||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
With Trembling Fingers
by Hal Crowther
(Hal Crowther is a former writer for Time and Newsweek, the Buffalo
News and the North Carolina Spectator before parking his column at
the
Independent in Durham, N.C.. He won the H.L. Mencken Award for column
writing in 1992.).
Despite the worst foreign policy blunder in American history, George
W. Bush and his millionaire supporters don't know the meaning of the
word shame
(Durham, NC) Independent, May 12, 2004
I used to take a drink on occasion with a network newsman famed for
his impenetrable calm -- his apparent pulse rate that of a large
mammal in deep hibernation -- and in an avuncular moment he advised
me that I'd do all right, in the long run, if I could only avoid the
kind of journalism committed to the keyboard "with trembling fingers." I
recognized the wisdom of this advice and endeavored over the years to
write as little as possible when my blood pressure was soaring and my
face was streaked with tears. The lava flows of indignation ebb
predictably with age and hardening arteries, and nearing three-score
I thought I'd never have to take another tranquilizer -- or a double
bourbon -- to keep my fingers steady on the keys.
I never imagined 2004. It would be sophomoric to say that there was
never a worse year to be an American. My own memory preserves the
dread summer of 1968. My parents suffered the consequences of 1941
and 1929, and my grandfather Jack Allen, who lived through all those dark
years, might have added 1918, with the flu epidemic and the Great War
in France that each failed, very narrowly, to kill him. Drop back
another generation or two and we encounter 1861.
But if this is not the worst year yet to be an American, it's the
worst year by far to be one of those hag-ridden wretches who comment
on the American scene. The columnist who trades in snide one-liners
flounders like a stupid comic with a tired audience; TV comedians and
talk-show hosts who try to treat 2004 like any zany election year
have become grotesque, almost loathsome. Our most serious, responsible
newspaper columnists are so stunned by the disaster in Iraq that
they've begun to quote poetry by Rupert Brooke and Wilfred Owen. They
lower their voices; they sound like Army chaplains delivering
eulogies over ranks of flag-draped coffins, under a hard rain from an iron
sky.
Yeats' "blood-dimmed tide is loosed." The war news has already
deteriorated from bad to tragic to pre-apocalyptic, which leaves no
suitable category for these excruciating reports on the sexual
torture of Iraqi prisoners. Fingers, be still. In less than a year, the
morale of the occupying forces has sunk so low that murder, suicide, rape
and sexual harassment have become alarming statistics, and now the
warriors of democracy -- the emissaries of civilization -- stand
accused of every crime this side of cannibalism. Osama bin Laden has
always anathematized America's culture, as well as its geopolitical
influence. To him these atrocities are a sign of Allah's certain
favor, a great moral victory, a vindication of his deepest anger and
darkest crimes.
Where does it go from here? The nightmare misadventure in Iraq is
over, beyond the reach of any reasonable argument, though many more
body bags will be filled. In Washington, chicken hawks will still be
squawking about "digging in" and winning, but Vietnam proved
conclusively that no modern war of occupation will ever be won.
(Vietnam clip) Every occupation is doomed.
The only way you "win" a war of occupation is the old-fashioned way,
the way Rome finally defeated the Carthaginians: kill all the
fighters, enslave everyone else, raze the cities and sow the fields
with salt.
Otherwise the occupied people will fight you to the last peasant, and
why shouldn't they? If our presidential election fails to dislodge
the crazy bastards who annexed Baghdad, many of us in this country would
welcome regime change by any intervention, human or divine. But if,
say, the Chinese came in to rescue us -- Operation American Freedom
--how long would any of us, left-wing or right, put up with an
occupying army teaching us Chinese-style democracy? A guerrilla who opposes
an
invading army on his own soil is not a terrorist, he's a resistance
fighter. In Iraq we're not fighting enemies but making enemies. As
Richard Clarke and others have observed, every dollar, bullet and
American life that we spend in Iraq is one that's not being spent in
the war on terrorism. Every Iraqi, every Muslim we kill or torture or
humiliate is a precious shot of adrenaline for Osama and al Qaeda.
The irreducible truth is that the invasion of Iraq was the worst
blunder, the most staggering miscarriage of judgment, the most
fateful, egregious, deceitful abuse of power in the history of
American foreign policy. If you don't believe it yet, just keep
watching. Apologists strain to dismiss parallels with Vietnam, but
the similarities are stunning. In every action our soldiers kill innocent
civilians, and in every other action apparent innocents kill our
soldiers -- and there's never any way to sort them out. And now these
acts of subhuman sadism, these little My Lais.
