So why are so many people making excuses for Mr. Bush and his officials?
Part of the answer, of course, is raw partisanship. One important difference between our current scandal and the Watergate affair is that it's almost impossible now to imagine a Republican senator asking, "What did the president know, and when did he know it?"
But even people who aren't partisan Republicans shy away from confronting the administration's dishonest case for war, because they don't want to face the implications.
After all, suppose that a politician — or a journalist — admits to himself that Mr. Bush bamboozled the nation into war. Well, launching a war on false pretenses is, to say the least, a breach of trust. So if you admit to yourself that such a thing happened, you have a moral obligation to demand accountability — and to do so in the face not only of a powerful, ruthless political machine but in the face of a country not yet ready to believe that its leaders have exploited 9/11 for political gain. It's a scary prospect.
Yet if we can't find people willing to take the risk — to face the truth and act on it — what will happen to our democracy?
posted on June 24, 2003 07:23:40 AM newBut even people who aren't partisan Republicans shy away from confronting the administration's dishonest case for war, because they don't want to face the implications.
No, American simply do not care what the reason is or even if it was "dishonest".
The majority of Americans know that in order to rout terrorism, many Arab governments in the mid east must be toppled and societies re-constituted.
Iran and Syria are next on the list, and few people care what public reasons are given for toppling these countries.
posted on June 24, 2003 07:33:15 AM new
As far as routing terrorism goes, war in the mid-east only creates more terroism...not less. Just look at Afghanistan for proof of that. The Taliban is back and strange as it may seem, we are negotiating with them!
posted on June 24, 2003 08:44:35 AM new
Your poll, that 56 percent of respondents endorsed the use of the U.S. military to block Iran from developing nuclear weapons while 38 percent opposed it, supports my allegation that most Americans are gullible. Otherwise, how could Bush and his administration along with our intelligence agencies get away with such deception or incompetence in the first two battles and now are prepared, with the continued support of Americans to go on to the third, fourth and probably fifth war?
For a country that will be spending more on war than education, the ability to interpret information is not likely to improve in the next decade.
As hate breeds terrorism, our presence in the mid-east will escalate recruitment and in a few years or sooner we will suffer again the tragedy of terrorism.
posted on June 24, 2003 08:56:18 AM newOtherwise, how could Bush and his administration along with our intelligence agencies get away with such deception or incompetence in the first two battles and now are prepared, with the continued support of Americans to go on to the third, fourth and probably fifth war?
They "got away with it" because Americans do not care what reason is publicly given for collapsing these regimes. Privately, a majority knows that these regimes must be done away with. It has nothing to do with being "gullible".
posted on June 24, 2003 09:12:02 AM new
My opinion on that subject is different than your's.
Besides ignorance, cognitive dissonance may have a bearing on how people can accept as truth such information that is glaringly false. When so many lives are lost, there is probably a psychological motivation to see the action as justifiable even though it is not -- in order to think of ourselves as "good" people.
When you say that Americans don't care what reason is publicly given, you are saying that Americans believe that lies are ok...that the end justifies the means. Although Americans may be misguided, I don't believe that most Americans can be catagorized as liers. That's just wrong.
The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. Eugene Debs
Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just. Thomas Jefferson
Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. AJ Liebling
Assassination is the extreme form of censorship. George Bernard Shaw
The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the gates and have academic tenure, judicial appointments, government grants, and control of the movies, television, and other media. Thomas Sowell
I intend to open the country up to democracy, and anyone who is against me I will jail, I will crush. President João Figueredo of Brazil, inauguration speech, 1979
posted on June 24, 2003 11:44:43 AM new
"Intelligence is not fact"...latest Orwellian info released today during Rumsfeld's press conference....so, I guess that means we're off the hook. We can say intelligence supports our need to preemtively strike any country and if we find that our intelligence is wrong later --it's perfectly ok because of course, wink, wink intelligence is not fact.
posted on June 25, 2003 08:37:30 AM new
Expert Said to Tell Legislators He Was Pressed to Distort Some Evidence
WASHINGTON, June 24 — A top State Department expert on chemical and biological weapons told Congressional committees in closed-door hearings last week that he had been pressed to tailor his analysis on Iraq and other matters to conform with the Bush administration's views, several Congressional officials said today.
The officials described what they said was a dramatic moment at a House Intelligence Committee hearing last week when the weapons expert came forward to tell Congress he had felt such pressure.
By speaking out, they said, the senior intelligence expert, identified by several officials as Christian Westermann, became the first member of the intelligence community on active service to make this sort of admission to members of Congress.
posted on June 25, 2003 08:53:49 AM new
Guess who will be in charge of Military Tribunals...Wolfowitz!!! What legal and military credentials does Wolfowitz have?
