Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Unable to 'win', Bush Re-names the Enemy

Don Rumsfeld said that you go to war with the army you have --not the army you might want. Bush, losing his war against an enemy he didn't want simply re-named it. As a National Intelligence Estimate revealed that terrorism had gotten worse since 911, Bush renames an insurgency (against which it was losing) "al Qaeda in Iraq" against which he hopes to win. Re-naming is easier than winning. The GOP rationale goes like this: if the GOP can change the terminology, a war lost on the ground might yet be won in the focus group. It's the GOP way.
When people hear "al-Qaeda," it's natural that they think of Osama bin Laden and the Sept. 11 attacks. The insurgency, sectarian violence and opposition to the US occupation in Iraq are not about fighting al-Qaeda, but that's how Bush's fiasco there is being branded.

McClatchy Newspapers' Baghdad correspondent Mike Drummond exposed the sinister rhetorical shift, noting in a recent report, "US forces continue to battle Shiite militia in the south, as well as Shiite militia and Sunni insurgents in Baghdad. Yet America's most wanted enemy at the moment is Sunni al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Bush administration's recent shift toward calling the enemy in Iraq 'al-Qaeda' rather than an insurgency may reflect the difficulty in maintaining support for the war at home more than it does the nature of the enemy in Iraq."

--Al-Qaeda In Iraq Bush's Creation, Niagra Fall Reporter

"Al Qaeda in Iraq" might have been brilliant had it not been so transparent. In three little words, Bush wraps up a complicated lie of several hundred words. The man who "read three Shakespeares" and a Camus in a single weekend would have problems with that many words. Bush's consultants hope that just three little words might make the people forget that al Qaeda had not been in Iraq until the US attacked and invaded. It's the US in Iraq that is the problem, that has done the most damage, taken the most innocent lives. It is the US in Iraq which is a terrorist recruitment poster. Does it really matter what Bush chooses to call his victims?

Bush's response to criticism and opposition is typically GOP: blame the critics. About our nation's own intelligence agencies White House spokesman Peter Watkins is quoted in the Nation as having said "their hatred for freedom and liberty did not develop overnight. Those seeds were planted decades ago." This position is outrageous and incompetent. This utterly failed administration obviously lashes out blindly, stupidly at any criticism of his utterly failed and incompetent policies.

Though Bush has never been right, he is, like "big brother", never wrong. He's not "resolute", he's stubborn, stupid and pig headed. What are the odds that a man so lacking in talent or intelligence is so otherwise infallible and wise? Bush is wrong about terrorism. Bush's own criminal administration is the cause of it. He's not winning in Iraq, he's lost it. Winning implies an exit strategy that Bush doesn't have. Re-naming an "enemy" is not the same as defeating one.

For all those reasons, Bush's homestretch is no time to relax. Bush's zeal with respect to Islam consolidated radical theocratic zealots at home but inflamed and radicalized theocratic zealots abroad. Shakespeare was more eloquent. A plague o' both your houses.

His failure in Iraq and his sabre rattling toward Iran make this period the most dangerous in his occupancy. Despite having been thoroughly discredited --not by critics but by facts --Bush persists in waging a messianic campaign. Until a new GOP focus group had done its work, Bush called our enemies "evil doers". I always found it interesting that Bush targeted only those "evil doers" who were oil rich. Poorer "evil doers" get a pass. The lesson the world learned from Bush is simply this: if you wish to do evil, liquidate your oil assets.

If we can avoid a nuclear holocaust --despite Bush's best efforts to effect a nuclear armageddon -- it will be a relief to see the end of Dick "Darth" Cheney, a goulish, snarling specter of no humanity and less good will. The list of those already departed this evil administration include John Ashcroft, a baritone whose tones we could bear no more easily than his contempt for the rules of evidence, due process, and or freedom of speech. Also gone is Al Gonzales who got the job because Bush wished to appear friendly to the fastest growing population segment in the US. Gonzales was Ashcroft with a tan and just as much antipathy to the principles of our founding --the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the presumption of innocence.

It would seem that all Bushies have problems with the Fourth Amendment, about which the Bush line was that "reasonable suspicion" not "probable cause" was the standard upon which investigations and/or arrests were made. Not surprisingly, the Bushies are dead wrong. All one need do to end this stupid debate is to simply read the Fourth Amendment for one's self.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment IV, Bill of Rights, US Constitution

Given the record of this administration, this Orwellian nightmare, it is surprising that the actual text of the Bill of Rights is still available. Perhaps, the de-centralized nature of information is the only thing not anticipated by Orwell, who foresaw, it seems, every other outrage to civilization, Democracy, and the spirit of free inquiry and truth.

Bush who cannot pronounce "Machiavellian" ought not indulge Machiavellian machinations. That Bush thinks himself smart proves he's not. Bush labels "terrorist" anyone who disagrees with his stupid policies, his incompetent regime, his illegal war and occupation. Author E.L. Doctorow got it right when he called Bush the "unfeeling President". The lack of "feelings", the utter lack of empathy describes evil itself. And that's what he have soiling the White House with venom.

Doctorow might have added that Bush is also lazy and incurious. His arrogance is inversely proportional to his intelligence. Many world leaders have been liars but none so transparent. I want to play poker with Bush and then retire. Bush will leave a legacy of state-approved torture, illegal wiretapping and domestic surveillance, concentration camps, kidnappings, the coddling of corporate polluters.


The Creation of Doctorow's "Ragtime"

Additional Resources







Why Conservatives Hate America



Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine

8 comments:

SadButTrue said...

The bigger question today is, "Can America be restored?" - A cloture vote on the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act failed in the Senate today, with 44 Senators (including one 'independent', Joe Lieberman, who still wants to be identified as a Democrat.)

These traitors all swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Hanging's too good for them, IMO.

