On Sunday's NBC Meet the Press, Vice President Joe Biden hinted that Iran's election results last week didn't seem quite right... politicos shake their heads over the odor of corruption and huffing news outlets question their validity.
Of course, our own elections have been rife with questionable results.... think of the Supremes deciding the 2000 presidential contest.... while our hackable electronic ballot systems are nothing to brag about.
What we have here seems to be very wishful thinking, and an attitude of "do as I say, not as I do."
Americans want Middle East peace, they want President Ahmadinejad and his scary rhetoric shown the door.... just like we did to Bush/Cheney in 2004.... oh yes, we didn't do that to The Decider and Darth Dick. Instead, while the world held it's breath, we elected them to a second term, after they lied us into the worst foreign policy blunder in our nation's history, the war in Iraq.... the Middle-East-destabilizing war in Iraq.
Well, now we know how the world felt. According to the Washington Post, the rumors of Ahmadinejad's political demise were very premature. As reported by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty in "The Iranian People Speak," it appears the "election results in Iran may reflect the will of the people."
On what do they base such an outlandish statement.... on a scientific national poll conducted in Iran three weeks before the election. Ahmadinejad was the preferred candidate two to one, and those results reflect the election's results. The poll was "conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award." Oh.
That's not what we want to believe. Our instant-gratification conditioning hasn't the patience. But, closing our minds and living in a blame-game la-la land won't change the reality.... nor a system where all Iranian candidates are chosen by a non-elected supreme leader. Here is where the poll's results are very interesting, and encouraging. And, far from the expected safe answers one might expect in a country with an oppressive regime in power.
While preferring Ahmadinejad, for now, four out of five indicated in answer to the poll's questions that they wanted to elect the supreme leader, chose free elections and a free press as priorities, and 77 percent "favored normal relations and trade with the United States." Those weren't safe answers.
So, while choosing Ahmadinejad.... change is in the air. Isn't that what we should be talking about, and encouraging?
In Iran, there are now major protests by supporters of the opposing candidate. One thing all the ballyhoo has done is to evidently unsettle the supreme leader. He's now calling for an investigation into the election. But then, why not. He can't lose. He picked all the candidates.
Showing posts with label Ahmadinejad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ahmadinejad. Show all posts
Monday, June 15, 2009
Monday, June 08, 2009
Friday is Iran's Defining Moment
There is an event this week that could spell the difference between a peaceful settlement of the Israel/Palestine conflict, reduced tensions in the Middle East, and a halt to the threat of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists; or.....
Escalating the current dangerous Israel/Palestine conflict, increasing tensions in the Middle East, while enabling the unstable ambitions of a nuclear-capable terrorist-funding regime. A regime headed by a holocaust-denying puppet of radical religious leaders.
There is an election scheduled for this Friday in Iran, and much of President Barack Obama's aspirations for Middle East peace, and curbing the bloody mayhem of jihad-inspired terrorism, rest on the outcome.
As reported in the Washington Post, "In Iran, Harsh Talk as Election Nears," by Robert F. Worth, this final week of Iran's presidential campaign, "has reached a level of passion and acrimony almost unheard-of in Iran."
As Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hurls fantastic accusations at his opponents, he is also ducking incoming fire, impassioned fire, and not from just his rivals, but also from long-suffering Iranians who are mad and not going to take it anymore.
For years Ahmadinejad has resorted to inciteful and false rhetoric.... from a constant refrain of threats against Israel, "to wipe them off of the face of the earth"..... and against any Western power that stands by Israel who "from now on will not see any result but the hatred of the people. You should not claim that we did not give a warning," he saber-rattles, to his oft repeated denial of the horrific WWII Jewish holocaust.
But, he also misled and terrorized his own people. In his last presidential campaign he promised the Iranians relief from poverty and a focus on domestic issues, what they got was a "police state" as one Iranian openly charged, and a foreign policy his leading opponent, reformist Mir Husein Moussavi, calls "adventurism, illusionism, exhibitionism, extremism and superficiality.”
This time, Ahmadinejad's hateful-rhetoric is backfiring.... unofficial polls suggest 54 percent of Iranian voters would support Moussavi, while Ahmadinejad lags at 39 percent.
So much rests on the result of Friday's election, and not just for the Iranian people. By showing Ahmandinejad the door, they can lop off the festering head of a regime bent on taking the people back to the zealous, social-freedom-eviscerating, hard-line piety of the 1979 revolution, and stop the plunge toward a nuclear abyss.
