Must we wait another two years for this to end? Can't someone talk W. and Cheney into early retirement? Where is mother Barbara when we need her? All mothers know when their children are making whopping disastrous and dangerous mistakes. Mother dearest, um, the planet is about to explode.
Everyday I pick up a newspaper, log on to on line news sources, blogs or turn on the TV, I see nothing but a world gone insane because of the Bush/Cheney Administration and its rubber stamping, cowardly and lazy (5 weeks vacation after working a mere 80 days?) Congressmen and women.
See BEST RUBBER STAMP IN D.C., SENATOR KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON. Her profile will pretty much tell you how a lawmaker can make promises to voters, but when back inside the Beltway, will turn around and vote the complete opposite. Lawmakers bank on our not reading their voting records. It will also tell you that most of our lawmakers represent big business and lobbyists, not their constituents. And like sheep, they all blindly follow Bush, even if it means taking the planet straight to hell.
The only reprieves available to us to escape from this hideous reality are immersion in work and sleep. Alas flight from reality is not really possible, I’ve learned, because of the endless chatter by the water cooler about our current state of national and global affairs. Everyone is now talking about the King Kong sized elephant in the room. At night dreams can easily become nightmares. Does W. have his finger on the red nuke button while Americans toss and turn at night?
I read that Bush's closest buddies, after Blair and the Brits, the Israelis, are upset with W. Some are blaming their not so successful military assault on Hezbollah on Bush. Olmert will most likely suffer politically from taking advice from one of the most disingenuous, deceitful and cynical leaders in U.S. history. LS
Mr. Robert Parry wrote a piece in The Consortium News: “Israeli Leaders Fault Bush on War” Found on Truthout.org
Excerpts:
Amid the political and diplomatic fallout from Israel's faltering invasion of Lebanon, some Israeli officials are privately blaming President George W. Bush for egging Prime Minister Ehud Olmert into the ill-conceived military adventure against the Hezbollah militia in south Lebanon.
Bush conveyed his strong personal support for the military offensive during a White House meeting with Olmert on May 23, according to sources familiar with the thinking of senior Israeli leaders.
Olmert, who like Bush lacks direct wartime experience, agreed that a dose of military force against Hezbollah might damage the guerrilla group's influence in Lebanon and intimidate its allies, Iran and Syria, countries that Bush has identified as the chief obstacles to U.S. interests in the Middle East.
As part of Bush's determination to create a "new Middle East" - one that is more amenable to U.S. policies and desires - Bush even urged Israel to attack Syria, but the Olmert government refused to go that far, according to Israeli sources.
One source said some Israeli officials thought Bush's attack-Syria idea was "nuts" since much of the world would have seen the bombing campaign as overt aggression.
ROBERT PARRY ON TRUTHOUT.ORG. HERE
BUSH WANTED THE ISRAEL/HEZBOLLAH CONFLICT TO BE A DRESS REHEARSAL FOR A WAR BETWEEN U.S. AND IRAN
A war with Iran when we are mired down in Iraq and the Taliban are resurfacing in Afghanistan? With what for troops? This is utterly mad.
Mr. Seymour Hersh wrote a brilliant and well-researched piece for The New Yorker. Top officials in both Britain and Israel are sources for this article. The piece can be found on Truthout.org and on Buzz Flash.com. LS
Excerpts:
According to a Middle East expert with knowledge of the current thinking of both the Israeli and the U.S. governments, Israel had devised a plan for attacking Hezbollah - and shared it with Bush Administration officials - well before the July 12th kidnappings. "It's not that the Israelis had a trap that Hezbollah walked into," he said, "but there was a strong feeling in the White House that sooner or later the Israelis were going to do it."
The Middle East expert said that the Administration had several reasons for supporting the Israeli bombing campaign. Within the State Department, it was seen as a way to strengthen the Lebanese government so that it could assert its authority over the south of the country, much of which is controlled by Hezbollah. He went on, "The White House was more focussed on stripping Hezbollah of its missiles, because, if there was to be a military option against Iran's nuclear facilities, it had to get rid of the weapons that Hezbollah could use in a potential retaliation at Israel. Bush wanted both. Bush was going after Iran, as part of the Axis of Evil, and its nuclear sites, and he was interested in going after Hezbollah as part of his interest in democratization, with Lebanon as one of the crown jewels of Middle East democracy."
Administration officials denied that they knew of Israel's plan for the air war. The White House did not respond to a detailed list of questions. In response to a separate request, a National Security Council spokesman said, "Prior to Hezbollah's attack on Israel, the Israeli government gave no official in Washington any reason to believe that Israel was planning to attack. Even after the July 12th attack, we did not know what the Israeli plans were." A Pentagon spokesman said, "The United States government remains committed to a diplomatic solution to the problem of Iran's clandestine nuclear weapons program," and denied the story, as did a State Department spokesman.
The United States and Israel have shared intelligence and enjoyed close military coöperation for decades, but early this spring, according to a former senior intelligence official, high-level planners from the U.S. Air Force - under pressure from the White House to develop a war plan for a decisive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities - began consulting with their counterparts in the Israeli Air Force.
Seymour Hersh "Watching Lebanon"
WHILE BUSH AND CHENEY ARE TRYING FABRICATE AND RIG A WAR BETWEEN THE U.S. AND IRAN, A TOP MILITARY COMMANDER IN IRAQ SAYS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT IRAN IS STIRRING UP TROUBLE IN IRAQ
I know who I believe and it certainly isn’t Bush or Cheney. LS
From Yahoo News.com
TOP MILITARY COMMANDER: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IRAN IS INVOLVED IN THE CONFLICT WITH IRAQ
BUSH OBVIOUSLY THINKS HE IS KING GEORGE W.
Bush obviously doesn’t give a lick about opinion polls, no matter who conducts them. Clearly the majority – and that’s the mainstream of the American population – thinks the war in Iraq is a bad idea and we should pull out. Naturally Bush doesn’t want to hear this so he attacks the majority of mainstream America, saying we want to “cut and run.”
The reality is that Bush is cutting and running from the truth and the American people.
Joe Conason wrote a great piece below on how Democrats can counter the Bush/Cheney cut and run rhetoric. LS Found on Truthdig.com.
Excerpts:
To be “strong on national security” does not mean supporting the misconceived and incompetently executed policies of the Bush administration. American security in years to come will depend on undoing this government’s grave mistakes, which have weakened this country’s military posture and undermined support for us around the world. Terrorism experts across the spectrum, from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat, agree that the “struggle against violent extremism” has suffered from the foolish decision to invade and occupy Iraq.
Evidently, the neoconservatives hope to escape responsibility for their debacle by complaining that the rest of us lack sufficient zeal. So they now pretend that Democrats and progressives, who overwhelmingly supported the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban and still do, want to abandon that effort. This is another partisan lie invented by the likes of William Kristol, who will answer to history for his role in promoting the Iraq war.
There have been times in recent years when war was unavoidable, in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo. For the neoconservatives, however, the answer to every international conflict is shock and awe, so long as they remain safely distant from the carnage. The American people are turning away from that mindless and dangerous attitude, which is leading us toward disaster. Politicians of both parties should do likewise.
JOE CONASON: "War Critics Are Mainstream, Not Fringe"
No comments:
Post a Comment