Diane B said...

I have been saying this for awhile,that I realize our Country is in dire straits Economically, politically, and morally. Our people are not able to come together at a time when there is so much need for change.Makes me wonder, if we will be able to survive, what is ahead of us as a Nation.

Look we allowed Bush, to take away our civil liberties, with out even caring as a people. For some crazy reason, many people think its for our own well being, and protection, that Bush wiretaps our phone and reads our emails. Amazing!

These unbelievable tax breaks for the rich, while you and I go with out. Charging to us and future generations of Americans these Mountains of debt, if they choose to still be Americans, after the complete financial collapse of our Country.

Our people realized much of this, but preferred to be red state, blue states instead of the United States. We did not come together then, when we could have pulled our selves out of this mess. Now, I'm afraid its to late and were in for a lot of pain as a people.

I wonder, if we will be able to come together as a Nation, for to survive as the United States, we must truly want to be a whole Country, not red states or blues states.

Len Hart said...

SadButTrue said...

The bigger question today is, "Can America be restored?" - A cloture vote on the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act failed in the Senate today, with 44 Senators (including one 'independent', Joe Lieberman, who still wants to be identified as a Democrat.)

Indeed! That's why I've been un-enthusiastic about Democrats. The nation had never needed true leadership more. We didn't get it. This vote is a betrayal.

I support a revolution. The principles of the Constitution are worth fighting for. The current government can be PROVEN to illegitimate and unlawful. I am sad for the US.

Diane B said...

Our people are not able to come together at a time when there is so much need for change.Makes me wonder, if we will be able to survive, what is ahead of us as a Nation.

Well, I no longer believe in miracles.

These unbelievable tax breaks for the rich, while you and I go with out.

There is a famous pictures of late 19th Century "robber barons" feasting lavishly, adorned with laurel wreaths. They fancied themselves latter day emperors or, at least, Roman nobility. But for a brief period following FDR's administration, nothing had changed. Modern day robber barons are no less megalomaniacal.

Ironically, it was the administration of Thomas Jefferson that put the US on the road to empire with the Louisiana Purchase. But the true militarism of the US began with the Spanish-American War and most dramatically the manner in which the US quashed the rebellion in the Phillipines. In our conduct there, we see portents of things to come --US soldiers at My Lai, the US destruction of Fallujah et al.

The point being --with every "war", the rich have profited greatly. Like the empire of Rome, the US military has become the enforcement arm of America's rich and plundering robber barons.

War is a racket. It is no accident that the US militarism trends upward concurrently with the flow of wealth.

Anonymous said...

Fuzz sez...

"I want to play poker with Bush and then retire."

Wouldn't sit with your back to the door, Cowboy. And break out a fresh sealed pack before each deal. No limit Texas Hold 'Em. Should clean the schmuck out within an hour. And don't take no I.O.U's. Strictly cash or personal check. Your winnings will be blood money. Bad juju. But you could maybe use the loot to drag his ugly ass before an international War Crimes Tribunal. Then you can retire. No worries.

Len Hart said...

Fuzz sez...

But you could maybe use the loot to drag his ugly ass before an international War Crimes Tribunal. Then you can retire. No worries.

Yep! That would be priority number one. I would fund a "foundation" what would, in turn, fund a ruthless investigation of the entire Bush cabal. It would make your head swim. The collaborators and co-conspirators would find their sorry asses warming a hard straight-backed chair in a forbidding war crimes court house. If these murderous bastards never saw the light of day again, it wouldn't bother me.

BTW --it was reported some time ago that the much reported (by CNN and BBC) al Qaeda website was originally traced to Maryland. (CIA??) When the gubbmint closed down Muslim websites, the URL it used --alneda.com --was taken over by a porn site operator named Jon David.

I won't go into a long list of "whois" look ups. But --given the obvious FAKERY of the latest bin Laden tape, I would not be surprised to learn that the CIA has been operating the so-called al Qaeda website for years. They might even maintain a little TV studio where they produce all the bin Laden tapes, complete with phony, shiny black beards and lousy make up jobs.

The CIA guys are lousy TV producers.

hizzoner said...

diane b says:

"Our people are not able to come together at a time when there is so much need for change.Makes me wonder, if we will be able to survive, what is ahead of us as a Nation."

This bothers me a lot....one of the reasons that we cannot come toghether for our own good..for our own survival really is because the Neocons have gained power by purposfully dividing us into a "them vs us" mentality. As long as we remain divided, they win.

The saddest part of it is that the stakes have been raised so high that there isn't a chance for real reconciliation or compromise. There is no clear "third way" and again, like a game, once one side escalates the stakes, the other has the choices of only "up the ante" or capitulate.

sigh....

I once worked for a chief executive who was so dumb he couldn't spell "VW"...but he was shrewd. He was a master manipulator. He was "street smart". That's how I see Bush. Not completely stupid...just ...well...ignorant.

hizzhoner

Len Hart said...

hizzoner sez...

The saddest part of it is that the stakes have been raised so high that there isn't a chance for real reconciliation or compromise.

Your response to Diane_b is right on the mark. The Bush modus operandi is precisely as you have described. At some point, however, Bush will overplay his hand. Sadly, however, the tragic consequences of his brinkmanship will not be confined to Bush and his neocon cronies.

whig said...

If you are the head of a country with substantial proven oil reserves, you are placed in a very dangerous situation.

If you liquidate your oil, that is to say, accept payment for it at whatever terms the oil barons want, the money must then be substantial and if people in your country might object to this arrangement, repression seems inevitable.

There is only one answer to it, and it is to grow hemp. Hemp can replace petroleum as our energy source, and in all parts of industry where petroleum products are useful.

No hemp, no peace. And I say that, not as a threat, but as a basic fact.