As one Moussavi supporter said, “...at the beginning of the Islamic revolution we were all like Ahmadinejad, but we changed our path and our way. ” Another Iranian added that she was speaking on behalf of her friends, "We love our religion, but they have used it as a tool to take people’s rights.”
The good Iranian people can send a message to a hopeful world.... we're taking our lives and our country back. We chose peace over conflict, hope over fear. We're looking forward.
We wish them Allah's speed.....
Escalating the current dangerous Israel/Palestine conflict, increasing tensions in the Middle East, while enabling the unstable ambitions of a nuclear-capable terrorist-funding regime. A regime headed by a holocaust-denying puppet of radical religious leaders.
There is an election scheduled for this Friday in Iran, and much of President Barack Obama's aspirations for Middle East peace, and curbing the bloody mayhem of jihad-inspired terrorism, rest on the outcome.
As reported in the Washington Post, "In Iran, Harsh Talk as Election Nears," by Robert F. Worth, this final week of Iran's presidential campaign, "has reached a level of passion and acrimony almost unheard-of in Iran."
As Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hurls fantastic accusations at his opponents, he is also ducking incoming fire, impassioned fire, and not from just his rivals, but also from long-suffering Iranians who are mad and not going to take it anymore.
For years Ahmadinejad has resorted to inciteful and false rhetoric.... from a constant refrain of threats against Israel, "to wipe them off of the face of the earth"..... and against any Western power that stands by Israel who "from now on will not see any result but the hatred of the people. You should not claim that we did not give a warning," he saber-rattles, to his oft repeated denial of the horrific WWII Jewish holocaust.
But, he also misled and terrorized his own people. In his last presidential campaign he promised the Iranians relief from poverty and a focus on domestic issues, what they got was a "police state" as one Iranian openly charged, and a foreign policy his leading opponent, reformist Mir Husein Moussavi, calls "adventurism, illusionism, exhibitionism, extremism and superficiality.”
This time, Ahmadinejad's hateful-rhetoric is backfiring.... unofficial polls suggest 54 percent of Iranian voters would support Moussavi, while Ahmadinejad lags at 39 percent.
So much rests on the result of Friday's election, and not just for the Iranian people. By showing Ahmandinejad the door, they can lop off the festering head of a regime bent on taking the people back to the zealous, social-freedom-eviscerating, hard-line piety of the 1979 revolution, and stop the plunge toward a nuclear abyss.
As one Moussavi supporter said, “...at the beginning of the Islamic revolution we were all like Ahmadinejad, but we changed our path and our way. ” Another Iranian added that she was speaking on behalf of her friends, "We love our religion, but they have used it as a tool to take people’s rights.”
The good Iranian people can send a message to a hopeful world.... we're taking our lives and our country back. We chose peace over conflict, hope over fear. We're looking forward.
We wish them Allah's speed.....
Monday, March 03, 2008
Are We Safer?....
President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez directed in a radio address this weekend.... "Mr. Defense Minister, move 10 battalions to the border with Colombia for me, immediately--- tank battalions, deploy the air force.... we don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master [of Colombia].... to come to divide us." (WashingtonPost)
As the military from leftist Ecuador and Venezuela deploy on their borders with Columbia, a U. S. ally, the tense crisis threatens to erupt into war.
The reason.... a raid by Colombia into Ecuador which killed a leader of the rebel leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) which has fought to overthrow the Colombian government for 40 years.
Colombia said its police and air force shot back at targets in Ecuador only after its forces came under fire from FARC rebels about a mile inside Ecuador.
Chavez warned "This is something very serious. This could be the start of a war in South America" and threatened to retaliate with Sukhois.... recently purchased Russian warplanes.
And... in the Middle East, Iranian's President Ahmadinejad is visiting Baghdad today and telling the U.S. to get out of Iraq and the region. (WashingtonPost)
During his two-day trip, Iran and Iraq will sign seven agreements on customs, transportation links, improving cooperation in industrial development, highlighting the new, closer relations between the former foes.
Since the U.S. overthrow of Saddam and the installation of a new U.S.-backed government, both Iraq and Iran are now run by Shiite majorities.
Meanwhile, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) decried our lack of focus on Afghanistan and nuclear-armed Pakistan. (NYTimes)
"Afghanistan is slipping toward failure. The Taliban is back, violence is up, drug production is booming and the Afghans are losing faith in their government"... Biden warned.
