September 14th, 2004
Technically, lawyers can represent whom they like. However, as a citizen, Mr. Baker’s apparent “conflict of interests,” in representing Mr. Bush, while his name-sake law firm defends the Sauidi Royal family against the 9-11 familes, concerns me and reminds me of General Eisenhower’s (Republican president, 1953-1961) warning to the nation in his farewell speech:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.” [ Text of Farewell Speech ]
It seems to me that far too many of us, Americans all, have neglected our solemn duty to remain vigilant against the danger that General Eisenhower warned us about.
There are some things that do transcend partisanship.
September 9th, 2004
And yet further proof that the Bush administration has completely bungled the Iraq war, another country has requested that the administration “formally” remove its name from the coalition of the un-willing list:
Costa Rica demands it be removed from a U.S. list of countries supporting Iraq. [ link ]
After looking at the current list of the coalition of the un-willing, it’s clear why US troops continue to bear the brunt of the burden in Iraq (i.e., 1,005 US fatalities).
…………………………………
P.S. I’ll be attending a candle light vigil for our troops tonight… after paying my respects for the fallen, I hope to have a chance to take some pics.
P.S.S. If you want to participate, please click on the link above. Note that you’ll have to agree to the following:
- Our vigils will be simple and dignified. We’ll gather at 8:00 P.M., and stand in a circle, silently, for 45 minutes or so, holding candles — safely away from anything that could catch fire.
- Together, we’ll acknowledge the sacrifice made by the 1,000 brave American men and women who have given their lives in Iraq. It is a time to silently honor our fallen soldiers, and to reflect on the situation in Iraq where 114,000 American troops are now serving, and the events and decisions that led to them being stationed there.
- This is not a rally. Although we may be moved emotionally by our shared reflection and acknowledgement, this is not the place for speeches or announcements.
- These ground rules are important. We ask that you only attend the event if you agree to abide by them.
August 26th, 2004
Here’s the reason why Mr. Bush will not condemn the group doing his dirty little work of character assassination:
For the first time this year in a [L.A.] Times survey, Bush led Kerry in the presidential race, drawing 49 percent among registered voters, compared to 46 percent for the Democrat.
And…
Although a solid majority of Americans say they believe Kerry served honorably in Vietnam, the poll showed that the fierce attacks on the senator from a group of Vietnam veterans criticizing both his performance in combat and anti-war protests at home have left some marks[.]
Bush Overtakes Kerry in Latest L.A. Times Poll [August 25, 2004]
Mr. Bush & Co. know that gutter-politics works, in spite of how much the public complains about it; since there’s always a number of people that’s predisposed to buy the lies, no matter how baseless the charges are.
Here’s just one Associated Press article not getting anywhere near the same air time as the dirty charges made by Mr. Bush & Co., the headline reads: Navy records appear to support Kerry’s version [August 25, 2004].
Of course, Mr. Bush will not condemn the group doing his work; because he knows that there are dividends — consequences be damned. Just ask Mr. McCain. He knows how Bush & Co. operate, and the sort of dirty, nasty, stab-in-the-back ploys they use to stomp on the character of good and honorable men: just look at what Mr. Bush & Co. did to Mr. McCain during the 2000 Republican primary. Here’s Mr. McCain confronting Mr. Bush at the time.
My hat’s off to Mr. Bush & Co., however; because they’ve managed to distract us from far more important things going-on in our own time, not 35 years ago. Just today I read this: Distraught father torches self in Marine van. Florida man received news son had been killed in Iraq combat. [August 25, 2004]. About a week ago I posted the U.S. death toll in Iraq, it then stood at 936; the figure now stands at 967.
I’m hopeful that the American public will see through the lies of Mr. Bush & Co., and send him packing to his Crawford, TX, compound. Then, while Mr. Kerry gets on with the business of fixing the mess that Mr. Bush created, Republicans can focus on their own house. Perhaps they can start with the recommendations made by Mr. Buchanan in his book: Where the Right Went Wrong : How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Hijacked the Bush Presidency. [Amazon Link]
August 25th, 2004
The Bush administration, and even some fellow DPCers, have been passing the buck and have been promoting the false idea that it’s only in hindsight that doubts over Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are apparent. Certainly, Iraq HAD possessed WMD; however, at the time of our invasion, it wasn’t clear whether Iraq CONTINUED to possess WMD. Mr. Bush’s supporters — on this board and elsewhere — point to some quotes by Democratic officials (including Mr. Clinton and Mr. Kerry,) where they state what was the U.S. government’s public position on Iraq’s WMD: 1. That Saddam Hussein had used WMD in the past (over 10 years ago), 2. That Saddam Hussein was a dangerous man, and 3. That the U.S. would prevent Iraq from developing WMD. Here’s one of the quotes that Mr. Bush’s supporters point to, and which I lifted from another thread in the DPC message board:
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime… He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation… And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction… So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real”
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Please notice how ellipses (i.e., …) are used in the quote; indicating that it’s not a complete statement, thus Mr. Kerry’s meaning has been completely stripped. Now, Mr. Kerry’s full statement is longer, but worth reading if you’re interested in discerning his real meaning:
First, destroying al Qaeda and other anti-American terror groups must remain our top priority. While the Administration has largely prosecuted this war with vigor, it also has made costly mistakes. The biggest, in my view, was their reluctance to translate their robust rhetoric into American military engagement in Afghanistan. They relied too much on local warlords to carry the fight against our enemies and this permitted many al Qaeda members, and according to evidence, including Osama bin Laden himself, to slip through our fingers. Now the Administration must redouble its efforts to track them down. And we need to pressure Pakistan to get control of its territories along the Afghanistan border, which have become a haven for terrorists.
