Friday, March 21, 2008

READING BETWEEN THE LIVES

March 19, 2008

President George W. Bush delivers remarks on the Global War on Terror during a visit Wednesday, March 19, 2008, to the Pentagon.

10:04 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:

Thank you all.

Deputy Secretary England, thanks for the introduction.

One boss may not be here, but the other one is.

[PLEASE SAY HELLO TO LAURA, EVERYONE]

(Laughter)

On this day in 2003, the United States began Operation Iraqi Freedom.

[NOT THE United States…BUT YOUR DECIDER, ME (or I?) BEGAN Operation Iraqi Freedom]

As the campaign unfolded

[CAMPAIGN? ISN’T THAT THE WORD FOR ELECTIONS AND STUFF?],

tens and thousands of our troops poured

[LIKE MOLASSES?]

across the Iraqi border to liberate the Iraqi people and remove a regime that threatened free nations

[A REGIME WHOSE ARMED FORCES WERE DESTROYED BY MY DADDY...A REGIME THAT HAD NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION…A REGIME THAT WAS NOT A THREAT TO AMERICA].

Five years into this battle,

[ACTUALLY, IT’S AN OCCUPATION. I GUESS THAT MAKES ME THE DECIDER AND THE OCCUPIER]

(Laughter)

there is an understandable debate over whether the war was worth fighting,

[IT’S ONLY ME WHO DOESN’T UNDERSTAND THE DEBATE]

whether the fight is worth winning, and whether we can win it.

[REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY TIMES YOU’VE HEARD OTHERS SAY THAT A MILITARY SOLUTION IN IRAQ ISN’T FEASIBLE]

The men and women who crossed into Iraq five years ago removed a tyrant, liberated a country, rescued millions from unspeakable horrors…

[ORPHANED MILLIONS, KILLED MANY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, AND IRRADIATED IRAQ].

NOTE:

As of today's five-year anniversary of the US attack on Iraq, 1,189, 173 Iraqis have died as a consequence of the invasion, according to the Iraq Body Count. The shocking number, at least 10 times greater than most estimates cited in the US media, is derived largely from a major study by the prestigious British medical journal, Lancet. (Click here for a complete explanation of methodology.)

The recent Winter Soldier hearings offered harrowing testimony from soldiers returned from the field all attesting to the utter brutality of the US occupation.

The Nation

2/19/08

Operation Iraqi Freedom was a remarkable display of military effectiveness

[AND POLITICAL DECEPTION].

Forces from the UK, Australia, Poland and other allies joined our troops in the initial operations.

[AND WERE ALSO DUPED BY ME AND MY MINIONS]

As they advanced, our troops fought their way through sand storms so intense that they blackened the daytime sky.

[EVEN THOUGH THE SAND IN THOSE STORMS WAS WHITE]

Our troops engaged in pitched battles with the Fedayeen Saddam -- death squads acting on the orders of Saddam Hussein that obeyed neither the conventions of war nor the dictates of conscience.

[KIND OF LIKE TORTURE]

Aided by the most effective and precise air campaign in history

[THERE’S THAT WORD CAMPAIGN AGAIN],

coalition forces raced across 350 miles of enemy territory

[I CALL IT THE MESOPOTAMIAN IDIDIROD]

-- destroying Republican Guard Divisions, pushing through the Karbala Gap, capturing Saddam International Airport, and liberating Baghdad in less than one month

[BEFORE IT BECAME ENGULFED IN CHAOS AND BLOODY MAYHEM]

Along the way, our troops added new chapters to the story of American military heroism.

[AND I ADDED NEW CHAPTERS TO HISTORY’S STORY OF INFAMY AND STUPIDITY]

Across the Iraqi countryside they uncovered mass graves of thousands executed by the regime.

[In February 1991, just after the start of the brief Gulf War, there was a large fight at the "Neutral Zone" located at the Iraq-Saudi border. American troops slaughtered thousands of Iraqi soldiers, after which American earth-movers plowed the Iraqis into the ground and covered them up. Possibly thousands of Iraqis were buried in the mass graves the American military created.

Near the end of the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. troops slaughtered thousands of Iraqi soldiers who were retreating from Kuwait. Once again, the dead soldiers were plowed into the ground. I can only wonder what weeds will grow from those seeds.

One mass grave near a Baghdad palace is known to contain Iraqi soldiers who died when American soldiers stormed Baghdad.

