Wearing our usual blinders, most Americans are missing a coming tsunami. It’s going to be a bit more subtle than the Iraq wave, but it is definitely going to impact all of us and especially our new president.
What am I talking about? – The silent powder keg that’s been growing in Afghanistan and Pakistan while we have had our backs turned and our attention focused on the false threat of Iraq. This won’t be the final blot on our future that BushCo has created for us, but it won’t be any minor blip on the radar either.
The fuse is lit. It may take several months, but when the flame reaches that keg, that country will once again become the focus because our failure there will be silhouetted by the explosion. At that point, we will have not only Iraq’s mess, but also a huge threat from Afghanistan and Pakistan to deal with.
I was not the darling of my progressive friends when, right after 9-11, I sided with George W. Bush in his identification of the problem in Afghanistan and the invasion to rid it of its Al Qaida supporting Taliban government. I had long detested the Taliban and believed that when we accomplished routing them out we would continue to pursue bin Laden and bring him and his band of terrorists to justice.
You see, I hadn’t yet learned about Bush’s towering incompetence or about the dark forces (read Karl Rove and the neo-cons) that so ably maneuvered him into office and so completely dominated the policies he brought to Washington with him.
He began to lose my support when he faltered in Afghanistan and failed to even come close to nabbing bin Laden. When he turned toward Iraq, I did some research, discovered his real motives and hit the streets to protest any and everything he and his henchmen tried to do.
Like everyone else, though, I took my eye off of Afghanistan. Now it only takes a cursory peek to reveal what a mess we have made there. We destroyed their government without helping them to create a meaningful replacement. We completely lost the goodwill of a great many people who initially cheered our removal of the Taliban by ignoring them while we made sure that the corporations we contracted to “rebuild” the country took home over 40% of the money we dedicated to the redevelopment effort. We lost the support of the rest of the people by putting all our eggs in the military basket rather than demonstrating that our way of life and governance has merit they might wish to emulate. They now are firm in their insistence that the war on terror is an American war and an intrusion on their lives.
When the Taliban was in control, the people of Afghanistan felt their freedom threatened. With America in control, they feel their lives and livelihoods threatened. Sentiment is rapidly rising to get us out of their land and to go back to some form of religiously restrictive governance.
On top of that powder keg is the upheaval in Pakistan where Mussharaf has alienated his own people, many of whom believe he had a hand in the assassination of his biggest political rival, Benizir Bhutto, and all of whom believe he has sold out to the U.S.
Thanks largely to the arrogance of America’s refusal to deal realistically with the terrorist situation, the people of both Afghanistan and Pakistan have little reason to consider us of any value to them at all.
They know that we would rather throw bombs at a problem than get our boots dirty solving it. They know that we are much more concerned with who we can get to ally themselves with us in our superficial “war on terror” than to apply ourselves to solving the real day to day problems they must deal with by instituting long range programs to elevate their lifestyles. They know that if a conflict arises between actions that could save a nation and actions that could save a pipeline, we will choose the pipeline every time.
They do not identify with our “war on terror” in any way except by pointing to us as the villain in the piece. As in Iraq, we have disrupted their lives, but, unlike Iraq, we have not put any serious effort into alleviating the problems this has created for them. They have found one way to make a living in the chaos and that is by growing opium poppies, and we are trying to stop them from doing that without providing an alternative.
Some of our politicians now running for office have spoken of reducing our troop strength in Iraq and diverting some of it to Afghanistan, but the reality that will hit the new president will include the BushCo negotiated pact with Iraq to provide military support there in perpetuity. General Patraeus spoke last week of the need to maintain troop strength in Iraq and so is already laying the groundwork that will make it very difficult for us to devote any significant level of military effort to calming the coming storm in Afghanistan.
As predicted at the outset of the Iraq war, the final upshot of all of our efforts since 9-11 is going to be the growth of the ability of Al Qaida and others to attack us. Our flanks – as in Afghanistan – and even our home ground are more vulnerable now than before we stupidly and illegally invaded Iraq.
We will need the help of friends whom our arrogance has alienated to maintain our balance under those circumstances. That’s why I think the explosion that comes when the Afghanistan powder keg explodes could tip the balance of power out of our hands.
Our next president had better be one persuasive son-of-a-gun.
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, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Bring Back My America
Surprise, surprise! BushCo announced yesterday that they might not be able to reduce the troops back to pre-surge levels after all. It seems they fear that violence might resurge if we only have our usual 135,000 or so troops in Iraq.
So does this mean that the surge wasn’t successful in reducing the enemy threat after all? Are they just lurking in the wings in wait for the moment when we pull out enough troops to give them free reign to go back on the offensive? Was General Patraeus’ program of buying their loyalty only successful as long as we also had sufficient troop strength to scare them?
