dr. elsewhere here
A dear friend and faithful reader (in fact, she not only introduced me to Cannonfire, but to Elizabeth de la Vega, whose book hits the stands in a few weeks, and whose interview with moi will be posted around the end of the month) just gave me the greatest idea.
She shared with me that, while heading home after watching Death of the President, she realized she had the urge, for the first time in years, to fly our flag.
I know that might strike some of you as schmaltzy, but I instantly realized, as she also suggested, what a terrific symbolic gesture for all us unpatriotic traitors to enact as an emblem of unity and dedication to the principles we have begun to recover in this country.
In one simple gesture, we can express our patriotism and dedication to the Constitution, "for which it stands," by taking back OUR flag!
[Deep bow to the wise and devoted CD.]
2 comments:
so this is what it is,
take pride in electing the other party and now forget about 9/11, war crimes, election fraud and murder.
good job! be real patriot clean up the cesspool!
We Won - Get Over It
Dear Dr. Elsewhere,
Well here comes Bob Boldt’s traditional post-election wet blanket - so head
for the hills. Just as my last ’04 post-presidential election
postmortem (concerning what a complete fraud John Kerry was) cost me a
couple of friendships, so too these parting shots will probably
alienate me from the few friends I have left among the progressive
Democratic community.
I have spent most of the month of October
working on behalf of the Claire McCaskill’s US Senate campaign.
Congratulations to Claire - she worked hard and deserved her win. I
spent countless hours, my butt planted in a chair at the Jefferson City
office of the Cole County Democratic Party Headquarters, making calls
to what had to be over 2,000 Missouri voters. Let me tell you it is an
experience I am not looking forward to repeating any time soon. I did
have some wonderful conversations (and some horrendous ones.) I will
not go into these exchanges because I would like discuss in some detail
what disturbed me the most in my conversations with the electorate.
I must hasten to disclaim any objective, statistical validity for my
highly anecdotal sample upon which I base my impressions. I called
lists of registered voters provided me by the Missouri Democratic
Committee and I have no idea as to the degree of pre-selection present
in the lists.
The thing that was most disturbing about the calls I made was the
massive number of undecided/uncommitted voters I spoke with. Granted,
their percentage seemed greater than it probably was, as I was
targeting exactly that demographic. I spent as little time speaking
with confirmed Democrats or committed Republicans as possible. With
the Democrats, I kept the conversation as brief as courtesy would allow
and with the Republicans… well let's just say, extended conversations
were really not possible outside of frigid monosyllabic responses at
best and screamed, obscene epithets at the worst. We kept a list of
the best (worst?) Republican comments on a big board in the office.
Cape Gerardo, MO is, after all, the hometown of Rush Limbaugh.
I spent most of my time speaking with undecided/uncommitted voters.
I found that they fell into mainly two categories: the disillusioned
and the clueless. I was not as disturbed by the disillusioned as I was
by the clueless. The disillusioned were many people after my own heart
as I, to a large extent, count myself among their ranks. With these
folks, I simply made a brief argument to the effect that the best way
to retard the criminal enterprise we call our present government is to
counter one bunch of thieves with another and let the Devil take the
hindmost. Shocking as this approach was, I think it did sway a couple
of cynics into actually going to the polls to vote Democratic.
The most problematic were the clueless, undecided voters. They were
a most discouraged and discouraging lot. I was tempted to scream
into the phone, “HOW CAN YOU BE UNDECIDED WITH TWO CANDIDATES WHO ARE
SO FAR APART ON EVERY ISSUE - EVERY VALUE, YOU NINNY!” The only
problem with this response was that I think I understood many of the
reasons that caused these people to be so beaten down into a state of
virtually comatose indecision, apathy and confusion.
I think I have at least a tenuous grasp of the social and political
realities that exist in this country and in the world because I have
the luxury of being able to read, compare and analyze from a wide
spectrum of viewpoints from the full political spectrum within the
country as well as having a respectable idea of at least the highlights
from the international press as well. Most people do not have anywhere
near the time I have to delve any deeper than the first two pages of
The Times and the evening TV news coverage with perhaps an occasional
“in-depth” Sunday morning with Tim Russert. Is it any wonder that most
are completely confused as to what the hell is going on in this country
as well as in the world? I would have liked to have simply passed off
these undecided voters as just plain stupid. Sadly this was not the
case. All I noticed in speaking to these people was a profound desire
to avoid all these issues that most believed they did not understand
and many believed they would never understand. I attribute much of
this to deliberate programs of mis-information on the one hand and the
sheer quantity and volume of media noise on the other.
