Saturday, January 13, 2007

How Bush Aided Al Qaeda and How the Democrats Can End the War

Bush antes up the lives of US soldiers to play out the two deuces he holds. Cynically sacrificing American lives, a treasonous and illegitimate "President" hopes to salvage his legacy -a legacy not worth salvaging at any price on any bet with any hand. Legally, the illegitimate "President" who lied the nation into the commission of an ongoing war crime compounds his venal crimes and ventures once again into high treason.

Why did Bush lose the war in its very planning, inception, and execution? Greed? Arrogance? Idiocy? Vainglorious visions of conquest and dictatorship? At this point -who cares? We must all work together to bring this miscreant and liar to justice in the Senate and, later, in the international court.

The record is clear when seen outside the prism of mass media -especially Fox and all the lying minions who toil there. The facts are these:
  • The Iraq war is lost. Iraq itself may be a lost cause. Bush broke it irreparably.
  • Iraq has become a virtual automated recruiting machine for Al Qaeda in those places where it actually exists. Moreover, Al Qaeda is now joined by numerous other groups who are similarly inspired by Bush's ongoing crimes. Bin Laden's number one ally is Bush's hamfisted conduct of middle east policy. The failed war in Iraq is only the most publicized aspect of it. Bin Laden -literally a creation of the CIA -has been made a gift of Iraq by Bush. Bin Laden and his wannabes alone have benefited from this most tragic war, this most tragic failure in American history.
  • There may nothing left Bush now but to bow and deign to talk to the villified Al Qaeda.
When the surge fails (and it will) Iran wil fill the vacuum having grown stronger as a result of Bush's counter-productive campaign of villification. As expected Iran has already formed an alliance with the Shias of Iraq -an outcome sure to alienate Bush's Sunni allies in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.

If Bush's goal was the usurpation of Iraqi oil, it is hard to see how he might deliver those resources to his cabal of oil barons when both Sunnis and Shias oppose him and his evil campaign to make the Middle East safe for the theft of oil -not Democracy.

Some 70 percent of all Americans oppose the surge. Democrats, therefore, must seize the moral high ground by cutting off funding for additional troops and additional campaigns. Democrats -it has been suggested -can tax our way out of the war with a "Victory Over Terror" tax levied on incomes of $5 million a year or more. Levied on all income, it would include stock options, jet plane rides, company-paid-for health and life insurance, retirement programs, golden parachutes, the use of apartments in Paris, cars and drivers.

The GOP will hate it and, therefore, it must be good. Those targeted have enjoyed the big GOP tax cuts since the days of Ronald Reagan who made them feel good about being greedy. This group has never been expected to sacrifice in times of war; rather, they have been enriched by it repeatedly. It's time to put a stop to it. Power to the people'

To close, the following is the video referred to by Sadbuttrue in the comments to this article:


,
, ,

21 comments:

Sebastien Parmentier said...

Picked up in the NYTimes commentaries about the presidential address from an anynymous:

I agree that sending troops is wrong. I’m not a usual poster, so pardon if I’m bringing something up that might siund a bit paranoid. I’m in NYC. My Time Warner Cable DVRs in 2 rooms each programmed to record plenty of TV all the time. I would never, however set either up to record a presidential address. On their own, both cable boxes programmed in advance were scheduled to record this. AND the cable box/DVRs- both of them- would not allow me to cancel the recording. Am I paranoid or did Time Warner force me to record/watch the address. Anyone else in NY experience this?

Now comrade, please stand up for The Minute of Hatred...

Len Hart said...

Any one who is not paranoid in these times is not entirely sane.

In the meantime, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas warns from the podium that Bush may fabricate a pretext to attack Iran. Bush inspires, exploits and feeds upon fear, prejudice and hate. These are the worst of times. May we all survive his sorry ass.

SadButTrue said...