Individuals brought before the tribunals would have no right to a jury trial, no right to confront their accusers and no right to judicial review of trial procedures or sentences, which could include death.
posted on June 26, 2003 06:14:13 AM new It's being said that this war marked the beginning of the American Empire in our relationship to the world. How about domestically? An empire doesn't have citizens, it has subjects.
Subjects don't expect to challenge the emperor or even to be told the facts.
posted on June 26, 2003 06:37:48 AM new
Remember when Bush abandoned the search for weapons of mass destruction to search for programs*?
Parts of a gas centrifuge system and plans hidden 12 years ago were found buried in a barrel behind an Iraqi scientist's house, under a rose bush.
It's not a weapon of mass destruction. It's not a centrifuge - but parts of a centrifuge. It would take 2,500 working centrifuges, large scale facilities and fissile material to produce enough uranium to make enough material to go into one bomb. To produce the bomb with a delivery system would take several years.
Desert storm drove this *program* underground in 1991
All the insensitivity and stupidity spewing over America's airwaves and carried in its newspapers does have an effect, as its sponsors intend that it should. Without any serious political opposition inside the country, America has launched two meaningless wars on weak nations, killing and maiming thousands of innocent people. It threatens still others and keeps prisoners in cages offshore. There is considerable public acceptance of barbarities like torture and assassination, and hundreds, perhaps thousands, inside the country are arrested and held with no access to courts or legal help. There is a vast increase in spying on your own people, and there is selective support for leaders of some countries no better than tyrants or murderers.
Meanwhile, "Hon, they've got a special on air conditioners down at the mall. Do you think we could drive down after the news?"
John Cluckman
One can only describe the corporate media’s performance as craven (cowardly, fearful, week and yellow) when it comes to tackling the government over the rationale for the invasion. Can we ever expect a serious analysis from the press? Yes, apparently, when hell freezes over, which at least according to my unnamed and utterly reliable source, will occur within the next 45 minutes.
[ edited by Helenjw on Jun 26, 2003 08:17 AM ]
posted on June 26, 2003 09:31:08 PM new
“For a country that will be spending more on war than education, the ability to interpret
information is not likely to improve in the next decade.”
Actually, this is not necessarily a true statement unless you are talking about the federal
government’s contribution to education which is only about 10% of the school budgets,
including higher education. Most of the money comes from property and other taxes at
the state level (and out of our own pockets). Education is NOT the responsibility of the
federal government....heaven help us if that day comes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are some figures that I came up with, perhaps you have better figures:
I couldn’t find the latest figures for the educational spending but I really doubt if they’ve
dropped from the ‘96 level quoted....
“Today, the Bush Administration requested that $396.1 billion be provided for national defense in
fiscal year (FY) 2003, including about $379.3 billion for the Department of Defense (DoD) and
$16.8 billion for Department of Energy and other defense-related programs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not ALL defense spending is for war, we have to be prepared at all times for this nation’s
DEFENSE from many enemies. And, rightly or wrongly, we are the world’s policeman,
mainly because almost all of the earth’s nations have shirked their responsibilities.
[ edited by bones21 on Jun 26, 2003 09:35 PM ]
$3 billion per month x 12 months = $36 billion
$36 billion x 5 years = $180 billion
(And that's just to pay for the troops. Since it appears Iraq's oil revenues won't even cover the country's basic needs, and since Proconsul Bremer already has promised to steer at least some of those revenues directly to the Iraqi people in the form of dividend checks -- a la Alaska's Permanent Fund -- we probably should add something to the U.S. tab for Iraq's reconstruction. So let's call it an even $5 billion a month, which equals $60 billion a year, which equals $300 billion over five years.
Budget of the United States 2004 This is a pdf link so you will have to wait a minute if you want to compare the Iraq expense to that of education etc.
posted on June 26, 2003 10:49:41 PM new
“And, rightly or wrongly, we are the world’s policeman,
mainly because almost all of the earth’s nations have shirked their responsibilities. “
No Bones, you are the worlds ‘policeman’ because you have the power to declare yourself such.
Police need a to follow the laws, and the appropriateness of their actions are assessed by a judge.
‘World Police’ need to follow ‘World laws’.
World Judges believe that your world "police" chiefs are corrupt.
Why not add to those figures that you cited the amount spent on FBI, CIA, Coast Guard, Police etc etc.
I mean after all you are comparing 'Defence' spending to primary, secondary and tertiary education.
Which I assume includes the money spent on military schools.