"If we should have had a surge anywhere, it is Afghanistan.... Afghanistan's fate is directly tied to Pakistan's future and America's security. When President Musharraf of Pakistan concluded that we were not serious about finishing the job in Afghanistan, he began to cut deals with extremists in his own country.
"As a result, the border area remains a freeway of fundamentalism: the Taliban and Al Qaeda find sanctuary in Pakistan, while Pakistani suicide bombers wreak havoc in Afghanistan."
The fruits of the Bush administration's Iraq-obsessed foreign policy.... deep unrest with the specter of war in our backyard, and an obscenely costly war in Iraq that has played into Iran's ambitions in that country while emboldening fundamentalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Heck of a job, Georgie.
As the military from leftist Ecuador and Venezuela deploy on their borders with Columbia, a U. S. ally, the tense crisis threatens to erupt into war.
The reason.... a raid by Colombia into Ecuador which killed a leader of the rebel leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) which has fought to overthrow the Colombian government for 40 years.
Colombia said its police and air force shot back at targets in Ecuador only after its forces came under fire from FARC rebels about a mile inside Ecuador.
Chavez warned "This is something very serious. This could be the start of a war in South America" and threatened to retaliate with Sukhois.... recently purchased Russian warplanes.
And... in the Middle East, Iranian's President Ahmadinejad is visiting Baghdad today and telling the U.S. to get out of Iraq and the region. (WashingtonPost)
During his two-day trip, Iran and Iraq will sign seven agreements on customs, transportation links, improving cooperation in industrial development, highlighting the new, closer relations between the former foes.
Since the U.S. overthrow of Saddam and the installation of a new U.S.-backed government, both Iraq and Iran are now run by Shiite majorities.
Meanwhile, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) decried our lack of focus on Afghanistan and nuclear-armed Pakistan. (NYTimes)
"Afghanistan is slipping toward failure. The Taliban is back, violence is up, drug production is booming and the Afghans are losing faith in their government"... Biden warned.
"If we should have had a surge anywhere, it is Afghanistan.... Afghanistan's fate is directly tied to Pakistan's future and America's security. When President Musharraf of Pakistan concluded that we were not serious about finishing the job in Afghanistan, he began to cut deals with extremists in his own country.
"As a result, the border area remains a freeway of fundamentalism: the Taliban and Al Qaeda find sanctuary in Pakistan, while Pakistani suicide bombers wreak havoc in Afghanistan."
The fruits of the Bush administration's Iraq-obsessed foreign policy.... deep unrest with the specter of war in our backyard, and an obscenely costly war in Iraq that has played into Iran's ambitions in that country while emboldening fundamentalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Heck of a job, Georgie.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Iran: Reason and Recklessness
At last, a voice of sanity on the subject of Iran, "Stalin, Mao And... Ahmadinejad?" (Newsweek)
If ever there was a must-read article about the current White House saber-rattling against Iran, it is this one-pager in the current issue of Newsweek.
Written by someone who understands and rejects fear-based policies on terrorism, Fareed Zakaria brings reason to the emotion-charged subject of our danger from oil-rich Iran.
Zakaria, born in India to a Muslim family, has been Newsweek's International editor since 2000 and has a rich grounding in foreign affairs including a PhD in Political Science from Harvard. Soon after the 9/11 attacks he wrote a seminal cover-story essay for Newsweek entitled "The Politics of Rage: Why Do They Hate Us?"
In it, he argued that Islamic terrorism has its roots in the stagnation and dysfunctions of the Arab world with decades of failure under tyrannical regimes who claimed to be Western-style modernizers.
Of course, these regimes only produced violent opposition to those Western values. Since the Mosque is the one place where people can gather in an Arab country, that is where the opposition to these tyrannies grew.
Zakaria, as a political "realist" advocates that the United States should help Arab countries to modernize their economies and societies as the path to liberty rather than forcing elections and democracy.
And, while as a Muslim he has a depth of understanding of the religion and culture, Zakaria's is a political moderate who believes the world needs an open and confident United States.
In this week's article, Zakaria exposes the war-mongering wizard behind the curtain. He points out that Iran has an economy the size of Finland's, while the U.S. has a GDP that is 68 times larger, and defense expenditures that are 110 times greater. What's more, Israel and every Arab country (except Syria and Iraq) are quietly or actively already allied against Iran.