Since the defining moment of the Bush presidency, the preposterous
flight-suit, Fox News-produced photo-op on the USS Abraham Lincoln in
front of the banner that read "Mission Accomplished," the shaming
truth is that everything has gone wrong. Just as it was bound to go
wrong, as many of us predicted it would go wrong -- if anything, more
hopelessly wrong than any of us would have dared to prophesy. Iraq is
an epic trainwreck, and there's not a single American citizen who's
going to walk away unscathed.
The shame of this truth, of such a failure and so much deceit
exposed, would have brought on mass resignations or votes of no confidence
in any free country in the world. In Japan not long ago, there would
have been ritual suicides, shamed officials disemboweling themselves with
samurai swords. Yet up to this point -- at least to the point where
we see grinning soldiers taking pictures of each other over piles of
naked Iraqis -- neither the president, the vice president nor any of
the individuals who urged and designed this debacle have resigned or
been terminated -- or even apologized. They have betrayed no
familiarity with the concept of shame.
Thousands of young Americans are dead, maimed or mutilated, XXX
billions of dollars have been wasted and all we've gained is a
billion new enemies and a mouthful of dust -- of sand. Chaos reigns, but in
the midst of it we have this presidential election. George Bush has
defined himself as a war president, and it's fitting that the war
should be his undoing. But even now the polls don't guarantee, or
even indicate, his demise.
Conventional wisdom says that an incumbent president with a $200
million war chest cannot be defeated, and that one who commands a
live, bleeding, suffering army in the field is doubly invincible. By
this logic, the most destructively incompetent president we have ever
had will be rewarded with a second term. That would probably mean a
military draft and more wars in the oil countries, and, under
visionaries like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, a chance for the USA
to emulate 19th-century Paraguay, which simultaneously declared war
on Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay and fought ferociously until 90% of the
male population was dead.
What hope then? Impeachment is impossible when the president's party
controls both houses of Congress, though Watergate conspirator John
Dean, who ought to know, claims in his new book that there are
compelling legal arguments for a half dozen bills of impeachment
against George W. Bush. Peer pressure? At the White House, world
opinion gets no more respect than FBI memos or uncomfortable facts.
Many Americans seem unaware that scarcely anyone on the planet Earth
supported the Iraq adventure, no one anywhere except the 40-50
million Republican loyalists who voted for George Bush in 2000.
Among significant world leaders he recruited only Great Britain's
Tony Blair -- whose career may be ruined because most Britons disagree
with him -- and the abominable Ariel Sharon, that vile tub of blood and
corruption who recently used air-to-ground missiles to assassinate a
paraplegic in a wheelchair at the door of his mosque. (Palestinians
quickly squandered any sympathy or moral advantage they gained from
this atrocity by strapping a retarded 16-year-old into a suicide
bomber's kit. Such is the condition of the human race in the Middle
East, variously known as the Holy Land or the Cradle of
Civilization.) Says Sharon, oleaginously, of Bush: "Something in his soul
committed him to act with great courage against world terror."
The rest of the known world, along with the United Nations, has been
dead set against us from the start. But they carry no weight. Thanks
to our tax dollars and the well-fed, strong but not bulletproof
bodies of our children -- though mostly children from lower-income
families -- George Bush and his lethal team of oil pirates, Cold
Warriors and Likudists commands the most formidable military machine
on earth. No nation, with the possible exception of China, would ever
dare to oppose them directly.
But the Chinese aren't coming to save us. Nothing and no one can stop
these people except you and me, and the other 100 million or so
American citizens who may vote in the November election. This isn't
your conventional election, the usual dim-witted, media-managed
Mister America contest where candidates vie for charm and style points and
hire image coaches to help them act more confident and presidential.
This is a referendum on what is arguably the most dismal performance
by any incumbent president -- and inarguably the biggest mistake.
This is a referendum on George W. Bush, the worst thing that has happened
to the United States of America since the invention of the cathode
ray tube.
One problem with this referendum is that the case against George Bush
is much too strong. Just to spell it out is to sound like a bitter
partisan. I sit here on the 67th birthday of Saddam Hussein facing a
haystack of incriminating evidence that comes almost to my armpit.