In our little microcosm here in Missouri, the spots put out by the
incumbent were, on the whole, deliberate misinformercials, dealing
largely with defaming the character of Claire McCaskill. Most people
were in no position to be inclined to fact-check the validity of either
these pejorative implications or the “facts” presented in Jim Talent’s
commercials. The result was that these undecided voters equated the
attack ads against the character of the challenger with the attack ads
that Claire used to point out the truly dismal record of the incumbent.
If you think any Congressional incumbent has anything to be proud of,
read Matt Taibbi’s scathing indictment of the 109th Congress in the
past Rolling Stone. [1]
Nevertheless, roughly 50% of the undecided cited their abhorrence of
the negative campaigns by both candidates and were unable to
distinguish between an attack of substance and an ad-hominem argument.
Time did not permit me to attempt to help them make this distinction.
I went with a simpler approach that essentially agreed with them that
all negative campaign ads were crap and my promised lie that I would
make sure Claire would hear from them to stop the negative adds. [2]
I think this distaste for the whole process has been fostered by the
lies and distortions that have so polluted the stream of communication
in this country. Rather than suffer further disillusion and feeling
like rubes for the fleecing, people would rather not look - or think.
It is not pleasant, even for me, to think of the President (of any
party) as an inveterate liar, that America, since before the cold war,
has nearly always had a largely corrupting influence in the world and
that Karl Marx may yet have the definitive word on capitalism. It is a
terrible thing to realize you are finally all grown up - and that this
is the way this country has really always been run - virtually from the
start.
So what was I to say to these people? I did not demean them in any
way. I began in the simplest possible terms with points that by now
have become intuitively obvious to even the most bi-partisan
demographic. Do you like what is going on in Washington? Do you
approve of Bush and his conduct of the war in Iraq? Has Jim Talent or
the Republican Congress truly represented you or done anything of value
other than rubber-stamping Bush’s dubious programs? The response to
these questions was immediate and unanimous. It was a simple matter
then to convince them that it was important for their future and for
the future of the country to go out and vote for Democrat, Claire
McCaskill. It was a little disarming to see how they could be so
easily and effectively moved by an argument as obvious and
straightforward as this. It was almost as if this line of reasoning
had never occurred to them before. As I said, these were not stupid
people. I spoke to no more than a dozen or so who might fit the
profile of the Clampetts of Beverly - Hills that is. What I took away
from my interchanges with these bright, kind, seemingly thoughtful
people engendered in me a profound depression and a fear for our future
and for the future of the country.
I think large numbers of humans have actually lost the ability to
reason. For so many - thought - intense, rigorous, sometimes painful
thought, is just no longer a viable form of mental activity. This
malady is not just restricted to folks wandering the median yellow line
of the political road. Too often I find those on the Left as prone to
unreasoned, simple-minded slogans and idiocy as those on the Right.
Please don’t ask for names.
The gods alone know what process the undecided voter finally used to
make up his mind when he scanned the ballot in the privacy of the
polling booth. Could it be that the decision was conjured up like
Scrooge’s phantoms - by “…perhaps a bit of bad beef, or a piece of
underdone potato“? - did indigestion finally trump indecision in that
fateful final political choice that will govern the most powerful
nation in the world for the next two years? This time it happened to
augur well for the Democrats and for democracy. Next time - who knows?
I’m afraid my disillusion with the political situation in this country
is conclusive and terminal. The fact of a Democratic victory in this
election has done virtually nothing to change my outlook. A Democratic
Congress will possess certain desirable and necessary checks on a power
mad administration and a rubber-stamp Congress. The impact will
probably be at best felt only in certain domestic programs however.