"It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society." -- j. krishnamurti

Nate over at Get In Their Face! has posted google's recently released full-length version of Bill Moyer's 1987 documentary 'The Secret Government.' It might be most accurate to say that anyone who is not paranoid in these times is ill-informed. This 90-minute video is the cure for that, and will increase your paranoia dramatically.
The Secret Government (this links to Nate for the video)

I have some observations on the film in my latest post: The Secret Government (this links to my comments.)
Excerpt: "As the result of the incomplete investigation, we have no assurance that anything more than the tip of the Secret Government's iceberg of activities ever came to light. Barely enough to cool the drinks at a Republican country club function. One would be naive to think that this 'stand-alone, self-financing' organization would just go away. None of its members ever showed anything but pride in their activities, which by the way were very lucrative. There was considerable financial motive for the gang to keep on doing what they had already been caught red-handed at and, having escaped unpunished, there was little incentive for them to stop. As a result this video looks like history, but feels eerily like current events."

If you would prefer to watch in fullscreen mode, you'll have to go directly to google videos: The Secret Government - Google Video

romunov said...

"...later, in the international court."
I doubt the American people are able to do that. We are talking about people who picked on French fries for not supporting them (and guess who turned out to be right).

One of major goals of this war is the government contracts, and the War machine wins either way, Dem or Rep. The Gov will still buy from the same people no matter the color of the Hill. And Iran was the target all along. Who benefits?

BenMerc said...

Great post & link Sad...Is this not one of the series of shows that got Moyers "pushed out" of PBS? When will we see this archived material up-dated and tied into the "now"...and back on PBS at prime time broadcast? Nothing like getting the dander up watching these elitist subversives in action, and how it all was swept under the rug of cover, as the press anointed them all as "American Heroes"

Sebastien Parmentier said...

Olbermann destroys Bush:

http://www.boucheabush.blogspot.com/

Sebastien Parmentier said...

You can really sense that the American democratic experience is at the end of the rope as its president declared in the January 14's "60 minutes" television interview", ``I fully understand they [ the American people through their representatives ] could try to stop me from doing it, but I’ve made my decision. And were going forward.”

And what is even more alarming is to hear our vice president, sounding darker than ever, who walks around wearing earplugs, saying that Democrats (and the dissenting republicans), “... have absolutely nothing to offer in its place.” Dick must immediately call his cable company with his big closed caption malfunction, because I remember having spent a whole day watching C-Span in my hotel room in New York, the day after Bush's alarming speech. And for what I saw, from left to right, the congressional raws were bubbling with great new ideas for pulling our troops out of this Iraqi mess while avoiding any “cut and run”strategy.

But, as the best ideas came, for instance, from magnificent orators such as Jim McDermott (D-Washington in case you wouldn't know) or Dennis Kucinich (come on, you know him, at least!), just a few, alas, took the former independent, seriously. For me, that is the real tragedy going on in this chocking democracy: the more passion one representative brings to an issue, the less consideration he – or she – receives. Passion and oratory skills are amalgamated to those of conspiracy theory believers and other so called “screaming liberals”. In today's politic, the louder one speaks, the less this one is heard.

In a dictatorship, the response to dissenting is either torture or death or usually both. In our incapacitated democracy, the response of this government to the loud dissents of three quarters of all Americans is, “whatever !”. And this is this exact answer I heard from Bush and Cheney this last couple of days.

This is a new kind of dictatorship indeed. We live in new kind of civilization in which the elite, the super-duper-rich, the clan, or whatever you wish to call them, have engineered and perfected an amazing and extremely effective social machine fueled on bread and games. After the second World War, Orwell could have never imagine a totalitarian dictatorship ruling without the use of an iron fist within its own borders over its own citizens, even less so with the today's government imaginative magic of an artificial prosperity and 24 hours high definition entertainment that induce political drowsiness to its subjects while digesting.

Orwell was wrong also to believe that some kind of “Ministry of truth” can only happen in some far future. Thirty two years before publishing his devastating masterpiece, 1984, Orwell already forgot that Hollywood had released a monstrously racist propaganda which has been received with glee and cheers by American moviegoers : Even president Woodrow Wilson said of the pro-KKK movie, "Birth of a Nation", “It is like writing history with Lightning. And my only regret is that it is all so terribly true.”