In other words – doesn’t this announcement just confirm the long held contention that what we are really facing in Iraq is a civil war that will never go away until the contenders are given the chance to fight it out?
Iraq has fallen out of the presidential campaign rhetoric, but it is no less an issue than it has been all along. It’s high time it came back into the picture so that candidates have to be forthright in expressing their ideas of how to handle it.
The truth is that the economy is as it is and it will not be affected in the short term by presidential policy, but only in the long term as it has been by BushCo's completely misguided policies of war and waste. Presidents can only affect it in the long term through the consequences (both intended and unintended) of the general policy line they follow.
Short term policy application is the presidential forte, and war is a problem that can be addressed through short term policy application.
The Democrats have been more successful than the Republicans at creating stable economies over the past 50 years because their basic philosophy has been to steer income to the middle and lower classes while the Republicans have concentrated on steering it to the top 5%. To me that translates into a better long term fiscal expectation for the country no matter which Democrat is elected, so the issue of what short term economic policies a given candidate intends to apply is relatively moot.
I want to hear how each candidate plans to get us out of the muck BushCo has stuck us into in the Middle East. I want to hear some candidate – any candidate – say that a policy of asking every country in the Middle East to come to the peace table cannot work as long as we insist that part of the outcome is to allow Israel to do whatever they want with regard to Palestine. I want to vote for any candidate who says that there is a problem with our two-faced alliance with Saudi Arabia and that he/she will attempt to obtain an agreement with that government that stipulates their facilitation of rights for their own citizens and realistically combats terrorism within their own borders as well as in other parts of the world. I want a president who will renounce the policy of pre-emptive war, apologize to the world for the mess we have made of Iraq, offer détente to Iran and Syria, curb Israeli suppression of the Palestinian people, negotiate with Hamas for the extinction of its program of missile attacks on Israel and show the world – in many ways - that we have a higher set of interests than just our own ability to guzzle oil.
I really don’t want much – just the America I believed in back in 1960.
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
So does this mean that the surge wasn’t successful in reducing the enemy threat after all? Are they just lurking in the wings in wait for the moment when we pull out enough troops to give them free reign to go back on the offensive? Was General Patraeus’ program of buying their loyalty only successful as long as we also had sufficient troop strength to scare them?
In other words – doesn’t this announcement just confirm the long held contention that what we are really facing in Iraq is a civil war that will never go away until the contenders are given the chance to fight it out?
Iraq has fallen out of the presidential campaign rhetoric, but it is no less an issue than it has been all along. It’s high time it came back into the picture so that candidates have to be forthright in expressing their ideas of how to handle it.
The truth is that the economy is as it is and it will not be affected in the short term by presidential policy, but only in the long term as it has been by BushCo's completely misguided policies of war and waste. Presidents can only affect it in the long term through the consequences (both intended and unintended) of the general policy line they follow.
Short term policy application is the presidential forte, and war is a problem that can be addressed through short term policy application.
The Democrats have been more successful than the Republicans at creating stable economies over the past 50 years because their basic philosophy has been to steer income to the middle and lower classes while the Republicans have concentrated on steering it to the top 5%. To me that translates into a better long term fiscal expectation for the country no matter which Democrat is elected, so the issue of what short term economic policies a given candidate intends to apply is relatively moot.
I want to hear how each candidate plans to get us out of the muck BushCo has stuck us into in the Middle East. I want to hear some candidate – any candidate – say that a policy of asking every country in the Middle East to come to the peace table cannot work as long as we insist that part of the outcome is to allow Israel to do whatever they want with regard to Palestine. I want to vote for any candidate who says that there is a problem with our two-faced alliance with Saudi Arabia and that he/she will attempt to obtain an agreement with that government that stipulates their facilitation of rights for their own citizens and realistically combats terrorism within their own borders as well as in other parts of the world. I want a president who will renounce the policy of pre-emptive war, apologize to the world for the mess we have made of Iraq, offer détente to Iran and Syria, curb Israeli suppression of the Palestinian people, negotiate with Hamas for the extinction of its program of missile attacks on Israel and show the world – in many ways - that we have a higher set of interests than just our own ability to guzzle oil.
I really don’t want much – just the America I believed in back in 1960.
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
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
The Sorry State of the Union
One sign held by an audience member at the John Edwards rally in Springfield yesterday summed it up beautifully – “We know the State of the Union. That’s why we’re here.”
W didn’t get far with anyone last night in his attempt to paint roses on the pile of manure he’s created in America over the past seven years. The line that got to me the most was his admonition about how this year’s work of the Congress would affect the future of America.
If the baby born last night while W was stating his idea of the state of things lives to be 100, he will still be paying for the mess Bush created the day he dies. That’s the state of the union Mr. Bush, and it’s the sorriest state it has ever been in thanks not to the Congress -- although they share the blame for not jerking a knot in your tail long ago -- but to you, little dick, and all the neo-cons who backed the cheating, lying, vote defying effort that got you into office.