The home-grown fascism Bush has accelerated so dramatically will only
be temporarily retarded. Our foreign policy and its military paradigm
is unlikely to change at all, in spite of all the posturing and
adjusting. [3]
One reason a change in foreign policy may get little traction with
the new Congress is because Bush and the Republicans have so
deceptively framed the debate that a discussion bearing any resemblance
to reality or to the proper understanding of the historical perspective
that led us to the present hopelessness is impossible. Americans know
something is wrong. They just have no idea what it is.[4]
I will have to admit that my appreciation of the ideas and popular
opinions expressed in the American media (TV) are sadly deficient. My
ignorance of TV’s goings on sometimes makes me feel a little like Kevin
McCarthy in the 1956 film, Invasion of the Body Snatchers when
attempting to talk politics with my fellow citizens. In Missouri one
takes ones life in ones hands when attempting to discuss religion or
politics anyway. [5]
The main reason for my installing network television was to follow the
discussions and the debates connected with the November election. This
was especially depressing fare. Anyone who reads or has made any
attempt to analyze something like, for example, the Iraqi Occupation
will find that what passes for thoughtful, objective news analysis on
network TV is akin to dropping into the lobotomy ward at your local
mental health facility. [6]
This lack of intelligent discussion and useful analysis gets back to
the problem I referred to with my indecisive voters – the inability (or
unwillingness) to conduct rigorous reasoning. Not long ago I heard
Greg Palast discussing the reasons for the demise of the kind of
probing no-holds-bared journalism that culminated in the Watergate
revelations during the Nixon administration. Greg said that so many
good journalists were ruined by Reagan during the infamous Iran-Contra
mess that the attrition resulted in literally a whole generation of
journalistic “gutless wonders” (my characterization, not his.) [7]
Good reporters with the courage to follow the bloody trail of Oliver
North, Eliot Abrahams, John Negroponte and yes, Bob Gates, were
systematically demoted and watched their careers being flushed while
their more politic colleagues moved up the food chain where they landed
management positions and invitations to White House dinners. The
result is that, twenty years later, all the successful survivors of the
Reagan era are now in the positions of power in a media culture that is
deeply committed to not rocking the boat and never questioning (or
biting) the imperial hand that gives the news to the faithful.
For only one small example:
they are not only not interested in Bush’s infamous history that
stretches from his good old days in the Texas Air National Guard to the
positively weird events leading up to and following 9/11, they are not
even capable of any interest whatsoever. Did you notice how swift all
these boys in the rooms upstairs at CBS were to toss Mary Mapes and and
even the iconic Dan Rather over the side of the boat when they tried
their little bit of investigative reporting on the boy who would be king?
You say, but surely it must be in the interest of the loyal opposition
to blow the whistle on this nonsense. Yes, there are some like John
Conyers and Henry Waxman who would love to do just that. On the whole,
even those who might gain the most political capitol from holding
Bush’s feet to the fire, are the most cowardly when it comes to
stepping up and being counted. Mark my words, Conyers and Waxman will
have a tougher time in the new, accommodating Congress run by their
fellow Democrats than they ever had when the Republicans forced them to
hold hearings under cover of darkness and persecution. As Nancy Pelosi
has said, Bush need not fear Impeachment from the new Congress (nor
need Cheney fear hearings or indictments?) Conyers and Waxman will now
be required to remain silent – “voluntarily.”
And let’s not forget the whole business of re-framing. I am ashamed
at the way those on the left have fallen in line and adopted the
language handed to them by Uncle Karl and his minions. “We are not
Pro-Choice, we are Pro-Abortion.” [8] “We do not torture - we utilize
stress”, “We support our troops – right or wrong”, “Iraq is better off
now than under Saddam”, “The critics are pro-alQaeda” and “John Kerry
has finally stopped beating his wife".” Oh, and don’t forget all the
euphemistic misnomered programs: Healthy Forests Initiative, Clear
Skies, No Child Left Behind, etc, etc, etc.