Back to this administration. Dick Cheney said today that he did not believe Democrats would try to cut off money for the war. Dick lives in La-la-land. Or does he: He declared that an anticipated non-binding resolution to oppose a troop increase “would not affect the president’s ability to carry out his policy.” Really? With what money?

But that is not the right question. The right question should be, if Democrats and probably half of the Republicans cut off the money to finance this military surge, doesn't it mean, constitutionally, that the notion of check and balance is not just about cutting the financing of this presidential action, but also that this congressional action is the very voice, via proxy, of the American people who is sanctioning this presidential action? “

What-ever!”... or, “go f*** yourself!” would say Cheney. According to him, History already supports his misdeeds: Woodrow Wilson involved justly the youth of United States in the trenches of WWI against the wish of the American people; and President Franklin Roosevelt also encountered a tremendous reticence from the American citizens for entering America in WWII, before Pearl Harbor.

However, if History finds a way in the future to continue hammering the Bush administration, this one still can count on some John Smith to work hard inside the Ministry of Truth. His name is Joseph I. Lieberman: “If you cut off funding for these additional troops,” he said on NBC, “then you’ve got to accept the consequences of what I fear will be failure, collapse, full-blown civil war, ethnic cleansing on an enormous level, Iran dominating half of Iraq, Al Qaeda setting up a base in the Sunni area, and our allies throughout the region, Fatah, among the Palestinians, the government in Lebanon, the moderates, taking a beating because of the loss of Iraq to the radicals.”

Sure. If we are to believe Joe Lieberman, the next generation of college kids will learn that Nancy Pelosi was impeached for causing the most monstrous blunder in American foreign policy, resulting in a WWIII over the Middle-East...

daveawayfromhome said...

People keep saying that the President needs to be impeached, which is absolutely true. But first, so as to deflect the Conservative Spin Machine, the Iraq War needs to be investigated. Thoroughly. At that point, I suspect that the public will be gathering outside the Whitehouse with tar, feathers, and steel rails.
A similar two-step approach needs to be used to cut off funding for the war. Step one: make all budgeting a part of the regular budget, not an emergency appropriation. Nothing like listing war costs along side everything else to make it more unpopular. Then cut the funding.

Sebastien Parmentier said...

The path to war against Iran,
chapter two.

Len Hart said...

I have hopes that the Iraq war will be investigated ...the criminality leading up to the war as well as the criminal conduct of it. With regard to the budget, I favor finely drawn Constitutional restraints on the executive -restraints with teeth in them. Specifically -no more "supplemental appropriations" coupled with additional restraints on the war powers of the executive. Indeed, the spigot needs to be cut now.

Len Hart said...

Disturbing news from the Arab Times. An excerpt:

"US military strike on Iran seen by April ’07; Sea-launched attack to hit oil, N-sites
KUWAIT CITY: Washington will launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007, say sources. The attack will be launched from the sea and Patriot missiles will guard all oil-producing countries in the region...."

...

"...the source said “they have chosen April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran and Syria before April 2007."

Bush is still trying to start World War III.

Len Hart said...

Dave, indeed...the run up to the war in Iraq is nothing less than an act of high treason on the part of many Bush admin officials and, of course, Bush himself. Let's hope the Democrats investigate, expose and impeach before Bush embroils the entire world in another BIG one.

Sebastien Parmentier said...

It make sense, Len. I remember having told you that March is in fact the month to watch. The French intellingence told Israel that after March '07, the Iranian course to seek a nuclear bomb would be unstoppable. They're already too way ahead.

The many article - see the one I posted earlier - denote this escalation. We can't say that we are not warned anymore. The war with Iran is going to happen no matter what. Actually, I wonder if Kissinger's tactic is nothing else but to create a real mess in Iraq in order to have it spill over to Iran. Thus, Iran would be attacked by three front: Israel, the US... and the Iraqi sunnis.

Sebastien Parmentier said...

Some news from Jesusland...

SadButTrue said...

Thanks for posting that video Len. People have to realize that it hasn't been the last six years, but the last SIXTY that the slow and steady erosion of democracy has been underway. (The documentary starts, chronologically at least, with Truman's signing of the National Security Act of 1947) Talk about your boiling frog analogy.