As a result of your shenanigans we will once again have a Democratic president next year, and, once again, thanks to those “fiscally conservative” actions the Republicans have taken every time they’ve been in power since Eisenhower left office, the Democrats will have to turn around an economy that is far to deep in debt and mired in the muck that’s always left behind when the nation’s wealth is diverted from the workers who create it to the Harvard MBAs who rake it in.
Next week Missouri will hold its primary elections. I will tell you now that my vote will go to John Edwards. I don’t suppose he can win because the press never tells you what the candidates plan to do once elected, but if that was all they could tell you (which is the way it ought to be), I have no doubt that he would win. The Hillary/Obama shouting match will continue to get the ink, and one of them will be our next president, but next week I will vote as close to my conscience as American candidacy will allow. I hope all my readers will do the same. The big day is February 5. Plan to be there. Plan to vote. It’s the closest thing to an exercise of power that we are allowed to do!
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
W didn’t get far with anyone last night in his attempt to paint roses on the pile of manure he’s created in America over the past seven years. The line that got to me the most was his admonition about how this year’s work of the Congress would affect the future of America.
If the baby born last night while W was stating his idea of the state of things lives to be 100, he will still be paying for the mess Bush created the day he dies. That’s the state of the union Mr. Bush, and it’s the sorriest state it has ever been in thanks not to the Congress -- although they share the blame for not jerking a knot in your tail long ago -- but to you, little dick, and all the neo-cons who backed the cheating, lying, vote defying effort that got you into office.
As a result of your shenanigans we will once again have a Democratic president next year, and, once again, thanks to those “fiscally conservative” actions the Republicans have taken every time they’ve been in power since Eisenhower left office, the Democrats will have to turn around an economy that is far to deep in debt and mired in the muck that’s always left behind when the nation’s wealth is diverted from the workers who create it to the Harvard MBAs who rake it in.
Next week Missouri will hold its primary elections. I will tell you now that my vote will go to John Edwards. I don’t suppose he can win because the press never tells you what the candidates plan to do once elected, but if that was all they could tell you (which is the way it ought to be), I have no doubt that he would win. The Hillary/Obama shouting match will continue to get the ink, and one of them will be our next president, but next week I will vote as close to my conscience as American candidacy will allow. I hope all my readers will do the same. The big day is February 5. Plan to be there. Plan to vote. It’s the closest thing to an exercise of power that we are allowed to do!
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, January 28, 2008
A Resume for Mr. Bush
Tonight George W. Bush will give his final State of the Union address. Aside from the pleasure it gives me to say the word final when attached to anything Mr. Bush does, I look forward to seeing his party squirm under the limelight of his “accomplishments”.
The Repulsicans will, of course, do their best to give him a rousing standing O when he enters tonight, but from the rest of the country that hissing sound he’ll hear will be a combination of booing and sighs of anticipated relief.
The paper today said his speech won’t be a “rest on your laurels” type, but rather a statement of the goals he has in mind for his final year. I think that’s wise given that a rest on his laurels would put him on the same bed of nails the rest of us are going to have to endure as a result of his tenure.
I think it’s wise of the Demorats to have already stated that most of W’s goals for his final year are unacceptable. All in all, though, the greatest pleasures throughout this year are going to come from the sure knowledge that at its end, this president and his henchmen will be forced – finally and not at all as brutally driven out as I would have hoped – to leave our nation’s capital and looking for work. If we’re lucky none of them will find it, but of course that’s fantasy as they will all jump right into positions as lobbyists and captains of industry.
By serendipity, a friend sent the following piece today, and I include it as a parting gift to Mr. Bush. I’m sure that there are plenty of folks out there who, even after reading this, would still hire him on. Shoot, I’d give him a job myself if he was willing to be a training dummy for phlebotomy students eight hours a day, or maybe even lobotomy students just once or perhaps as a dartboard holder in an after hours Irish pub or he could be a bunker buster test target – after all he really likes those things -- or maybe he’d be willing to stand hold a target in a New Orleans shooting range. That job shouldn’t take long – heckuva a job, Shrub. Well at any rate, no matter what kind of work he might be looking for, this curriculum vitae ought to get him one he deserves:
RESUME
GEORGE W. BUSH
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D. C. 20520
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
Law Enforcement:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.
Military:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
College:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE :
I ran for U.S. Congress and lost.
I began my career in the oil business in Midland,Texas in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.
I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.
With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.
With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida , and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President of the United States, after losing by over 500,000 votes.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.
I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.
I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues.
I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleezza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.
I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
I am the all- time U.S . and world record -holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.
My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. history, Enron.
My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip-offs in history. I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed.
I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.
I changed the U.S. policy to allow convict ed criminals to be awarded government contracts.