But, the most chilling observation Zakaria makes: "We're on a path to irreversible confrontation with a country we know almost nothing about.... Iran is a black hole to us--- just as Iraq had become in 2003."
Remember the "Alice in Wonderland" prediction last year by Princeton scholar, Bernard Lewis.... a close adviser to The Decider and Darth Cheney.... that on August 22, 2006, Iran's President Ahmadinejad was going to end the world.
Well, we're still here. But so are the administration's Middle East ambitions. Secretary of State Rice today breathlessly announced, "U.S. Imposes New Sanctions Against Iran." (WaPo)
Unilateral sanctions.... designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and of the elite Quds Force as a supporter of terrorism.
It's all too terrifyingly familiar....
If ever there was a must-read article about the current White House saber-rattling against Iran, it is this one-pager in the current issue of Newsweek.
Written by someone who understands and rejects fear-based policies on terrorism, Fareed Zakaria brings reason to the emotion-charged subject of our danger from oil-rich Iran.
Zakaria, born in India to a Muslim family, has been Newsweek's International editor since 2000 and has a rich grounding in foreign affairs including a PhD in Political Science from Harvard. Soon after the 9/11 attacks he wrote a seminal cover-story essay for Newsweek entitled "The Politics of Rage: Why Do They Hate Us?"
In it, he argued that Islamic terrorism has its roots in the stagnation and dysfunctions of the Arab world with decades of failure under tyrannical regimes who claimed to be Western-style modernizers.
Of course, these regimes only produced violent opposition to those Western values. Since the Mosque is the one place where people can gather in an Arab country, that is where the opposition to these tyrannies grew.
Zakaria, as a political "realist" advocates that the United States should help Arab countries to modernize their economies and societies as the path to liberty rather than forcing elections and democracy.
And, while as a Muslim he has a depth of understanding of the religion and culture, Zakaria's is a political moderate who believes the world needs an open and confident United States.
In this week's article, Zakaria exposes the war-mongering wizard behind the curtain. He points out that Iran has an economy the size of Finland's, while the U.S. has a GDP that is 68 times larger, and defense expenditures that are 110 times greater. What's more, Israel and every Arab country (except Syria and Iraq) are quietly or actively already allied against Iran.
But, the most chilling observation Zakaria makes: "We're on a path to irreversible confrontation with a country we know almost nothing about.... Iran is a black hole to us--- just as Iraq had become in 2003."
Remember the "Alice in Wonderland" prediction last year by Princeton scholar, Bernard Lewis.... a close adviser to The Decider and Darth Cheney.... that on August 22, 2006, Iran's President Ahmadinejad was going to end the world.
Well, we're still here. But so are the administration's Middle East ambitions. Secretary of State Rice today breathlessly announced, "U.S. Imposes New Sanctions Against Iran." (WaPo)
Unilateral sanctions.... designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and of the elite Quds Force as a supporter of terrorism.
It's all too terrifyingly familiar....
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Bush's Reckless Relevance
At any moment today during The Decider's press conference it seemed he would flash double overhead Nixonian Vs and declare.... "I'm not a crook!"
Of course, despite his declaration, President Nixon was a crook and resigned the presidency in disgrace, just one step ahead of slam-dunk impeachment proceedings.
What President Bush did declare today was "I am relevant!"
Which, of course means he's become a cipher, not only irrelevant, but to most of the country an embarrassment too.
Ah.... but The Decider has a way to get our attention, he says, the power of his veto.... "one way to ensure I am relevant."
In the irrelevant race, Bush's 24 percent job approval rating has now tied Nixon's for an all-time low. But the cocky Bush also reminded us that it wasn't just his veto (whose use by Bush is akin to a red-faced tantrum) that makes him relevant.... it's also his "bully pulpit."
Boy, does he have that right! Bush and his bully boys use the force of the executive to gut the Constitution and pervert the rule of law, and then take the pulpit to deny and obfuscate.
Which brings us to another statement made by The Decider today.... "we don't torture."
Department of Justice memos have surfaced recently outlining the administrations "approved" tortures. So, when asked today for his definition of torture, he said "That's defined in U.S. law, and we don't torture." When asked what that means to him, he said "Whatever the law says." And, of course, Bush directs the writing of the torture guidelines.... the law.
What was torture today was listening to The Decider's grade school intellect.... coupled with his unbounded and unwarranted arrogance.... and then to realize this is the clueless cowboy who has been leading our country for last seven excruciating years, and it's not over yet!