In my opinion, two of the biggest scams foisted upon a gullible body
politic and “opposition” politicians are “The War on Terror” and “We
must win in Iraq.” Virtually everyone who has appeared in the popular
media, including even the progressive pundits begin the discussion
apparently unaware of the fraudulence of these two unquestioned
assumptions. [9]
The only way we can even begin to extricate ourselves from the toxic
mess the Bush administration and their complicit Democrats have put us
in is by realizing that the very assertion of the axiom, “War on
Terror” is, on its face, fraudulent. There is no way we can ever “win
in Iraq.” For the sake of the survival of a world, where there is any
chance that humanistic values can exert the slightest brake on American
Imperialism, it is of the utmost importance that we lose (and lose big)
in Iraq. The fact that there is not one elected official in this
country who is willing even to lay these two premises on the examining
table is an indication of just how hopeless and insoluble our
predicament is.
I do not propose to waste another 3,000+ words here explaining further
the complete immorality and wrong-headedness of our whole approach to
geopolitics - except to say that I believe the whole situation we have
been tar-babied into is about to be revealed as having been bipartisan
in its inception and in its maintenance all along. I am sorry to
wet-blanket the flush of all the victory parties with this
morning-after bit of hangover shock, but the Democrats are not the
knights on white horses riding in to save the Republic. Those naïve
enough to think they will soon set things aright and do God’s work are
in for a big surprise. The Democrats are reading from the same
playbook that both Bush I and Bush II have been following all along.
Clinton didn’t care if Saddam had WMD or not. His enforcement of
sanctions was in hopes of bringing down the government in Iraq –
nothing more. [10]
More recently:
Every Democrat in the Senate knew of the bogus status of
the intelligence in the build up to the war. If they didn’t know, it
was only because they chose not to look. I don’t buy for a minute
Kerry’s BS that Bush hid the truth from Congress. Those who voted for
the war were either gutless, complicit or both.
So off will go our hard-won winner, Claire McCaskill to tilt with the
dragons of corruption, to win the war and bring home the bacon for
Missouri. You probably are asking yourself why I bothered to support
someone who will no doubt turn out to be a shill of corporate fascism,
just another corrupt Senator, war hawk and happy recipient of AIPAC
largess. [11]
I came very close to not only not working on her campaign but not even
voting for her as well:
After Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker article detailing the story of how
Bush had been deterred from his plans to nuke Iran by his Pentagon
advisers, I decided to see how many politicians supported Bush in this
change of policy. The first target of inquiry was my hawkish
Democratic Representative on the Houe Armed Services Committee, Isaac
Newton (Ike) Skelton. A citizens’ ad hoc committee was drawn up to
attempt to ascertain his stance on the matter. All attempts to
determine his position were resolutely stonewalled. To my knowledge,
our tireless Democratic Representative, Ike is still an advocate of
nuking Iran. In a similar manner I set out to determine Claire’s
position. Her bellicose statements about using the “full force of the
US military” to prevent Iran’s development of nuclear weapons seemed to
be even to the right of Bush. After a lot of pressure and many emails,
I was finally able to communicate with an aide who assured me that
Claire would never vote to nuke Iran. I had to take his word for it,
as her omage to Mars on her website remained unchanged. I have to
assume that even though, in her soul, she knew that a first strike
attack on Iran would be illegal and immoral, she didn’t want this
potentially embarrassing belief leaking out to the electorate. That and her refusal to condemn Israel’s atrocities against Lebanon almost cost her my support and my vote.
So why then, you keep asking, did I work so hard to get her elected? I
supported Claire solely because she is a Democrat. I would have worked
just as hard for her if she were a child-molester, homophobe or a
Dixicrat. No matter. She had my support!
The only joy I take in the Democratic victory in Congress this past
Nov. 7 is in the fact that, in terms of our domestic policy agenda, a
dominant Democratic Congress may give us some necessary breathing
space from Bush’s storm troopers. Hopefully there will now be a little
more time for those of us who believe that the answer lies in the
development of local neighborhoods and sustainable networks of
independence to develop without the government interrupting us. I plan
to place my future energies entirely in the development of local
community that exist materially, socially and politically off the
national grid.