I appointed more convicted criminals to my administration than any President in U.S. history.
I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States Government.
I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
I refused to allow inspector's access to U.S. "prisoners of war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.
I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US election).
I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any President since the advent of television.
I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
I garnered the most sympathy ever for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.
I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. Citizens and the world community.
I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families in wartime.
In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.
I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.
I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice.
RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review. I specified that my sealed documents will not be available for 50 years.
PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERY VOTER YOU KNOW!
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
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 Repulsicans will, of course, do their best to give him a rousing standing O when he enters tonight, but from the rest of the country that hissing sound he’ll hear will be a combination of booing and sighs of anticipated relief.
The paper today said his speech won’t be a “rest on your laurels” type, but rather a statement of the goals he has in mind for his final year. I think that’s wise given that a rest on his laurels would put him on the same bed of nails the rest of us are going to have to endure as a result of his tenure.
I think it’s wise of the Demorats to have already stated that most of W’s goals for his final year are unacceptable. All in all, though, the greatest pleasures throughout this year are going to come from the sure knowledge that at its end, this president and his henchmen will be forced – finally and not at all as brutally driven out as I would have hoped – to leave our nation’s capital and looking for work. If we’re lucky none of them will find it, but of course that’s fantasy as they will all jump right into positions as lobbyists and captains of industry.
By serendipity, a friend sent the following piece today, and I include it as a parting gift to Mr. Bush. I’m sure that there are plenty of folks out there who, even after reading this, would still hire him on. Shoot, I’d give him a job myself if he was willing to be a training dummy for phlebotomy students eight hours a day, or maybe even lobotomy students just once or perhaps as a dartboard holder in an after hours Irish pub or he could be a bunker buster test target – after all he really likes those things -- or maybe he’d be willing to stand hold a target in a New Orleans shooting range. That job shouldn’t take long – heckuva a job, Shrub. Well at any rate, no matter what kind of work he might be looking for, this curriculum vitae ought to get him one he deserves:
RESUME
GEORGE W. BUSH
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D. C. 20520
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
Law Enforcement:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.
Military:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
College:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE :
I ran for U.S. Congress and lost.
I began my career in the oil business in Midland,Texas in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.
I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.
With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.
With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida , and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President of the United States, after losing by over 500,000 votes.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.
I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.
I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues.
I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleezza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.
I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
I am the all- time U.S . and world record -holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.
My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. history, Enron.
My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip-offs in history. I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed.
I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.
I changed the U.S. policy to allow convict ed criminals to be awarded government contracts.
I appointed more convicted criminals to my administration than any President in U.S. history.
I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States Government.
I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
I refused to allow inspector's access to U.S. "prisoners of war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.
I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US election).
I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any President since the advent of television.
I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
I garnered the most sympathy ever for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.
I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. Citizens and the world community.
I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families in wartime.
In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.
I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.
I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice.
RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review. I specified that my sealed documents will not be available for 50 years.
PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERY VOTER YOU KNOW!
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
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, January 25, 2008
More BushCo Madness
The Bush Administration has shown some consistent traits over the years: their lack of interest in careful exploration of fact before making tactical decisions; their disregard for the opinions of any who oppose them; their willingness to lie to get their way, and; their habit of making huge policy decisions without considering the ramifications.
The most glaring example of these traits was the Iraq war, in course of which they manipulated the intelligence, created fear through innuendo, violated long standing treaties and pacts and ultimately took the country into a negative situation that from which it may never recover. -- Especially in light of the agreement for permanent presence that they are now underhandedly negotiating. (See yesterday’s blog.)
What most people don’t know, though, is that this M.O. pervades everything they do and that there are several areas in which their under-the-table mismanagement have the potential for doom. Two of these are global warming and nuclear proliferation. In the first case, they have simply (and blatantly) refused to accept the testimony of the world’s leading scientists to resist any measures that might hurt the short term gains of the corporate status quo. In the second, while mouthing platitudes about the reduction of nuclear weapons, they have sought – through dangerously loose methods – to expand their production and even considered and perhaps tried to use them.
Mother Jones magazine recently reported on this in a most interesting article titled, “Off Target” (Mother Jones, January/February, 2008 p.64) that discussed the many ways in which typical BushCo behavior has put us at risk. In a sidebar, for instance, they list the five ways BushCo has “thwarted nuclear nonproliferation”:
1. “Treaty busting” – while talking like they’re in favor of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, they have been “backing away from it”.
2. “The India Deal” – again while flapping their lips about nonproliferation, they have ended sanctions against India for not joining the treaty group and are selling them nuclear technology – the same offense for which they condemn North Korea.
3.”Soviet Nukes” – because Donald Rumsfeld thought it was “wimpy to be involved in” BushCo has been trying to cut the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program under which the Pentagon was leading efforts to secure the massive Soviet nuclear arsenal.