Feeling full of his pulpit-power, Bush didn't want to let the country off of the hook with just his relevance-making veto and tinny bully pulpit, he wanted to instill fear.... the easiest way after all to keep the electorate compliant.... with a red alert warning about his new favorite target, Iran.
".... So I told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them [Iran] from having knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," Bush recklessly lectured.
With trademark Bush barroom delivery and lack of dignity, when asked about the recent tete-a-tete between Russia's President Putin and Iran's President Ahmadinejad in Tehran, and Putin's supportive words to Iranian leaders, Bush poo-poohed the thought that anything was amiss in our... or, as he views it, his.... relationship with "Wily" Putin.
With a wink and a nod he said he would talk to Putin and get the real lowdown on what happened on Putin's visit to Iran. Bet Putin appreciated Bush's public implication that Putin would compromise Iran and tell Buddy Bush the real skinny.
And, aren't you starting to feel a little sorry for Secretary of State Rice and the world perception under which she has to labor. More than once The Decider referred to "Condi" not "Secretary Rice" which would give her much needed stature. His "Condi" reduces her to just one of his stable of unprofessionals.... "Heck of a job, Brownie."
But, the scariest moment of the press conference came with a question about Putin's intent to continue ruling Russia after his term expires next spring, possibly by becoming prime minister.
The Decider was asked if he should get tougher with Putin... "what would it mean for Russian democracy if, when you leave power.... assuming you do in January 2009 (laughter).... that Vladimir Putin is still in power?"
Bush's answer was evasive. But, it was the question that made the blood run cold.... "assuming" Bush leaves power in January 2009. The reporters in the room laughed.... but, to even touch on the possibility really isn't funny at all.
There's that as yet unfocused disquiet.... why is the White House so secretive, and so intent on accumulating so much power.
Of course, despite his declaration, President Nixon was a crook and resigned the presidency in disgrace, just one step ahead of slam-dunk impeachment proceedings.
What President Bush did declare today was "I am relevant!"
Which, of course means he's become a cipher, not only irrelevant, but to most of the country an embarrassment too.
Ah.... but The Decider has a way to get our attention, he says, the power of his veto.... "one way to ensure I am relevant."
In the irrelevant race, Bush's 24 percent job approval rating has now tied Nixon's for an all-time low. But the cocky Bush also reminded us that it wasn't just his veto (whose use by Bush is akin to a red-faced tantrum) that makes him relevant.... it's also his "bully pulpit."
Boy, does he have that right! Bush and his bully boys use the force of the executive to gut the Constitution and pervert the rule of law, and then take the pulpit to deny and obfuscate.
Which brings us to another statement made by The Decider today.... "we don't torture."
Department of Justice memos have surfaced recently outlining the administrations "approved" tortures. So, when asked today for his definition of torture, he said "That's defined in U.S. law, and we don't torture." When asked what that means to him, he said "Whatever the law says." And, of course, Bush directs the writing of the torture guidelines.... the law.
What was torture today was listening to The Decider's grade school intellect.... coupled with his unbounded and unwarranted arrogance.... and then to realize this is the clueless cowboy who has been leading our country for last seven excruciating years, and it's not over yet!
Feeling full of his pulpit-power, Bush didn't want to let the country off of the hook with just his relevance-making veto and tinny bully pulpit, he wanted to instill fear.... the easiest way after all to keep the electorate compliant.... with a red alert warning about his new favorite target, Iran.
".... So I told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them [Iran] from having knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," Bush recklessly lectured.
With trademark Bush barroom delivery and lack of dignity, when asked about the recent tete-a-tete between Russia's President Putin and Iran's President Ahmadinejad in Tehran, and Putin's supportive words to Iranian leaders, Bush poo-poohed the thought that anything was amiss in our... or, as he views it, his.... relationship with "Wily" Putin.
With a wink and a nod he said he would talk to Putin and get the real lowdown on what happened on Putin's visit to Iran. Bet Putin appreciated Bush's public implication that Putin would compromise Iran and tell Buddy Bush the real skinny.
And, aren't you starting to feel a little sorry for Secretary of State Rice and the world perception under which she has to labor. More than once The Decider referred to "Condi" not "Secretary Rice" which would give her much needed stature. His "Condi" reduces her to just one of his stable of unprofessionals.... "Heck of a job, Brownie."