When the U.S. Marines destroyed Fallujah, at least 600 Iraqis died — and most of them were buried in mass graves set up in soccer fields, called the "Graveyard of the Martyrs" by Fallujah residents.]

Because we acted, Saddam's regime is no longer invading its neighbors or attacking them with chemical weapons and ballistic missiles.

[If the gassing was done by Iraqi soldiers, it was done with chemical weapons that came from the United States. If it was such a terrible act, why did the Reagan administration make it possible? If gassing your "own people" is such a heinous act, why did the U.S. government use gas against the Branch Davidians at Waco?]

Because we acted, the world is better and United States of America is safer.

[I AM YOUR DECIDER. I HAVE DECIDED THAT THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL BELIEVE]

(Applause.)

The battle in Iraq has been longer and harder and more costly than we anticipated -- but it is a fight we must win.

[OR LOSE BY TRYING TO WIN]

So our troops have engaged these enemies with courage and determination.

[COME ON SPEECH WRITERS! OUR TROOPS ARE NOT GETTING MARRIED, SO QUIT SAYING THAT THEY HAVE ENGAGED THEIR ENEMIES]

And as they've battled the terrorists and extremists in Iraq, they have helped the Iraqi people reclaim their nation

[A NATION THAT MILLIONS OF IRAQIS HAVE LEFT],

and helped a young democracy rise from the rubble of Saddam Hussein's tyranny.

[OR WAS IT THE RUBBLE OF MY SHOCK AND AWE?]

The terrorists who murder the innocent in the streets of Baghdad want to murder the innocent in the streets of America. Defeating this enemy in Iraq will make it less likely that we'll face the enemy here at home.

[YOU’VE HEARD ME CATAPULT THIS PROPAGANDA BEFORE]

A little over a year ago, the fight in Iraq was faltering.

[BUT DEATHS WERE NOT]

Extremist elements were succeeding in their efforts to plunge Iraq into chaos.

[A FOREIGN INVASION AND OCCUPATION DIDN’T HELP]

They had established safe havens in many parts of the country. They were creating divisions among the Iraqis along sectarian lines.

And their strategy of using violence in Iraq to cause divisions in America was working

[THE EXTREMISTS WERE CAUSING DIVISIONS IN AMERICA? THIS IS NEWS TO ME]---

as pressures built here in Washington for withdrawal before the job was done.

[WAR FOR ME---YOUR LONG WAR PRESIDENT---IS A JOB]

My administration understood that America could not retreat in the face of terror.

[JUST AS WE COULD NOT RETREAT FROM DICK’S SHOTGUN]

And we knew that if we did not act, the violence that had been consuming Iraq would worsen, and spread, and could eventually reach genocidal levels.

[OOPS! WRONG WORD. GENOCIDAL IS WHAT MY SHOCK AND AWE HAS PRODUCED]

So we reviewed the strategy -- and changed course in Iraq.

[AND THE CURSE]

We sent reinforcements into the country in a dramatic policy shift that is now known as "the surge."

[OR “THE SPLURGE” AS THE PENTAGON LIKES TO CALL IT]

General David Petraeus took command with a new mission: Work with Iraqi forces to protect the Iraqi people, pressure [sic] the enemy into strongholds

[STRONGHOLDS? DON’T WE WANT THE ENEMY IN WEAK HOLDS?].

There's still hard work to be done in Iraq. The gains we have made are fragile and reversible.

[BY SAYING THIS IT ALLOWS ME TO CONTINUE MY OCCUPATION AS IF IT WERE A SLINKY TOY: VICTORY IS ALWAYS ON THE HORIZON, BUT THERE ARE UPS AND DOWNS, BACK AND FORTHS, EBBS AND FLOWS…UNTIL THE JOB IS DONE!]

"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse."

[EXCEPT IN IRAQ WHERE THEY LIKE STRONG CAMELS]

Next month, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will come to Washington to testify before Congress. I will await their recommendations before making decisions on our troop levels in Iraq.

[BUT LIKE I DID WITH FALLON, IF THEY DON’T SAY WHAT I WANT TO HEAR, THEY’LL HAVE TO HIT THE ROAD]

The successes we are seeing in Iraq are undeniable -- yet some in Washington still call for retreat. War critics can no longer credibly argue that we're losing in Iraq -- so now they argue the war costs too much.

[BY SAYING THIS, I CAN INSINUATE THAT THE CUT-AND-RUNNERS AND WHITE FLAG-WAVERS ARE UNPATRIOTIC]

In recent months we've heard exaggerated estimates of the costs of this war.