4. “Back to Square One” – In 2002 BushCo scrapped the Agreed Framework – negotiated by the Clinton Administration with North Korea – under which we supplied oil and civilian nuclear technology and they froze their nuclear weaponry development program. To replace it, BushCo took a hard line against North Korea until finally negotiating another fuel deal that closely resembles the Clinton arrangement. In the interim, North Korea has become a nuclear armed country.
5. “Lost in Transit” – BushCo adopted John Bolton’s idea for the Proliferation Security Initiative that uses quasi-legal high seas police to try and intercept nuclear shipments. None have been intercepted and nothing has been done to monitor cargo before it can be loaded onto ships in the first place.
I would add the Department of Homeland Security in general. I have yet to see any proof that this huge new cabinet level department has done anything to truly add to our security. From telling us all to stock up on plastic sheeting and duct tape to forcing fisherman to have a passport in order to get back home from Canadian fishing trips and making little old ladies take off their shoes before getting on an airplane, they have only added hassle to our lives while restricting our freedom with no benefit.
The Mother Jones article did offer what may be the BushCo solution to global warming though in the following table:
Scenario Drop in Avg Drop in Avg.
Global Temp. Global Rainfall Chilling
For Years For Years Effects
India & Pakistan
Fire 100 Warheads 2º 10% Winter up to 5º colder
US & Russia fire
7,000 warhead 6º 25% Up to 80 more days
below freezing in US*
US & Russia fire
20,000 warheads 15º 45% Below freezing in Iowa
for up to three years*
*Not to mention that 95% of us would be dead before the freeze hit!
So what the hell, George, you’ve got all those weapons and less than a year to use them. After all, it’s about the only thing you haven’t tried yet. Why not go for it? Then maybe someone would turn to you and say, “Heckuva job, buddy.”
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 most glaring example of these traits was the Iraq war, in course of which they manipulated the intelligence, created fear through innuendo, violated long standing treaties and pacts and ultimately took the country into a negative situation that from which it may never recover. -- Especially in light of the agreement for permanent presence that they are now underhandedly negotiating. (See yesterday’s blog.)
What most people don’t know, though, is that this M.O. pervades everything they do and that there are several areas in which their under-the-table mismanagement have the potential for doom. Two of these are global warming and nuclear proliferation. In the first case, they have simply (and blatantly) refused to accept the testimony of the world’s leading scientists to resist any measures that might hurt the short term gains of the corporate status quo. In the second, while mouthing platitudes about the reduction of nuclear weapons, they have sought – through dangerously loose methods – to expand their production and even considered and perhaps tried to use them.
Mother Jones magazine recently reported on this in a most interesting article titled, “Off Target” (Mother Jones, January/February, 2008 p.64) that discussed the many ways in which typical BushCo behavior has put us at risk. In a sidebar, for instance, they list the five ways BushCo has “thwarted nuclear nonproliferation”:
1. “Treaty busting” – while talking like they’re in favor of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, they have been “backing away from it”.
2. “The India Deal” – again while flapping their lips about nonproliferation, they have ended sanctions against India for not joining the treaty group and are selling them nuclear technology – the same offense for which they condemn North Korea.
3.”Soviet Nukes” – because Donald Rumsfeld thought it was “wimpy to be involved in” BushCo has been trying to cut the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program under which the Pentagon was leading efforts to secure the massive Soviet nuclear arsenal.
4. “Back to Square One” – In 2002 BushCo scrapped the Agreed Framework – negotiated by the Clinton Administration with North Korea – under which we supplied oil and civilian nuclear technology and they froze their nuclear weaponry development program. To replace it, BushCo took a hard line against North Korea until finally negotiating another fuel deal that closely resembles the Clinton arrangement. In the interim, North Korea has become a nuclear armed country.
5. “Lost in Transit” – BushCo adopted John Bolton’s idea for the Proliferation Security Initiative that uses quasi-legal high seas police to try and intercept nuclear shipments. None have been intercepted and nothing has been done to monitor cargo before it can be loaded onto ships in the first place.
I would add the Department of Homeland Security in general. I have yet to see any proof that this huge new cabinet level department has done anything to truly add to our security. From telling us all to stock up on plastic sheeting and duct tape to forcing fisherman to have a passport in order to get back home from Canadian fishing trips and making little old ladies take off their shoes before getting on an airplane, they have only added hassle to our lives while restricting our freedom with no benefit.
The Mother Jones article did offer what may be the BushCo solution to global warming though in the following table:
Scenario Drop in Avg Drop in Avg.
Global Temp. Global Rainfall Chilling
For Years For Years Effects
India & Pakistan
Fire 100 Warheads 2º 10% Winter up to 5º colder
US & Russia fire
7,000 warhead 6º 25% Up to 80 more days
below freezing in US*
US & Russia fire
20,000 warheads 15º 45% Below freezing in Iowa
for up to three years*
*Not to mention that 95% of us would be dead before the freeze hit!