But, the scariest moment of the press conference came with a question about Putin's intent to continue ruling Russia after his term expires next spring, possibly by becoming prime minister.
The Decider was asked if he should get tougher with Putin... "what would it mean for Russian democracy if, when you leave power.... assuming you do in January 2009 (laughter).... that Vladimir Putin is still in power?"
Bush's answer was evasive. But, it was the question that made the blood run cold.... "assuming" Bush leaves power in January 2009. The reporters in the room laughed.... but, to even touch on the possibility really isn't funny at all.
There's that as yet unfocused disquiet.... why is the White House so secretive, and so intent on accumulating so much power.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
What Happened To Our Country?
The Decider's speech at the U.N. yesterday was like a bad comb-over.... he tried without success to hide the fact that his bald assertions about the human rights abuses of his perceived enemies didn't mask those of his perceived friends. Nor his own.
He called on the countries in the U. N. to live up to the freedoms and rights promised almost sixty years ago, denouncing Burma (Myanmar) Belarus, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria and Zimbabwe as brutal regimes that should be confronted for their abuses.
The Decider barely mentioned the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, nor the nuclear ambitions of Iran, nor the suppressive regimes of Pakistan, Turkey, China or Russia.
It was a sorry show, it was at once selective in its call for sanctions, and myopically self-congratulating ignoring our occupation of Iraq, and saber rattling at Iran as his destructively aggressive agenda drags the Middle East toward the abyss.
He talked about the needy children of the world while holding his veto pen over the medical insurance needs of millions of children in the United States.
But, as bad as was The Decider's smoke and mirrors show at the U. N., it was nothing compared to the hysteria surrounding the visit from the tin-hat from Iran. Strong, confident nations can engage in dialogue with their enemies without name calling and plain rude behavior. Remember the cold war complete with nuclear standoff? For 70 years the Soviet Union threatened to eradicate American capitalism and democracy. But, there were no juvenile spit-ball antics.
Well, that United States is gone.
It's been replaced by a nasty, jingoistic nation howling at the visiting heels of the puppet of Iran's mullahs, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was embarrassing to watch a university president lambaste it's invited guest while Bush-incited news outlets like FOX twirled dervishly about at the thought of the "foul-smelling fruitbat Ahmadinejad" speaking at "that crack house known as Columbia University."
It's the Limbaughization of our country.... rude, crude, uncomprehending and egotistically self-righteous. It'll be a long road back. The journey starts November 2008.
He called on the countries in the U. N. to live up to the freedoms and rights promised almost sixty years ago, denouncing Burma (Myanmar) Belarus, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria and Zimbabwe as brutal regimes that should be confronted for their abuses.
The Decider barely mentioned the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, nor the nuclear ambitions of Iran, nor the suppressive regimes of Pakistan, Turkey, China or Russia.
It was a sorry show, it was at once selective in its call for sanctions, and myopically self-congratulating ignoring our occupation of Iraq, and saber rattling at Iran as his destructively aggressive agenda drags the Middle East toward the abyss.
He talked about the needy children of the world while holding his veto pen over the medical insurance needs of millions of children in the United States.
But, as bad as was The Decider's smoke and mirrors show at the U. N., it was nothing compared to the hysteria surrounding the visit from the tin-hat from Iran. Strong, confident nations can engage in dialogue with their enemies without name calling and plain rude behavior. Remember the cold war complete with nuclear standoff? For 70 years the Soviet Union threatened to eradicate American capitalism and democracy. But, there were no juvenile spit-ball antics.
Well, that United States is gone.
It's been replaced by a nasty, jingoistic nation howling at the visiting heels of the puppet of Iran's mullahs, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was embarrassing to watch a university president lambaste it's invited guest while Bush-incited news outlets like FOX twirled dervishly about at the thought of the "foul-smelling fruitbat Ahmadinejad" speaking at "that crack house known as Columbia University."
It's the Limbaughization of our country.... rude, crude, uncomprehending and egotistically self-righteous. It'll be a long road back. The journey starts November 2008.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Maliki a Dangerous Scapegoat
Today's Washington Post editorial asks, is Iraqi's Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki an "Easy Scapegoat"?
Seems so. But Maliki's cozying up to Shiite Iran and Syria asks a more disturbing question. Is Maliki an honest but ineffectual partner in Iraq, or a dangerous tool of neighboring countries waiting to gobble up Iraq while the Bush administration neocons flail around looking for a saleable political excuse to be there in the first place.