Second, without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses.
He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America’s response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world’s response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.
That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm.
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies.
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 (For the full text of the speech before the Council of Foreign Relations please see here).
Mr. Kerry, in that same speech, continues:
As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don’t have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action.
The Administration must pass this test. I believe they must take the time to do the hard work of diplomacy. They must do a better job of making their case to the American people and to the world.
Please note how important sentences were completely omitted from the quote that Mr. Bush’s supporters — on this board and elsewhere — attribute to Mr. Kerry. The example of this quote is a good illustration of Bush & Co. twists facts, omit important truths and aim to deflect criticism against the Iraq war — a war of choice, and not one of necessity.
From Mr. Kerry’s full statement the following are clear:
1. Mr. Bush failed to aggressively pursue al Queda in the Afghan-Pakistan border; thus allowing Osama Bin Laden to get away.
2. Saddam Hussein is a bad man and that if permitted to obtain WMD — that is, “Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction” — would be bad, given his propensity to miscalculate. However, note that Mr. Kerry’s full statement makes it clear that there were doubts about whether Iraq possessed WMD. I’ll grant you that there’s some nuance here; however, I’d hope that my fellow citizens would have the patience to weight issues of war and peace with some serious consideration.
3. At the time that Mr. Kerry made this speech, only eight weeks before the Iraqi invasion, it wasn’t absolutely clear that Iraq possessed WMD; nor, as Mr. Kerry points out, was it clear that Mr. Bush had made a compelling case for war as the only alternative.
Again, it’s worth remembering that Mr. Bush’s rhetoric during the pre-invasion period did not hint at any doubts over the existence of Iraq’s WMD. In fact, Mr. Bush unequivocally stated that Iraq still had WMD: “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons.” (George W. Bush, Weekly Radio Address, White House (9/28/2002). Please see Iraq on the Record: The Bush Administration’s Public Statements on Iraq.) So, even though doubts over the continued existence of Iraq’s WMD abounded, Bush & Co. sold war to the American people as if it were a clean cut case without any detractors. I sincerely wonder whether the American people would’ve supported invading another country if the serious doubts that abounded had been publicly weighted by the Bush administration (not to mention the media).
Mr. Bush and his supporters are desperately hoping that the American public will now forget the serious doubts that were voiced about the CONTINUED existence of Iraq’s WMD. It’s worth remembering that various United Nations members and millions of people around the world, were not convinced by the weak case that Bush & Co. were making for invading Iraq. The head of the U.N.’s WMD inspection team at the time, Dr. Hans Blix, reflecting back on the pre-invasion period, said:
“Well, they [the Bush administration] certainly advanced weapons of mass destruction as the decisive reason for going to war, and I think the evidence was rather weak at the time.”
Dr. Hans Blix (read the rest here)
One can argue if Mr. Bush intentionally misled us about the CONTINUED existence of Iraq’s WMD; however, one thing is not open to interpretation, because it’s a FACT: THERE WERE SERIOUS DOUBTS ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF IRAQ’S WMD AT THE TIME OF INVASION. That fact simply isn’t going away, no matter how often Mr. Bush & Co. beat us over the head with their trite excuse of, “Oh, it’s only in hindsight that doubts have come to light.” As I mentioned to a fellow DPCer on this board, to believe that it’s only in hindsight that doubts over Iraq’s WMD seem apparent, is to lie to one’s self and to willfully ignore recent history.
At the very least, Mr. Bush & Co. should: 1. Stop deploying the “it’s only in hindsight” defense; 2. Mr. Bush should acknowledge that mistakes were made; and, 3. We should not let anyone mislead us (again), by their distortions of the record and by ignoring recent history, into believing that war was the only alternative that we had before Bush & Co. invaded Iraq.
