a stage debating for the right to be a president; or maybe in their own minds.
Cynical? Me??
An Invitation to Readers
If you are in the Springfield area, please come downtown tonight for First Friday and while you’re there, stop by The Front Porch (next to the Piano Bar and Nonna’s on South Street). I’ll be playing a set there at about 8 pm and would sure like to see you in the audience. If you do come, please introduce yourself as a reader. I’d love to meet you.
Minx & Miller will play at about 9.
It’s not a political setting, but who knows what may happen?!!
************************************************************************
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Like all event-changing photos, it was the product of both skill and luck. It takes skill to be in the right place at the right time, but it takes luck to capture the right image when all the time the photographer has is the tick it takes for a bullet to travel two feet. That’s what Adams did when he froze forever in time the moment when a South Vietnamese officer fired a bullet into the brain of a young man standing next to him with his hands tied behind his back. He was supposedly a Viet Cong, but that was beside the point. Our citizens reacted to the barbarity of the act.
The other world shaking photo was of a young girl running naked down a village street screaming in pain from the napalm burns inflicted upon her by our Air Force.
The U.S. was already in turmoil over the war in Vietnam when the photos were published, but there is no doubt that so many Americans were appalled by those images that their support for the war disappeared. The people wanted no more part in the barbaric slaughter that they saw daily on the evening body count and so graphically in those horrific photographs.
I wonder, though, what the reaction would be to similar images today. Would we see the same moral indignation in this nation as we did in 1968?
I think not. After all, we’ve already let the disgrace of Abu Ghraib slip into oblivion. Every day we ignore what’s going on in Guantanamo Bay. They don’t give us body counts any more. We aren’t even allowed to see the coffins of our own soldiers coming home for burial, let alone the rows of body bags we saw in Vietnam. We accept the idea of torturing prisoners as though it was business as usual. Just this week we have been subjected to Attorney General Mukasey’s slimy Congressional testimony when he repeatedly side-stepped making a definitive statement about waterboarding. Our children spend their free time in front of TVs and computers pushing buttons to fire AK-47s at the human beings pictured on the screen while imagining that they are pulling the trigger to kill whoever the programmer has put in front of them.
We go to church on Sunday and pray to the Prince of Peace then go home and send checks of support to candidates who pledge to keep us in Iraq for another 100 years if “necessary”. We cry crocodile tears over the “heroic sacrifice” of nearly 4,000 our own children in an entirely unnecessary war and completely ignore the thousands and thousands of Iraqi lives that have been taken as a result of our reckless abandonment of the principles we used to hold dear.
So would a photo of the cold-blooded assassination of a supposed Al Qaida soldier cause us to say enough is enough and get ourselves out of Iraq?
Not a chance. Not while there is still an SUV to drive. Not while there is still oil to be sucked out of the desert sands. Not while there is a neo-con anywhere near the Whitehouse. And not while the American people remain blind to the possibility that their biggest enemy is not in a cave somewhere in Pakistan, but in a mansion somewhere on the coast of this country; in a ranch house somewhere in Texas; in Washington lobbying for an arms manufacturer; on a stage debating for the right to be a president; or maybe in their own minds.
Cynical? Me??
An Invitation to Readers
If you are in the Springfield area, please come downtown tonight for First Friday and while you’re there, stop by The Front Porch (next to the Piano Bar and Nonna’s on South Street). I’ll be playing a set there at about 8 pm and would sure like to see you in the audience. If you do come, please introduce yourself as a reader. I’d love to meet you.
Minx & Miller will play at about 9.
It’s not a political setting, but who knows what may happen?!!
************************************************************************
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