What matters most, what signifies? Journalists used to look for the
smoking gun, but this time we have the cannons of Waterloo, we have
Gettysburg and Sevastopol, we have enough gunsmoke to cause asthma in
heaven. I'm overwhelmed. Maybe I should light a match to this
mountain of paper and immolate myself. On the near side of my haystack,
among
hundreds of quotes circled and statistics underlined, just one thing
leaped out at me. A quote I had underlined was from the testimony of
Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg trials, not long before Hitler's
vice-fuhrer poisoned himself in his jail cell:
"... It is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is
a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to
the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell
them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in
every country."
Goering's dark wisdom gained weight when a friend called me and
reported that Vice President Cheney was so violently partisan in his
commencement speech at Westminster College in Missouri -- so rabid in
his attacks on John Kerry as a anti-American peace-marching
crypto-communist -- that the college president felt obliged to send
the student body an email apologizing for Cheney's coarseness.
If you think it's exceptionally shameless for a man who dodged
Vietnam to play the patriot card against a decorated veteran, remember that
Georgia Republicans played the same card, successfully, against Sen.
Max Cleland, who suffered multiple amputations in Vietnam. In 2001
and 2002, George Bush and his Machiavelli, Karl Rove, approved political
attack ads that showed the faces of Tom Daschle and other Democratic
senators alongside the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
And somewhere in hell, Goering and Goebbels toasted each other with a
schnapps.
Am I polarized? I've never been a registered Democrat, I'm sick of
this two-party straitacket, I wish to God it didn't take Yale and a
major American fortune to create a presidential candidate. The only
current Democratic leaders who show me any courage are Nancy Pelosi
and old Bob Byrd -- Hillary Clinton has been especially cagy and
gutless on this war -- and John Kerry himself may leave a lot to be
desired. He deserves your vote not because of anything he ever did or
promises to do, but simply because he did not make this sick mess in
Iraq and owes no allegiance to the sinister characters who designed
it. And because his own "place in history," so important to the kind
of men who run for president, would now rest entirely on his success
in getting us out of it.
Kerry made a courageous choice at least once in his life, when he
came home with his ribbons and demonstrated against the war in Vietnam.
But Sen. Kerry could turn out to be a stiff, a punk, an alcoholic, and
he'd still be a colossal improvement over the man who turned Paul
Wolfowitz loose in the Middle East.
The myth that there was no real difference between Democrats and
Republicans, which I once considered seriously and which Ralph Nader
rode to national disaster four years ago, was shattered forever the
day George Bush announced his cabinet and his appointments for the
Department of Defense.
I'm aware that there are voters -- 40 million? -- who don't see it
this way. I come from a family of veterans and commissioned officers;
I understand patriots in wartime. If a spotted hyena stepped out of
Air Force One wearing a baby-blue necktie, most Americans would
salute and sing "Hail to the Chief." President Bush cultivated his patriots
by spending $46 million on media in the month of March alone. Somehow
I'm on his mailing list. (Is that because my late father, with the
same name, was a registered Republican, or can Bush afford to mail
his picture to every American with an established address?) Twice a week
I open an appeal for cash to crush John Kerry and the quisling liberal
conspiracy, and now I own six gorgeous color photographs of the
president and his wife. I'm sure some of my neighbors frame the
president's color photographs and fill those little blue envelopes he
sends us with their hard-earned dollars.
I struggle against the suspicion that so many of my fellow Americans
are conceptually challenged. I want to reason with my neighbors; I
want to engage these lost Americans. What makes you angry, neighbor?
What arouses your suspicions? Does it bother you that this
administration made terrorism a low priority, dismissed key
intelligence that might have prevented the 9/11 catastrophe, then
exploited it to justify the pre-planned destruction of Saddam
Hussein, who had nothing to do with al Qaeda? All this is no longer
conjecture, but direct reportage from cabinet-level meetings by the turncoat
insiders Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill.
If the Pentagon ever thought Saddam had "weapons of mass
destruction," it was only because the Pentagon gave them to him. As Kevin
Phillips recounts in American Dynasty, officials of the Reagan and first
Bush administrations eagerly supplied Saddam with arms while he was using
chemical weapons on the Kurds. They twice sent Donald Rumsfeld to
court Saddam, in 1983 and 1984, when the dictator was in the glorious
prime of his monsterhood.
This scandal, concurrent with Iran-Contra, was briefly called
"Iraqgate," and, yes, among the names of those officials implicated
you'll find most of the engineers of our current foreign policy.