The bratty Maliki threatens the Bush administration that Iraq can "find friends elsewhere,"..... and, after his visit with madman Ahmadinejad in Iran crowed that "he appreciated Iran's positive and constructive stance on Iraq."
Maliki even threw a fit and insisted on the removal of U.S. commander Gen. Petraeus, and threatened to launch Shiite forces against our troops because of the General's "neighborhood watch" approach of utilizing local Sunni forces against al Qaeda.
The Decider's response to Maliki's outrageous behavior was to tell him to "calm down," and publicly refer to him as a "good guy." A good guy!
In a CNN report yesterday, front-line U.S. Generals in Iraq openly questioned whether democracy can be the goal in Iraq, one of the Bush administration's ever-changing justifications for the invasion of Iraq, and the need for Maliki's power-grabbing "democratic" government.
And, in a devastating blow to the Bush justification campaign, the Iraq national intelligence assessment to be released today questions whether or not Maliki is up to the job.
Seems as though the recently-hyped progress estimate on an Iraq led by "good guy" Maliki has evidently been a calculated attempt by the White House to blunt the negative assessments of both our mission in Iraq, and Maliki's leadership.
But, in the fairytale being woven to salvage the Bush legacy, the White House will need a scapegoat.... why else keep the two-faced Maliki around?
Seems so. But Maliki's cozying up to Shiite Iran and Syria asks a more disturbing question. Is Maliki an honest but ineffectual partner in Iraq, or a dangerous tool of neighboring countries waiting to gobble up Iraq while the Bush administration neocons flail around looking for a saleable political excuse to be there in the first place.
The bratty Maliki threatens the Bush administration that Iraq can "find friends elsewhere,"..... and, after his visit with madman Ahmadinejad in Iran crowed that "he appreciated Iran's positive and constructive stance on Iraq."
Maliki even threw a fit and insisted on the removal of U.S. commander Gen. Petraeus, and threatened to launch Shiite forces against our troops because of the General's "neighborhood watch" approach of utilizing local Sunni forces against al Qaeda.
The Decider's response to Maliki's outrageous behavior was to tell him to "calm down," and publicly refer to him as a "good guy." A good guy!
In a CNN report yesterday, front-line U.S. Generals in Iraq openly questioned whether democracy can be the goal in Iraq, one of the Bush administration's ever-changing justifications for the invasion of Iraq, and the need for Maliki's power-grabbing "democratic" government.
And, in a devastating blow to the Bush justification campaign, the Iraq national intelligence assessment to be released today questions whether or not Maliki is up to the job.
Seems as though the recently-hyped progress estimate on an Iraq led by "good guy" Maliki has evidently been a calculated attempt by the White House to blunt the negative assessments of both our mission in Iraq, and Maliki's leadership.
But, in the fairytale being woven to salvage the Bush legacy, the White House will need a scapegoat.... why else keep the two-faced Maliki around?
Friday, August 10, 2007
The Decider Babbles On...
President Bush held a press conference yesterday.... asserting that the economy is strong.... in the real world the stock market DOW was in the process of losing almost 390 points.... and then took questions, or should we say listened to questions and then drifted off into la-la land when answering.
Example.
QUESTION: "Given the decision to commute the sentence of Libby, given the performance of Iraqi leaders, is it fair for people to ask questions about your commitment to accountability."
BUSH: [After declaring himself "deliberate in my decision-making" and a "fair person"... he wandered back to his favorite subject, Iraq.] ..... "It matters if the United States does not believe in the universality of freedom. It matters to the security of people here at home if we don't work to change the conditions that caused 19 kids to be lured onto airplanes to come and murder our citizens.
"The first question one has to ask on Iraq is: Is it worth it? I could not send a mother's child into combat if I did not believe it was necessary for our short-term and long-term security to succeed in Iraq."
Whoa! Work to "change the conditions" that caused "19 kids" to be "lured" onto airplanes on 9/11. That sounds like clowns handing out lollipops to beardless innocents.
First of all, the terrorists weren't kids. They ranged in age from the early twenties to 33.
And, to "change the conditions" that caused the terrorists to act we should have invaded Saudi Arabia. Of the nineteen "kids," fifteen were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt and one from Lebanon.... none were from Iraq.
Bush was asked about Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's current (and photographed) hand-holding visit with Iran's madman President Ahmadinejad, where it was reported that Maliki said "he appreciated Iran's positive and constructive stance" on Iraq.