In my heart of hearts I am actually thankful for George W. Bush and the
appalling singularity of his presidency. Without him I would still be
slumbering in my Amerikan dream. Because of him, the scales have
fallen from my eyes and I can see that the problems this country
has caused for the poor, the disadvantaged, the third world, the
environment and indeed the peace of the planet are not anything that
can be solved by the mere redirection of the nation or some mythical
realignment to our founder’s principles. The evil of Amerika and our
capitalist system for which it so ignominiously stands is endemic and
incurable. Even though I think the Islamisists are as clinically
insane as their black-hearted brothers-in-spirit who labor under the
cross of Jesus or the Star of David, I still have some admiration for
and sympathy with anyone intent on destroying this country. I see us
(US) as some malefic virus humanity has produced out of some horrific
thanstosis. Perhaps if I were younger, more imaginative or less
committed to non-violence, I might be looking for a supporting role in
the sequel to "V for Vendetta - Redux" playing at a small planet near
you. Such is not my path.
Devout coward that I am and failing any ability or real inclination to
bring this country to its knees in any practical sense, I choose to
withdraw, cover my own ass and look to my personal survival. This
strategy is the result not only of a moral position but also a response
to very practical considerations as well.
One thing I do agree with the fundamentalist Christians on is that we
are living in the End Times. [12] There are just too many delinquent
accounts coming due. Like a drunken alcoholic, we in this country are
just too impaired to see or understand the results of our profligacy.
The earth cannot support us any longer. Global Climate change scenarios
include a number of disturbing prospects that could bring some bad
weather reports even sooner than expected. The true $43 Trillion debt
may sink us well before the oil is shut off. The inability of this
government to provide for even the most microscopic degree of security
its citizens expect on any level is just to depressing to even be
pointed out by opportunist politics.
Most of us have no idea of just how our civilization hangs by
the thinnest of threads. Strangely enough those we have entrusted
precisely with being on watch and hedging our bets against just such
thready vulnerability seem to have taken up the art of juggling with
sharp knives. One or more of these disasters may strike next year or
in ten years, but disasters will surely come. We sleep on with nothing
more substantial to worry about than a national epidemic of obesity.
As George’s daddy said at Kyoto, “The American way of life is
non-negotiable!” [13]
That is why this past November 7 was my last national election. It
takes a lot less than two stolen presidential elections to cause me to
disconnect from this madness – materially, politically (and not least
of all) emotionally. I will be intensifying my local identifications
as well as my involvement with neighboring social and political
organizations. For me there will no longer be Democrats, Republicans,
conservatives or progressives. There will only be those who wish to
survive and sustain their own habitat for themselves and their
families. I will also be communicating with like-minded others around
the world who feel, as I do, that our only hope is to network globally
and act locally.
The only fertilizer I will be purchasing will be - not for bombs - but
for my own garden. Organic please!
Bob Boldt
Footnotes:
[1]
“But the 109th Congress is no mild departure from the norm, no slight
deviation in an already-underwhelming history. No, this is nothing less
than a historic shift in how our democracy is run… In the past six
years they have castrated the political minority, abdicated their
oversight responsibilities mandated by the Constitution, enacted a
conscious policy of massive borrowing and unrestrained spending, and
installed a host of semipermanent mechanisms for transferring
legislative power to commercial interests. They aimed far lower than
any other Congress has ever aimed, and they nailed their target.”
- Matt Taibbi
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12055360/cover_story_time_to_go_inside_the_wors
t_congress_ever
[2]
I actually hate all TV spots and must confess to having produced more
than my share in my time. Hopefully when the gods of the underworld
weigh my heart against the feather of truth, I will be found to have
produced more worthy PSA’s than ads for children's sugar-coated
breakfast cereal.
[3]
I am so very happy to finally see the backside of Rummy the Dummy. I’m
sure the Bush-nominated un-indicted Iran-Contra co-conspirator will be
a big improvement. Not!
Let’s get those war crimes briefs in (early and often) guys and gals.
Remember old Secretaries of Defense never die – they just smell that
way. Right-on Mr. McNamara?
[4]
Even though 60% of Americans claim to oppose Bush’s conduct of the war
in Iraq, none of us cares a scrap for the fact that 71% of Iraqis want
us out in a year - unconditionally ,while 65% want us gone – yesterday.