(They also signaled their fractious client, Saddam, that it might be all
right to overrun part of Kuwait; you remember what happened when he
tried to swallow it all.) Does any of this trouble you? Does it worry
you that Dick Cheney, as president of the nefarious Halliburton
Corporation, sold Iraq $73 million in oilfield services between 1997
and 2000, even as he plotted with the Wolfowitz faction to whack
Saddam? Or that Halliburton, with its CEO's seat still warm from
Cheney's butt, was awarded unbid contracts worth up to $15 billion
for the Iraq invasion, and currently earns a billion dollars a month from
this bloody disaster? Not to mention its $27.4 million overcharge for
our soldiers' food.
These are facts, not partisan rhetoric. Do any of them even make you
restless? The cynical game these shape-shifters have been playing in
the Middle East is too Byzantine to unravel in 1,000 pages of text.
But the hypocrisy of the White House is palpable, and beggars belief.
If there's one American who actually believes that Operation Iraqi
Freedom was about democracy for the poor Iraqis, then you, my friend,
are too dangerously stupid to be allowed near a voting booth.
Does it bother you even a little that the personal fortunes of all
four Bush brothers, including the president and the governor, were
acquired about a half step ahead of the district attorney, and that
the royal family of Saudi Arabia invested $1.476 billion in those and
other Bush family enterprises? Or, as Paul Krugman points out, that
it's much easier to establish links between the Bush and bin Laden
families than any between the bin Ladens and Saddam Hussein. Do you
know about Ahmad Chalabi, the administration's favorite Iraqi and
current agent in Baghdad, whose personal fortune was established when
he embezzled several hundred million from his own bank in Jordan and
fled to London to avoid 22 years at hard labor?
That's just a sampling from my haystack. Maybe I can reach you as an
environmentalist, one who resents the gutting of key provisions in
the Clean Air Act? My own Orange County, N.C., chiefly a rural area, was
recently added to a national register of counties with dangerously
polluted air. You say you vote for the president because you're a
conservative. Are you sure? I thought conservatives believed in civil
liberties, a weak federal executive, an inviolable Constitution, a
balanced budget and an isolationist foreign policy. George Bush has
an attorney general who drives the ACLU apoplectic and a vice president
who demands more executive privilege (for his energy seances) than
any elected official has ever received. The president wants a
Constitutional amendment to protect marriage from homosexuals, of all
things. Between tax cuts for his high-end supporters and three years
playing God and Caesar in the Middle East, George Bush has simply
emptied America's wallet with a $480 billion federal deficit
projected for 2004 and the tab on Iraq well over $100 billion and running.
"A lot of so-called conservatives today don't know what the word
means," Barry Goldwater said in 1994, when the current cult of
right-wing radicals and "neocons" had begun to define and assert
themselves. Goldwater was my first political hero, before I was old
enough to read his flaws. But his was the conservatism of the wolf --
the lone wolf -- and this is the conservatism of sheep.
All it takes to make a Bush conservative is a few slogans from talk
radio and pickup truck bumpers, a sneer at "liberals" and maybe a
name-dropping nod to Edmund Burke or John Locke, whom most of them
have never read. Sheep and sheep only could be herded by a ludicrous
but not harmless cretin like Rush Limbaugh, who has just compared the
sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners to "a college fraternity prank" (and
who once called Chelsea Clinton "the family dog" ).
I don't think it's accurate to describe America as polarized between
Democrats and Republicans, or between liberals and conservatives.
It's polarized between the people who believe George Bush and the people
who do not. Thanks to some contested ballots in a state governed by
the president's brother, a once-proud country has been delivered into
the hands of liars, thugs, bullies, fanatics and thieves. The world
pities or despises us, even as it fears us. What this election will
test is the power of money and media to fool us, to obscure the truth
and alter the obvious, to hide a great crime against the public trust
under a blood-soaked flag. The most lavishly funded, most cynical,
most sophisticated political campaign in human history will be out
trolling for fools. I pray to God it doesn't catch you.
by Hal Crowther
Can you get a copy of this under kerry's nose?
Rowland
---
/ o o \
===OO=====OO=================================================
http://pnews.org/vortal/ New World disOrder and Myth Busters
http://g0lem.net/vortal/ Insane Planet and Wacko World
http://g0lem.net/portal/ Bad-Ass Truth and TheGolemsPortal
http://pnews.org/portal/ Naked Truth and PNEWS Portal
http://g0lem.net/PhpWiki/ (Wiki) http://pnews.org/ (Home)
-DON'T FEED THE TROLLS-
=============================================================
\_/ \_/