So what the hell, George, you’ve got all those weapons and less than a year to use them. After all, it’s about the only thing you haven’t tried yet. Why not go for it? Then maybe someone would turn to you and say, “Heckuva job, buddy.”
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, January 24, 2008
Mission Accomplished: The Neo-Con Legacy
The moment I began fighting against in October, 2000 has come. I have often said over the past six years that I never thought I would see my country sink to this level, but it has, and the major proof of the pudding is in progress as I write these words. That proof is that BushCo has already begun negotiations with PART of the Iraqi government to make a pact for the long term (read permanent) placement of American troops in Iraq.
In several blogs, letters to the editor and Voices columns in the local paper over the years, I have written about the Neo-Con paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” that was presented to the G. W. Bush campaign’s foreign affairs committee in – take note of this date - September, 2000 – a full year before 9-11 by The Project for A New American Century. Those who may not have heard about this paper need to know that it was underwritten by such luminaries as William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz and a bunch of other Neo-Cons. (NOTE: I tried to publish these letters and columns in several national publications over the years, too, but none accepted them. The News-Leader should be praised for their willingness to do so.)
“Rebuilding America’s Defenses” was a grand scale layout of the military agenda that has since become, nearly word for word, our written national security policy. What stood out for me was this line from page 14: “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
Question: If the desire to base American troops in Iraq transcended the regime of Saddam Hussein, why, during the rush-up to the war, didn’t we hear about that instead of what bad guy Hussein was?
Answer: The American people wouldn’t have found it a compelling enough reason to attack a sovereign nation.
Now, having already notified the Congress that they would not pass this new document (They won’t call it a treaty because treaties must by Constitutional law be ratified by the Senate.) through them for ratification, BushCo has begun speechifying about an “enduring” relationship with Iraq while – without saying anything to the American people about it – negotiating the non-treaty with members of the Iraqi cabinet dependent upon U.S. forces for their personal safety; notably not with Iraq’s Parliament which has already stated that they want us out of there within two years. It is notable, though, that one of those cabinet members has already made a public statement calling the document a “treaty”, but he’ll probably never make that mistake again!
So what does this treaty call for? It calls for the U.S. to respond militarily to threats to the Iraqi government whether internal or external in perpetuity. What’s so bad about that? 1.) The U.S. has never entered into an agreement that bound us to fight in a civil war before, and this document does that; 2.) refusing to allow the Senate to ratify is another un-Constitutional end run indicative of this administration’s willingness – no eagerness – to ignore the laws of our land and do it their way in any case; 3.) this agreement goes against the will of both the Iraqi people and the American people who have both said at the 70% level that they want the U.S. out of Iraq; 4.) it also goes against the will of the Iraqi Parliament; 5.) it is the bald-faced revelation of the real reasons why this administration twisted intelligence reports and misled the nation into a pre-emptive war by spreading disinformation and hiding their true motives from the people, and; 6.) it is an underhanded attempt by BushCo to tie the hands of the next administration – most likely Democratic -- by signing an agreement that binds them to staying in Iraq when they are coming into office with the intent of extricating us from that morass, Thus forcing a Democratic administration to further the goals of the Neo-Cons who created the entire mess we are in.
I have said since Bush came into office that he was the puppet of Neo-Cons who have as their aim the economic and militaristic domination of the world, not because I knew those individuals but because of that paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. I had hoped and prayed for the past seven years that they wouldn’t get away with their plan for Iraq, but today my heart is heavy with the high probability that they will.
If the rest of their plans are also realized, you can kiss your freedoms goodbye.
The only glimmer of hope I can see at this point is that Congressman William Delahunt of Massachusetts has announced that he is going to launch a series of Congressional investigations to determine whether or not the document being negotiated fits the definition of a treaty. If it can be found to do so, the Senate can (and probably would) refuse to ratify it and thus kill it.
Please let Mr. Delahunt know that you support his efforts and why. Let’s also notify all of our Senators and Congressmen about our opposition to this TREATY. In doing so, please mention “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” and insist that they block this effort to illegally bind us to a permanent presence in Iraq.
Neither our nation nor the world at large can afford to have this Neo-Con goal met.
References:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18357565
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
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
In several blogs, letters to the editor and Voices columns in the local paper over the years, I have written about the Neo-Con paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” that was presented to the G. W. Bush campaign’s foreign affairs committee in – take note of this date - September, 2000 – a full year before 9-11 by The Project for A New American Century. Those who may not have heard about this paper need to know that it was underwritten by such luminaries as William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz and a bunch of other Neo-Cons. (NOTE: I tried to publish these letters and columns in several national publications over the years, too, but none accepted them. The News-Leader should be praised for their willingness to do so.)