[DON’T LISTEN TO NOBEL LAUREATES OR HARVARD GRADS WHEN YOU CAN LISTEN TO A YALE GRAD WITH A C AVERAGE AND A SKULL AND BONES ACROSS HIS CHEST]

No one would argue that this war has not come at a high cost in lives and treasure---

[EXCEPT YOUR DECIDER…ME…MYSELF…AND I]

but those costs are necessary when we consider the cost of a strategic victory for our enemies in Iraq.

[DAMMIT SPEECH WRITERS! A STRATEGIC VICTORY FOR OUR ENEMIES?]

If we were to allow our enemies to prevail in Iraq---Iraq would descend into chaos.

[RIGHT NOW IT’S JUST A LITTLE MIXED UP, THAT’S ALL]

The terrorists intend even greater harm to our country

[EVEN GREATER SINCE MY INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ]

Throughout the war on terror, we have brought the enemy -- we have fought the enemy on every single battlefront.

[FREUDIAN SLIP: BROUGHT THE ENEMY?]


And so long as the terrorist danger remains, the United States of America will continue to fight the enemy wherever it makes its stand.

[WHEREVER IT SITS, SPITS OR SLEEPS. LOOK OUT IRAN…LOOK OUT SYRIA…LOOK OUT PAKISTAN!]

(Applause.)

We will stay on the offense.

[AND I WILL REMAIN OFFENSIVE]

So we're helping the people of Iraq establish a democracy [UNDER AMERICA’S CORPORATE CONTROL] in the heart of the Middle East.

[OR THE LIVER IF YOU PREFER IT]

A free Iraq will fight terrorists instead of harboring them.

[DOES IRAQ HAVE HARBORS?]

A free Iraq will be an example for others of the power of liberty to change the societies and to displace despair with hope.

[AND DISPLACE MILLIONS OF CITIZENS FROM THEIR COUNTRY THAT GOT BOMBED, SHOCKED, AND AWED WITH A PREEMPTIVE AND PERFIDIOUS WAR]

Five years ago tonight, I promised the American people that in the struggle ahead "we will accept no outcome but victory."

[BUT I STILL CAN’T TELL YOU WHAT THE HELL IS MEANT BY VICTORY]

The battle in Iraq is noble, it is necessary, and it is just.

[WITH MY FINGERS DOUBLE-CROSSED]

And with your courage, the battle in Iraq will end in victory.

God bless.

(Applause.)


IT'S THE OIL STUPID!

Thursday, March 20, 2008

SEE DICK AND JOHN

See Dick.

See John.

See Dick and John in Iraq.

See Dick and John smile as they walk and talk in Iraq.

See Dick and John praise the Decider’s War (not the occupation).

See Dick and John pull the wool over our eyes (and over their ears).

“Jump Dick!”

“Jump John!”

Said George W. Bush.

Keep my long war going.

Make my legacy last.

Finish the job that I started.

Run John! (FOR THE PRESIDENCY!)

Run Dick! (AWAY FROM IMPEACHMENT!)

Run, Dick, run!

Run, John, run!

So I can go back to my ranch!

IT'S THE OIL STUPID!

It would not have been possible for me ever to trust someone who acquired office by the shameful means Mr. Bush and his abettors resorted to in the last presidential election. His nonentity was rapidly becoming more apparent than ever when the catastrophe of Sept. 11, 2001, provided him and his handlers with a role for him, that of "wartime leader", which they, and he in turn, were quick to exploit. This role was used at once to silence all criticism of the man and his words as unpatriotic, and to provide the auspices for a sustained assault upon civil liberties, environmental protections, and general welfare. The perpetuation of this role of "wartime leader" is the primary reason-- more important even than the greed for oil fields and the wish to blot out his father's failure-- for the present determination to visit war upon Iraq, kill and maim countless people, and antagonize much of the world of which Mr. Bush had not heard until recently. The real iniquities of Saddam Hussein should be recognized, in this context, as the pretexts they are. His earlier atrocities went unmentioned as long as he was an ally of former Republican administrations, which were happy, in their time, to supply him with weapons. I think that someone who was maneuvered into office against the will of the electorate, as Mr. Bush was, should be allowed to make no governmental decisions (including judicial appointments) that might outlast his questionable term, and if the reasons for war were many times greater than they have been said to be I would oppose any thing of the kind under such "leadership". To arrange a war in order to be re-elected outdoes even the means employed in the last presidential election. Mr. Bush and his plans are a greater danger to the United States than Saddam Hussein.