-They caught Nixon red-handed trying to subvert the constitution in the Watergate era. It was pretty thoroughly investigated, but a lot of the players got off on technicalities, or had sentences reduced or suspended due to immunity deals tied to testimony. The message sent: "Attack the constitution and you'll probably get off scot free."

-They caught the Iran/Contra conspirators (I believe they were acting under Poppy's authority - he was never officially indicted. I believed the gormless Reagan when he said he knew nothing) - again red-handed. This time the charges should have included treason. They subverted the military chain of command and diverted US high-tech weapons to a declared enemy for profit, for crying out loud. This time there was a palpable whitewash, nowhere near as thorough as the Watergate investigations. The few members of the conspiracy that were convicted got off again on technicalities or were pardoned by George Herbert Walker Bush. Can no-one see the irony here?

Where are they now? Kissinger, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter all connected to the present administration's crimes. G. Gordon Liddy and Ollie North talking heads at FOX "news", selling it to the public as 'business as usual.' Part and parcel of the ongoing mission to destroy civil liberties and turn America into a police state. The secret government is still in operation. The only thing is, what was being done covertly then is now being done openly, even blatantly. And they've dropped the 'secret' from the name. It's just called The Government now.

Len said..."I have hopes that the Iraq war will be investigated." The abuses increase exponentially with each Republican administration. No corrective actions are taken when the Democrats are in power. If the investigations are not thorough, open and consequential there is no America anymore. Just a vast expanse of land separating Canada from Mexico.

BTW, check out this cool Flash from POAC. "Why would anyone want to destroy a government of the people, by the people, for the people?"

damien said...

I'm known to be something of a panic merchant, but at the moment I think it's well justified. Bob Gates has just come out and confirmed that the military buildup is in respect of Iran. This whole thing has a very dangerous feel to it. We are likely to see the same bluster, hurry-up and disinformation from the Bush admin that we have seen in the past. The war will be presented as a fait accompli. I don't like it one little bit. Events are moving too fast. There is no meaningful public engagement with the idea that the US and Israel fully intend to attack Iran. Condoleeza's nonsense statements to Congress are a measure of the ongoing contempt by this admin for anyone other than their own immediate circle. I am not sure that Congress can carry through on any of it's threats to Bush if the war is actually in motion. The public will swing behind the US leadership.

Here in Australia we have wall to wall cricket and tennis, the Asia conference and a load of distracting local issues. I imagine the public in Britain and the US are not faring much better. There is no meaningful public engagement on the Iran issue and I expect that any public discussion that may eventually take place will do so in a fact-free zone, full of rhetoric about 'nuclear threats from jihadists'. Bush is totalitarian. Hitler comparisons are appropriate. The public has no sense of the cultural markers that point to totalitarian development. All of the current developments have a very bad feel about them.

Sebastien Parmentier said...

We are told that Condi is touring in Israel for some peace process talk. I don't believe it one bit. I believe she is over ther carring the message from Cheney that Israel has the green light and all the support they need.

damien said...

I enjoyed this. It must be some moral failing in me that I am unable to find any 'good faith' in the Bush regime. I don't see accidents and policy failures. That would imply incompetence. And when it comes to stealing from the public coffers these guys are nothing if not competent. So I'm left to fall back on malice and 'mission accomplished'. They're more sinister than we would allow our own good natures to admit. Most of us just don't think like them.

Len Hart said...

Saddbuttrue wrote: "If the investigations are not thorough, open and consequential there is no America anymore. Just a vast expanse of land separating Canada from Mexico."

Indeed! I have had my fill of whitewashes and half baked investigations for show.

damien said...

Those interested in the US / al Qaeda connections should look up Wolfgang Bohringer, Ali Mohammed and
Yasin Qadi. They're the real islamic terrorists. And the're all walking round free as a bird with full US support. Any of those names ring a bell? I thought not. Most people wouldn't recognise an islamic terrorist if they bit them in the bum. It's a baloney war on terror as long as the foundations are maintained by the US government for their own use.

Anonymous said...

hey dante lee, I knew I would find you here, pick up your phone!.