Or, while we are at it, here is another appalling statistic: 85% of
our troops suffer from the pernicious delusion that we are in Iraq
primarily as payback for Saddam’s decisive role in the destruction of
the World Trade Towers. I guess, as Kerry said, they should have
studied harder in school.
[5]
When I moved into my present digs over a year ago, I decided not to
hook up cable and stop watching TV. About a month before the election,
I installed an antenna in order to receive CBS, NBC and the local
Fox/ABC affiliate. It may just have been the result of my abstinence
from the great electronic teat that made me see things with a new
sensibility, but the quality of the writing appearsseems to have
descended to a level I never would have thought imaginable. It looks
as if they are attempting to disguise these script defects with
increased production budgets. The cinematography, lighting and editing
are first-rate (for those who even care to notice) - at a level
comparable to feature film budgets. Prime-time programming consists
mainly of a menu of meagerly scripted “reality shows,” gory, Grand
Gignol crime dramas about autopsies that would make a Caesar lose his
lunch and blatantly chauvinistic, pro military programs that presume
to drum up support for US Imperialism. I was appalled to see that
David Mammet is the head writer on a show called “The Unit.” In the
episode in question, he shamelessly propagandized for the necessity and
the desirability of a covert, paramilitary, husband and wife (? !) hit
squad that operates above the law – any law. I saw the heroes (and
they are portrayed as heroes) kill a number of innocent people with
malice and impunity. Sickening! It was so badly written that it
actually began to trigger my gag reflex. I watched on in stupefied
amazement. One particularly gross bit of ham-handed scripting lauded
our macho troops who are “…defending our freedoms in Iraq” and
characterized all who question our president in a time of war as
pampered, cowardly anti-patriots. Even the Commander in Chief could
have written a screenplay with more craft and subtly.
David Mammet! My gods, if he needs the money that badly someone should
take up a collection. I will contribute, even if only for the sake of
the good old days back in Chicago when he was a struggling playwright
worth listening to. Has anyone else seen this show? I hate to base
such a harsh judgment of the whole series on only one viewing.
[6]
Some of it may be blamed on the time constraints. Chomsky eschewed
appearances on US TV because he says it is impossible to conduct any
in-depth discussion under the format available.
[7] "’Independent’ media in America is better called ‘starvation’
media: journalists that want to do real reporting don't survive long -
Bob Parry, who uncovered the Iran-Contra scandal, lost his job at the
AP, Seymour Hersh was pushed off the New York Times - and I'm in exile.
Investigative reporting is a quick career path to disemployment. The
'dependent' media is killing us with poisoned lies.” -Greg Palast
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/051103B.shtml
[8]
Many I spoke with told me they would not vote for Claire McCaskill
because she was Pro-Abortion. I said that that was a truly silly
notion. Claire is not Pro-Abortion. NO one is Pro-Abortion. The only
real argument was about the most effective way to prevent as many
abortions as possible and guaranteeing that those abortions that were
performed would be done safely and legally. I reminded them that,
according to their own definition, Senator Jim Talent himself was
Pro-Abortion because, if the life of the fetus is that inherently
sacred, why is he willing to make an exception in the case of rape and
incest? I don’t think I really won any converts with this argument
because, in the case of the hard-core Pro-Lifers, we are by any
assessment, dealing with some pretty stupid, inflexible people with a
lot of wax in their ears.
[9]
“The war on terror is less -- it is occasionally military, and it will
be, and it will continue to be for a long time. And we will need the
best-trained and the most well-equipped and the most capable military,
such as we have today.
But it's primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that
requires cooperation around the world -- the very thing this
administration is worst at. And most importantly, the war on terror is
also an engagement in the Middle East economically, socially,
culturally, in a way that we haven't embraced, because otherwise we're
inviting a clash of civilizations.
And I think this administration's arrogant and ideological policy is
taking America down a more dangerous path. I will make America safer
than they are.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/debatetranscript29.html
These timid, meager, carefully parsed assertions made by Kerry during
the Presidential primary debates in the lead up to the 2004 election
were greeted with hysterical shrieks of horror by the Right who
instantly accused Kerry of being “soft of terrorism.” Kerry learned
his lesson and, to my knowledge, never brought up this point again.
