"Propaganda is a soft weapon; hold it in your hands too long, and it will move about like a snake, and strike the other way." -- Anouilh
Bush hoisted himself above the rest of the nation Tuesday as he
ripped into Democrats and others who dared to question the scope of his power in prosecuting his manufactured 'war on terror'. The man who was president at the moment when our nation suffered its worst attack since Pearl Harbor, and who has let the prime orchestrators of that attack run free for over five years, was taunting his detractors at republican fundraisers Tuesday with his newest vile character attack in the latest installment of his fear and smear campaign; the likes of which would make Joe McCarthy cry foul.
Time and time again, the Democrats want to have it both ways," Bush complained in a calculated line , repeated at the next republican fundraiser. "They talk tough on terror, but when it comes time -- when their votes are counted, their softer side comes out," he said.
What could Bush possibly be talking about? Could it be the majority Democratic opposition to the torture and detention bill? The legislation, in it's conception, was as much of a denial of Bush's own aspirations for unlimited authority to detain and prosecute without any measure of justice or due process at all. Still, it eventually developed into it's own special evil, and his republican enablers in Congress gave Bush even more imperial gifts to enhance his increasingly autocratic rule. That vote gave Bush the swagger he used to lie to his republican crowd and claim he's on one side defending the nation against some unidentified threat, and Democrats on the other side letting 'terrorists' go and putting the nation at risk of some secret attack he says the CIA's torture foiled.
"The Democrats in the United States Senate need to explain to the American people which of the attacks that the CIA program stopped would they have been willing to let go forward," Bush told the crowd. We got a clear record on this issue," he said, "We know this program is making Americans safer, and we're not going to allow the Democrats in Congress to take it away.
Bush has yet to explain why he let al-Qaeda operate cells within our own country, under his nose, as intelligence reports flagging the growing threat were waved off by him, and by his unconcerned and otherwise pre-occupied advisers. Rice says she was unaware . . . doesn't recall . . . doesn't remember the meeting where CIA director Tenet laid out, before Bush's then-National Security Adviser, warnings of an imminent attack from al-Qaeda forces. Nothing to Rice appeared "actionable" to her, or to her boss, Bush, about a Presidential Daily Briefing entitled, 'Bin-Laden Determined to Strike Within the U.S.',which surfaced a full month before the 9-11 attacks.
The 'clear record' of Bush's stewardship of our national security is a tragedy of continuing failures; a blundering overstretch of our military defenses; and an arrogant refusal to change course, even as 16 intelligence agencies warn that his militarism is actually increasing the risks to the nation, instead of lessening them as he repeatedly claims. If he spent as much time reading his own administration's intelligence reports as he does listening to Rove and Kissinger, he would have actually done something, anything, about the threats from al-Qaeda which passed through his office more than once before the September 11 attacks.
Bush has yet to explain why he let bin-Laden and his accomplices escape at Tora-Bora, and why he's still at-large influencing and inspiring a flood of recruits encouraged by his five years of taunts and nose-thumbing videos. Bush has yet to explain why he diverted a historic chunk of our nation's resources and humanity from that pursuit to invade and occupy Iraq. He's yet to explain why he has devoted only 20,000 troops to Afghanistan and the hunt for bin-Laden, and is busy escalating the 140,000 troops he has committed to Iraq. Time and time again, Bush has proclaimed Iraq as the 'center' of his terror war, as he repeated in his calculated speeches Tuesday at his republican fundraisers.
"They say that Iraq is a distraction in the war on terror. "I strongly disagree," Bush said. I think Iraq is a central front in the war on terror, and we must defeat the enemy in Iraq if we want America to be secure."
It's all so convenient for Bush to claim Iraq as the center of his terror war. He's closed down the al-Qaeda unit which was supposed to be coordinating the search for bin-Laden. He's already gotten whatever he could torture out of the 14 prisoners the CIA gave up to Gitmo. Iraq's the one place Bush can point to where he can direct our troops around like toy soldiers while he postures as protector from the violence he's recklessly stirring up. "There are some who feel like that conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is 'bring them on'," Bush told reporters in the White House Roosevelt Room in 2003
Sadly, American soldiers serve as targets in Iraq, and their lives are no less important than ours here in the states. Inviting attacks on Americans overseas is an amazing retreat from the peaceful influence of a great nation of justice; humbled by bloody, devastating wars; and witnessed to the power of liberty, and to the freedom inherent in the constitution we would wisely defend with our peaceful acts of mercy, charity, and tolerance. But, Bush is unconcerned with the safety of those he places in the way of his "ideological struggle" that he wages with the lives of our soldiers. Over 2700 U.S. soldiers' lives have been sacrificed by Bush in Iraq to satisfy his imperialistic ambition to own Iraq for his own aggrandizement, and dominate the Middle East by virtue his ability to direct the overwhelming force of our nation's military from there, to unleash wanton death and destruction across sovereign borders, on a whim.