W. S. Merwin


And (unfortunately) this from:

http://www.presstv.com


Cheney: Iran might be next US target
Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:17:01


A senior aide to the US Vice President has reportedly said a military option against Iran over its nuclear program is on the table again.

Vice President Dick Cheney is again talking about possible US military action to shut down Iran's nuclear program, the Israeli website DEBKA quoted the aide as saying.

The official added Cheney had told US troops in a military base in Iraq that "Iran has got to be very high on that list (of the countries that might be attacked)".

The remarks came ahead of the talks Cheney was to hold during his 10-day tour of the Middle East, which began Monday, March 17 in Iraq.

The report added that Cheney is again talking about possible US military action to shut down Iran's nuclear program, citing military and political sources in the region.

Cheney stopped over in Oman Wednesday, after two days in Iraq. He will travel to Saudi Arabia and will be in al-Quds next Saturday. He is also scheduled to visit Ramallah and Turkey.

According to the report, Cheney would emphasize the Bush administration's decision to distance itself from the National Intelligence Estimate indicating that "Iran has halted its nuclear arms program in 2003."

The report has undermined the position of hawkish politicians who were beating the drums of war with Iran.

Cheney will also underlines that "the administration now buys British, German, French and Israeli intelligence estimates that Iran is indeed pressing forward with programs for building nuclear weapons, warheads and ballistic missiles for their delivery."

The report added the Americans will need the cooperation of Oman, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey to mount a military attacks on Iran.

Israel was notified by the White House that the Iranian issue had been added to Cheney's regional agenda at the last minute, DEBKA quoted informed sources as saying.

SB/RE


Wednesday, March 19, 2008

GOOD INTENTIONS AND SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST

We have lost Afghanistan as surely as we have lost Iraq and as surely as we are going to "lose" Pakistan. It is our presence, our power, our arrogance, our refusal to learn from history and our terror--yes, our terror--of Islam that is leading us into the abyss. And until we learn to leave these Muslim peoples alone, our catastrophe in the Middle East will only become graver. There is no connection between Islam and "terror". But there is a connection between our occupation of Muslim lands and "terror". It's not too complicated an equation. And we don't need a public inquiry to get it right.

From
"The Little Men and the Inferno
The Hell-Disaster of Iraq"

By ROBERT FISK
March 19, 2008

http://counterpunch.com/fisk03192008.html


*********************************************************


This war was for the good of our nation.

Knowing that the floodgates of global chaos (agriculture---economics---raw materials---climate change etc.) were opening, we needed to secure vital areas of the world that have petroleum.

We had to kill in order for you and I to survive.

This is the way it is and this is the way it has always been.

We can’t be philosophers.

We can't be moralists.

Do you want your children to have food and water...

Or for others to have them?

We could not take the chance that other nations would secure resources that our country---you and I---needed here in the homeland.

Yes, lies were told.

But these lies were well-intentioned fabrications.

The world is standing at the crossroads of a new paradigm:
Who will live and who will die?

We decided for the good of our nation to be the ones who will survive.

It is us or them.
Mad Plato


IT'S THE OIL STUPID!
****************************************

Each year of George W. Bush's war in Iraq has been represented by a thematic falsehood. That Iraq is now calm or more stable is only the latest in a series of such whoppers, which the mainstream press eagerly repeats. The fifth anniversary of Bush's invasion of Iraq will be the last he presides over. Sen. John McCain, in turn, has now taken to dangling the bait of total victory before the American public, and some opinion polls suggest that Americans are swallowing it, hook, line and sinker.
The most famous falsehoods connected to the war were those deployed by the president and his close advisors to justify the invasion. But each of the subsequent years since U.S. troops barreled toward Baghdad in March 2003 has been marked by propaganda campaigns just as mendacious. Here are five big lies from the Bush administration that have shaped perceptions of the Iraq war.

I posit that each year of the war has been characterized by a central lie by the Bush propaganda machine.

Year 1: "There is no guerrilla war.

"Year 2: "Iraq is a model democracy.

"Year 3: "Zarqawi is causing all the trouble.

"Year 4: "There is no Civil War.

"Year 5: "Everything is calm now.

"I also suggest that John McCain is pushing for:

Year 6: "Total victory is around the corner."