This approach, which could have been the key issue of the election, if
explained properly, became less than a forgotten footnote in a
remarkably mismanaged and completely ineffective political campaign.
Lesson learned.
[10]
“Well, the fact of the matter is the United States was never interested
in disarming Iraq. The whole Security Council resolution that created
the UN weapons inspections and called upon Iraq to disarm was focused
on one thing and one thing only, and that is a vehicle for the
maintenance of economic sanctions that were imposed in August 1990
linked to the liberation of Kuwait. We liberated Kuwait, I participated
in that conflict. And one would think, therefore, the sanctions should
be lifted.
The United States needed to find a vehicle to continue to contain
Saddam because the CIA said all we have to do is wait six months and
Saddam is going to collapse on his own volition. That vehicle is
sanctions. They needed a justification; the justification was
disarmament. They drafted a Chapter 7 resolution of the United Nations
Security Council calling for the disarmament of Iraq and saying in
Paragraph 14 that if Iraq complies, sanctions will be lifted. Within
months of this resolution being passed--and the United States drafted
and voted in favor of this resolution--within months, the President,
George Herbert Walker Bush, and his Secretary of State, James Baker,
are saying publicly, not privately, publicly that even if Iraq complies
with its obligation to disarm, economic sanctions will be maintained
until which time Saddam Hussein is removed from power.
That is proof positive that disarmament was only useful insofar as it
contained through the maintenance of sanctions and facilitated regime
change. It was never about disarmament, it was never about getting rid
of weapons of mass destruction. It started with George Herbert Walker
Bush, and it was a policy continued through eight years of the Clinton
presidency, and then brought us to this current disastrous course of
action under the current Bush Administration.”
- Scott Ritter
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051114/ritter
Editor’s note:
I’m sure all Americans are genuinely sorry about the collateral damage.
Certainly the 800,000 innocent Iraqi children that died as a direct
result of the application of our sanctions will forgive us.
[11]
U.S. Senate and House pass pro-war resolutions in support of Israel.
“On July 18th, 2006, the U.S. Senate passed WITHOUT DISSENT (!)
S.RES.534, that gave unequivocal support for Israel's actions,
described as "self-defense" its blatant disregard for international and
humanitarian law. The House only did only a little better, passing a
similar resolution, H. Res. 921, with 8 Congresspeople voting NO and
some voting "Present".” (CAP emphasis mine)
http://www.stopaipac.org/policies.htm
After the passage of these resolutions, which essentially endorsed
Israel’s lawless invasion and destruction of Lebanon, the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) bragged about how it “owned”
the US Congress.
[12]
I think the Rapture is a great idea. Imagine a world suddenly without
any Born-Again Christians. Sounds like paradise to me!
[13]
“In June, 1992, the Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. At
this conference, 153 countries (including the United States) signed
treaties to curb the damage to the environment from human economic
activities. This conference was attended by George H. W. Bush, then
President of the United States of America, who proved resistant to
efforts to make deep and lasting changes that could ensure protection
of the world on which all nations depend. His reasoning? "The American
way of life is not negotiable". In 2002, a 10-year follow-up to the
Earth Summit was held, and President George W. Bush decided not to
attend, sending Colin Powell in his place. White House press secretary
Ari Fleischer was asked prior to the event whether the new president
would be asking Americans to reduce consumption in order to reduce
pollution. The answer was no. In fact, the comment made at this time
was "The American way of life is a blessed one". It is to be protected
at all costs. In fact, international policy makers were asked by the
United States to endorse that goal. The rest of the world was being
asked to sign onto the right of Americans to consume the resources of
the world without consideration of the consequences for the rest of the
world. Is it any wonder Colin Powell was heckled and booed as he
attempted to make his speech?
The American way of life is not negotiable. The American way of life is
a blessed one. Even worse than the fact that these grotesque statements
were made in such a forum is the fact that Americans don't seem to find
anything wrong with them. It seems that the American public agrees.”
http://www.faulkingtruth.com/Articles/GlobalWarning/1024.html
Ed: There is no way on earth to save an arrogant fool like this or his
demented progeny - or fools like us, so thirsty for death.
Post a Comment