It is as a result of the spoils of our political system, as well as the collective cowardice of Congress, that one party has been able to prop Bush up and enable him to pilfer almost every measure of power and control that was on his wish list. The torture and detention legislation is no exception. It's an election-season document; its constitutional value not worth any more than the scant attention Bush gives any law. It's not terrorists that Bush is interested in at all. He's eagerly willing to shame the office he was gifted with by the American people as he uses the security of our nation as a mere pawn in his cynical political campaign to hold on to the power.
If Iraq is truly the 'center' of his focus in his 'war on terror', then we have no hope in securing our nation; not if he holds to his promise to stay in Iraq "as long as he's president." The American people should have had enough of being called "soft" and "weak" for disbelieving Bush's lies about Iraq. They're accused in his fear and smear campaign (along with their Democratic representatives in Congress) of putting the country at risk of terrorism - like Bush himself allowed in 2001- for demanding a check on the unconstitutional power his republican enablers are granting him under the pretext of 'protecting' us from the chaos that his own military bungling has caused.
Nothing could be softer than the actual public support for the course that Bush and his republican 'party of fear' have taken. In the Sept. 29-Oct. 2 CNN poll, 58% of respondents said the Bush regime lied to them when they repeatedly claimed the occupation of Iraq was going swimmingly.
Fifty-seven percent in the poll say the conflict has made the U.S. less safe from terrorism; unconvinced by Bush's boasting that his policies and actions have "made America safer and the world a better place." Sixty-one percent say they oppose the war, and 66% percent say they disapprove of Bush's handling of the occupation in Iraq. Bush's answer?
"The first thing I would ask the Democrats is, do they truly believe the world would be better off with Saddam Hussein still in power?" Bush asked the fundraiser crowd. "And if so, they need to say it loud and clear -- because I know full well that this state sponsor of terror, a person who had used weapons of mass destruction, a person who invaded his neighbors, the sworn enemy of the United States, someone who was shooting at U.S. pilots, someone who defied the United Nations resolution -- removing him from power has made America safer and the world a better place."
Bush is out there on his own, fighting his imaginary 'war on terror', against the will of the American people; against the very citizens in Iraq that he claims to have 'liberated'. As he persists, the 'spawning' of recruits in Iraq into active militarized resistance to Bush's occupation continues unabated; fueled by the American targets Bush is so willing to provide as a buffer between Iraqis and Maliki's puppet regime.
No one, except for his fearmongering followers, believes Bush's reasons for diverting to Iraq from the hunt for bin-Laden and his accomplices in Afghanistan. That hasn't dissuaded Bush from using the words of the terrorist to gin up voter's fears as he warns that rejecting his 'party of fear' at the polls will cause terrorists to attack again. It's all the more self-serving to raise the specter of violence from al-Qaeda as his administration is doing next to nothing to catch and prosecute them.
Not a word of dissent was heard from Bush on the campaign trail against Sen. Bill Frist this week, as the Majority Leader of the republican-controlled Senate suggested unilateral surrender to the Taliban, and recommended the 9-11 terrorist-supporting members join the Afghan government. Do Bill Frist and Bush truly believe the world would be better off with the Taliban still in power?
If so, they need to 'say it loud and clear'. Bush can't have it both ways. Either he can persist in making the risks of violent reprisals to our country worse by continuing to occupy Iraq, or he can pull our soldiers out of there and concentrate the nearly $10b a month he's spending on Iraq alone on honoring his original promise to Americans to pursue and capture bin-Laden, "dead or alive", and eliminate the sources of inspiration for vengeful aggression against us.
Bush is arguing that he should be allowed to yoke generations to his "call of the 21st century;" to his "ideological struggle" that he imagines he's waging in Iraq, with our compromised soldiers doing all of the fighting and dying for him. All he needs to complete his reign of torture, indefinite detentions, warrantless surveillance of random Americans, calculated collateral killings of innocents caught in the way of his swaggering militarism is the complicity of the Americans, voting for his republican enablers in the November congressional elections.
All we need to put the necessary checks and balances in place, in front of his unbridled power-grab, are our votes for our Democratic candidates against the republican enablers. If we want leaders in Washington who understand the enemy we face and will provide the correct focus and commitment necessary to protect us, if we want people in Washington who are not going to divert us from the hunt for the 9-11 perpetrators again, making us less safe and less secure, you make sure you send our Democratic candidates back to the United States Congress.
Our county's fate is truly in our hands now.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