You could also add the money given to Israel and ‘some’ other ‘humanitarian’ aid.
I am prepared to overlook the $3million spent on the WTC inquiry.
This footage, obtained and presented exclusively by The Memory Hole, shows President Bush sitting in a Florida classroom for 5 minutes after he was told that the second Twin Tower has been hit and that America was being attacked. A truncated version of this footage that has been available online since June 2002 shows Bush for only 2 minutes, 10 seconds after being told. This new footage more than doubles this length of time.
Immediately below, you'll find still-frames from the video, one every 5 seconds starting when Chief of Staff Andrew Card gives Bush the news and ending when the scene abruptly ends. Below that is a longer introduction and explanation of this footage, including how you can get it yourself.
Apologists claim that Bush didn't leave simply because he didn't want to interrupt and upset the children, but this falls apart for several reasons:
1) America is being attacked, thousands are dying, and Bush doesn't know if we're facing nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks, as well. Couldn't he just say, "Excuse me, kids, I need to take care of something. It's part of being President, y'understand. I'll be back as soon as I can."
2) At the moment Card told Bush about the second plane, the children weren't reading to Bush. They had finished reading words from an easel and were reaching under their chairs for a book when Card whispered to Bush. Another 30 seconds would elapse before they started reading again. This pause was a perfect time for Bush to politely excuse himself.
3) By staying, he not only endangered his own life, but the lives of all of those children. Wouldn't it be better to risk upsetting them than to risk letting them die in a terror attack?
4) Even if Bush was afraid of hurting the kiddies' feelings, what about the Secret Service? Have they been trained not to attempt to save the President's life if it might bother some schoolchildren?
5) What about Chief of Staff Andrew Card, White House Spokesperson Ari Fleischer, and other officials who were in that classroom? Didn't they feel that a 21st-century Pearl Harbor and a potential attack on the President himself were worth some sort of action?
6) Finally, and most damningly, this excuse doesn't explain why Bush continued to mill around the classroom for several minutes after the children had finished reading.
Somewhere, someone has the complete, uncut footage of Bush in Booker Elementary, from the time he enters the classroom until he finally walks out. If you have this footage, please send it to me.
posted on June 27, 2003 10:55:07 AM new
Another U.S. soldier shot in the head today on the streets of Iraq. His condition is not being released, but the death toll among Americans is now up to 18 since President Bush declared "victory" on May 1. Hundreds of Iraqis, including children, are being killed; ambush attacks are targeting anyone perceived to be sympathetic to U.S. troops.
What Bush hath wrought ....
------------------- We do not see things as they are. We see them as we are.
------------The Talmud
Baghdad, Iraq- American troops and helicopters scoured the desert yesterday for two U.S. soldiers who were apparently abducted from an observation post north of Baghdad. Ambushes and hostile fire elsewhere in Iraq killed two U.S. soldiers and two Iraqi civilians and wounded eight other Americans.
A day after a U.S. Marine was killed responding to an ambush on Americans, reports of attacks on U.S. troops appeared almost hourly - too frequent for military press officers to keep up with. Most of the information came from witnesses at the attack scenes.
Between Wednesday and yesterday, assailants blew up a U.S. military vehicle with a roadside bomb, dropped grenades from an overpass, destroyed a civilian SUV traveling with U.S. troops, demolished an oil pipeline and fired an apparent rocket-propelled grenade at an Army truck.
Officials played down the violence, but with shattered glass, blood stains and mangled vehicles littering the landscape, the upsurge in attacks is causing concern that the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq could be turning into a guerrilla war.
posted on June 27, 2003 02:09:03 PM new Experts Question Depth of Victory
"The longer this goes on, the more violent these events will become," said Fulford, a former deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe. "We learned this in Lebanon and Somalia -- and Iraq is much more challenging than either of these."
posted on June 27, 2003 04:08:51 PM new
It saddens me to see the commies and cowards have nothing better to do this fine summer. Conspiracies and innuendo.
Go outside and enjoy the good weather while you can. Have a picnic, go on a hike. Enjoy life before the government boogie man comes to get you.
WASHINGTON (AP) Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee announced Friday plans to stage their own inquiry on the credibility of prewar intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and its links to the al-Qaida terror network.
The announcement by Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the panel's top Democrat, marked an unusual split with Chairman John Warner, R-Va., on an issue with strong political overtones ahead of next year's elections. Warner and Levin are longtime colleagues on the committee and repeatedly stress bipartisan cooperation.
Democrats in both the House and Senate have been pushing for widened examinations of prewar intelligence beyond reviews already under way by both bodies' intelligence committees.