Bush's delusional reply, "Now if the signal is that Iran is constructive, I will have a heart to heart with my friend, the prime minister. Because I don't believe they are constructive.
"I don't think he, in his heart of heart, thinks they're constructive either."
Oh no.... The Decider is looking into another Putinish soul and opining.
Will someone please tell Bush his hair is on fire! That we are fighting Iran's war for them in Iraq.... that both Maliki and Iran are Shiites.... and, that as soon as we turn our backs Maliki will rush into Iran's arms... if not sooner.
Eugene Robinson in his op ed today, "Just Another Vacation From Reality" (WaPo) asks why Iraq or any nation would appreciate being invaded, occupied and having Western democracy imposed at the point of a gun?
They wouldn't. But, The Decider justifies.... "I firmly believe it is an ideological struggle. And I believe it's a struggle between the forces of moderation and reasonableness and good and the forces of murder and intolerance.
"And what has made the stakes so high is that those forces of murder and intolerance have shown they have a capacity to murder innocent people in our own country....."
The Decider won't recognize that the "forces of murder".... no longer "kids," I guess.... weren't from Iraq, but from Saudi Arabia.
What he "thinks," and his neocon ideology justifies, is clear. As long as he is in office he'll wage war in Iraq, regardless of the facts on the ground or the price our country is paying.
Bush turns a deaf ear to the American public's answer "NO" when he asks... "Is it worth it?."
As Robinson says.... "if you think Bush is going to care what [Gen.] Petraeus's report says in September, get out of the sun immediately and drink lots of water. You're delirious."
Example.
QUESTION: "Given the decision to commute the sentence of Libby, given the performance of Iraqi leaders, is it fair for people to ask questions about your commitment to accountability."
BUSH: [After declaring himself "deliberate in my decision-making" and a "fair person"... he wandered back to his favorite subject, Iraq.] ..... "It matters if the United States does not believe in the universality of freedom. It matters to the security of people here at home if we don't work to change the conditions that caused 19 kids to be lured onto airplanes to come and murder our citizens.
"The first question one has to ask on Iraq is: Is it worth it? I could not send a mother's child into combat if I did not believe it was necessary for our short-term and long-term security to succeed in Iraq."
Whoa! Work to "change the conditions" that caused "19 kids" to be "lured" onto airplanes on 9/11. That sounds like clowns handing out lollipops to beardless innocents.
First of all, the terrorists weren't kids. They ranged in age from the early twenties to 33.
And, to "change the conditions" that caused the terrorists to act we should have invaded Saudi Arabia. Of the nineteen "kids," fifteen were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt and one from Lebanon.... none were from Iraq.
Bush was asked about Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's current (and photographed) hand-holding visit with Iran's madman President Ahmadinejad, where it was reported that Maliki said "he appreciated Iran's positive and constructive stance" on Iraq.
Bush's delusional reply, "Now if the signal is that Iran is constructive, I will have a heart to heart with my friend, the prime minister. Because I don't believe they are constructive.
"I don't think he, in his heart of heart, thinks they're constructive either."
Oh no.... The Decider is looking into another Putinish soul and opining.
Will someone please tell Bush his hair is on fire! That we are fighting Iran's war for them in Iraq.... that both Maliki and Iran are Shiites.... and, that as soon as we turn our backs Maliki will rush into Iran's arms... if not sooner.
Eugene Robinson in his op ed today, "Just Another Vacation From Reality" (WaPo) asks why Iraq or any nation would appreciate being invaded, occupied and having Western democracy imposed at the point of a gun?
They wouldn't. But, The Decider justifies.... "I firmly believe it is an ideological struggle. And I believe it's a struggle between the forces of moderation and reasonableness and good and the forces of murder and intolerance.
"And what has made the stakes so high is that those forces of murder and intolerance have shown they have a capacity to murder innocent people in our own country....."
The Decider won't recognize that the "forces of murder".... no longer "kids," I guess.... weren't from Iraq, but from Saudi Arabia.
What he "thinks," and his neocon ideology justifies, is clear. As long as he is in office he'll wage war in Iraq, regardless of the facts on the ground or the price our country is paying.
Bush turns a deaf ear to the American public's answer "NO" when he asks... "Is it worth it?."
As Robinson says.... "if you think Bush is going to care what [Gen.] Petraeus's report says in September, get out of the sun immediately and drink lots of water. You're delirious."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)