“Rebuilding America’s Defenses” was a grand scale layout of the military agenda that has since become, nearly word for word, our written national security policy. What stood out for me was this line from page 14: “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
Question: If the desire to base American troops in Iraq transcended the regime of Saddam Hussein, why, during the rush-up to the war, didn’t we hear about that instead of what bad guy Hussein was?
Answer: The American people wouldn’t have found it a compelling enough reason to attack a sovereign nation.
Now, having already notified the Congress that they would not pass this new document (They won’t call it a treaty because treaties must by Constitutional law be ratified by the Senate.) through them for ratification, BushCo has begun speechifying about an “enduring” relationship with Iraq while – without saying anything to the American people about it – negotiating the non-treaty with members of the Iraqi cabinet dependent upon U.S. forces for their personal safety; notably not with Iraq’s Parliament which has already stated that they want us out of there within two years. It is notable, though, that one of those cabinet members has already made a public statement calling the document a “treaty”, but he’ll probably never make that mistake again!
So what does this treaty call for? It calls for the U.S. to respond militarily to threats to the Iraqi government whether internal or external in perpetuity. What’s so bad about that? 1.) The U.S. has never entered into an agreement that bound us to fight in a civil war before, and this document does that; 2.) refusing to allow the Senate to ratify is another un-Constitutional end run indicative of this administration’s willingness – no eagerness – to ignore the laws of our land and do it their way in any case; 3.) this agreement goes against the will of both the Iraqi people and the American people who have both said at the 70% level that they want the U.S. out of Iraq; 4.) it also goes against the will of the Iraqi Parliament; 5.) it is the bald-faced revelation of the real reasons why this administration twisted intelligence reports and misled the nation into a pre-emptive war by spreading disinformation and hiding their true motives from the people, and; 6.) it is an underhanded attempt by BushCo to tie the hands of the next administration – most likely Democratic -- by signing an agreement that binds them to staying in Iraq when they are coming into office with the intent of extricating us from that morass, Thus forcing a Democratic administration to further the goals of the Neo-Cons who created the entire mess we are in.
I have said since Bush came into office that he was the puppet of Neo-Cons who have as their aim the economic and militaristic domination of the world, not because I knew those individuals but because of that paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. I had hoped and prayed for the past seven years that they wouldn’t get away with their plan for Iraq, but today my heart is heavy with the high probability that they will.
If the rest of their plans are also realized, you can kiss your freedoms goodbye.
The only glimmer of hope I can see at this point is that Congressman William Delahunt of Massachusetts has announced that he is going to launch a series of Congressional investigations to determine whether or not the document being negotiated fits the definition of a treaty. If it can be found to do so, the Senate can (and probably would) refuse to ratify it and thus kill it.
Please let Mr. Delahunt know that you support his efforts and why. Let’s also notify all of our Senators and Congressmen about our opposition to this TREATY. In doing so, please mention “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” and insist that they block this effort to illegally bind us to a permanent presence in Iraq.
Neither our nation nor the world at large can afford to have this Neo-Con goal met.
References:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18357565
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
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, January 23, 2008
The Israeli Wall
This morning’s news was particularly lush what with the boy Governor Blunt’s announcement that he would not run for a second term (I didn’t think he was smart enough to recognize that he ought to be out of the public eye when what the stink that’s in the air now hits the fan.); Charles Lewis releasing his compilation of the Bush deception process leading up to the war in Iraq – more on that tomorrow; and the breach of Israel’s wall between Gaza and Egypt.
What struck me most about the reports I heard this morning on the Israeli wall breach was the angle each reporter took. The first report I heard came from the BBC. They interviewed a Palestinian blogger who reported that people were crossing the border to get food, gasoline, and other necessities they couldn’t get at home.
The second was from NPR on Morning Edition. Their reporter said he was watching a man carry a carpet back across the border and another with auto tires. Then they reported Mubarak’s statement that he was not going to try to stem the tide because the Palestinians were starving people in need of the food and medicine they could not get at home.
The third report was from CNN. They reported that people were going home with Coca-Cola and cigarettes.
So why the differences? Who are we supposed to believe? From my perspective, a news hound has to be willing to look at what the reporting agency might have to gain from the angle they take. The BBC takes no money from the British government and so has no ax to grind. NPR has a history of reporting from the left, but that was jerked more into line by the Reagan administration and so has a more recent history of carefully reporting in such a way as not to anger anyone too much and CNN is a mainstream media reporter that relies on the good will of whoever is holding the most power at the moment.
For that reason, I think CNN typically reports in such a way that they will not add fuel to any arguments contrary to current national policy. Our national policy has long been unquestioning support for Israeli policy, so don’t expect any reporting from CNN that might give anyone a reason to cast a negative light in Israel’s direction.
It’s no great surprise that the breach happened. Hearing the first report was a kind of “whack your forehead” moment. Why hadn’t this happened long ago? It’s so obvious a thing to do. Why didn’t Hamas long ago quit lobbing random missiles over the wall into Israel and instead just blow up the damn wall? Now done, it seems like a stroke of genius that any fool should have thought of long ago.
The Palestinians have a great deal to gain from this. For one thing, the people of Gaza get access in Egypt to goods they can’t get at home – thanks to the Israeli policy of subjugation. For another, the world is watching while needy people swarm through the breach and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who has signed an agreement with Israel to guard the wall, refuses to stop them on the grounds that they are getting necessities for life that the Israelis are denying them. For another, attention is diverted from “Hamas as terrorists” due to their lobbing missiles that threaten innocent lives to “Hamas as liberators” who are attacking a wall that is the most obvious emblem of the Israeli suppression of Palestinian freedoms.
If we keep building the wall between us and Mexico, we should expect the same thing and worse to happen to us some day. I’m not saying that we are as guilty of oppression in this case as I believe Israel to be, but I do believe that a barrier wall is an affront that few people will accept without rancor. We ought to be able to come up with smarter ways of dealing with our immigration problem than an offensive and probably ineffective barrier that silently but constantly says, “We don’t want you.” (Israel’s goes further and says, “I don’t want you, but I do want your land, so I’m taking it. At least we haven’t done that to Mexico since we drove them out of Texas.)
Both the U.S. and Israel should be seeking ways to help their neighbors become capable of self-sustenance instead of ways to exploit their need in the form of cheap, subservient labor. By belittling our neighbors we create enemies. By elevating our neighbors, we elevate ourselves through the only means by which the old saw “A rising tide floats all ships” is actually true.
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
What struck me most about the reports I heard this morning on the Israeli wall breach was the angle each reporter took. The first report I heard came from the BBC. They interviewed a Palestinian blogger who reported that people were crossing the border to get food, gasoline, and other necessities they couldn’t get at home.
The second was from NPR on Morning Edition. Their reporter said he was watching a man carry a carpet back across the border and another with auto tires. Then they reported Mubarak’s statement that he was not going to try to stem the tide because the Palestinians were starving people in need of the food and medicine they could not get at home.
The third report was from CNN. They reported that people were going home with Coca-Cola and cigarettes.
So why the differences? Who are we supposed to believe? From my perspective, a news hound has to be willing to look at what the reporting agency might have to gain from the angle they take. The BBC takes no money from the British government and so has no ax to grind. NPR has a history of reporting from the left, but that was jerked more into line by the Reagan administration and so has a more recent history of carefully reporting in such a way as not to anger anyone too much and CNN is a mainstream media reporter that relies on the good will of whoever is holding the most power at the moment.
For that reason, I think CNN typically reports in such a way that they will not add fuel to any arguments contrary to current national policy. Our national policy has long been unquestioning support for Israeli policy, so don’t expect any reporting from CNN that might give anyone a reason to cast a negative light in Israel’s direction.
It’s no great surprise that the breach happened. Hearing the first report was a kind of “whack your forehead” moment. Why hadn’t this happened long ago? It’s so obvious a thing to do. Why didn’t Hamas long ago quit lobbing random missiles over the wall into Israel and instead just blow up the damn wall? Now done, it seems like a stroke of genius that any fool should have thought of long ago.
The Palestinians have a great deal to gain from this. For one thing, the people of Gaza get access in Egypt to goods they can’t get at home – thanks to the Israeli policy of subjugation. For another, the world is watching while needy people swarm through the breach and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who has signed an agreement with Israel to guard the wall, refuses to stop them on the grounds that they are getting necessities for life that the Israelis are denying them. For another, attention is diverted from “Hamas as terrorists” due to their lobbing missiles that threaten innocent lives to “Hamas as liberators” who are attacking a wall that is the most obvious emblem of the Israeli suppression of Palestinian freedoms.
If we keep building the wall between us and Mexico, we should expect the same thing and worse to happen to us some day. I’m not saying that we are as guilty of oppression in this case as I believe Israel to be, but I do believe that a barrier wall is an affront that few people will accept without rancor. We ought to be able to come up with smarter ways of dealing with our immigration problem than an offensive and probably ineffective barrier that silently but constantly says, “We don’t want you.” (Israel’s goes further and says, “I don’t want you, but I do want your land, so I’m taking it. At least we haven’t done that to Mexico since we drove them out of Texas.)
Both the U.S. and Israel should be seeking ways to help their neighbors become capable of self-sustenance instead of ways to exploit their need in the form of cheap, subservient labor. By belittling our neighbors we create enemies. By elevating our neighbors, we elevate ourselves through the only means by which the old saw “A rising tide floats all ships” is actually true.
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)