Juan Cole


Tuesday, March 18, 2008

SAVIOR OR ANTICHRIST?



Some "kook-nuts" (my neologism) are now alleging that Barack Obama is the third Anti-Christ of Nostradamus:
Mabus.
The above kook-nuts are saying that Mabus can be derived from placing Mr. Obama's name next to Bush, and voila, you will get Mabus, or at least an approximate derivative:
ObaMABUSh.
Yes, and aliens are taking our sperm and ova to make their human-alien hybrids.
Well, that might be true;
But the Obama-Bush juxtaposition which hatches the "next" (last?) Anti-Christ is a
VERY LONG SHOT.
Or...


IT'S THE OIL STUPID!

Monday, March 17, 2008

THE SKY IS NOT FALLING BUT GLACIERS ARE RAPIDLY MELTING



The state of the world is in a sad shambles.
I know that every generation says the same thing about its own time.
The past seems less important than the present.
And the way we have been living indicates that the present is more important to us than our future.

I do not wish for the world to come to an end, but then I think to myself, "Well, maybe it's for the better. Maybe by starting over again things will turn out better."

Yeah, right.
This kind of nonsense has been repeated for centuries.

The serpent is forever devouring its tail.

The U.S. economy is in a slow-down.
A meltdown?
No, it's the world's glaciers that are doing that.

With regard to the economic inertia, we are told that the antidote is to spend, spend, spend.

Lower the interest rates.

Borrow, borrow, borrow!
Spend, spend, spend!

People are making less money than they were (except for the super-rich);
companies are making less money than they were (except for the oil companies);
the dollar has less value;
our nation produces less than it consumes...
Does it logically follow that we should spend more and more?

Isn't this why the glaciers are melting?
Isn't this why wars are being (and have been) fought?

We are over-consuming and over-using...
TOO MUCH.

Start over?

It must be that time again for a new and bigger...
WAR.

Mad Plato


IT'S THE OIL STUPID!

**********************************

AND THIS from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7299561.stm

About the versions
BBC News
watch One-Minute World News
mobiles News services
Your news when you want it


Last Updated: Sunday, 16 March 2008, 19:51 GMT
Glaciers suffer record shrinkage
Glacier. Image: Glaciers Online/Jurg Alean
Some glaciers in Europe have suffered significant losses

The rate at which some of the world's glaciers are melting has more than doubled, data from the United Nations Environment Programme has shown.

Average glacial shrinkage has risen from 30 centimetres per year between 1980 and 1999, to 1.5 metres in 2006.

Some of the biggest losses have occurred in the Alps and Pyrenees mountain ranges in Europe.

Experts have called for "immediate action" to reverse the trend, which is seen as a key climate change indicator.

Estimates for 2006 indicate shrinkage of 1.4 metres of 'water equivalent' compared to half a metre in 2005.

Achim Steiner, Under-Secretary General of the UN and executive director of its environment programme (UNEP), said: "Millions if not billions of people depend directly or indirectly on these natural water storage facilities for drinking water, agriculture, industry and power generation during key parts of the year.

"There are many canaries emerging in the climate change coal mine. The glaciers are perhaps among those making the most noise and it is absolutely essential that everyone sits up and takes notice.

Litmus test

He said that action was already being taken and pointed out that the elements of a green economy were emerging from the more the money invested in renewable energies.

Mr Steiner went on: "The litmus test will come in late 2009 at the climate convention meeting in Copenhagen.

"Here governments must agree on a decisive new emissions reduction and adaptation-focused regime. Otherwise, and like the glaciers, our room for manoeuvre and the opportunity to act may simply melt away."

Dr Ian Willis, of the Scott Polar Research Institute, said: "It is not too late to stop the shrinkage of these ice sheets but we need to take action immediately."

The findings were compiled by the World Glacier Monitoring Service which is supported by UNEP. Thickening and thinning is calculated in terms of 'water equivalent'.

Glaciers across nine mountain ranges were analysed.

Triftgletscher glacier in Switzerland   Image: Glaciers Online/Jurg Alean
Glaciers have been monitored for more than a century

Dr. Wilfried Haeberli, director of the service, said: "The latest figures are part of what appears to be an accelerating trend with no apparent end in sight.

"This continues the trend in accelerated ice loss during the past two and a half decades and brings the total loss since 1980 to more than 10.5 metres of water equivalent."

During 1980-1999, average loss rates had been 0.3 metres per year. Since the turn of the millennium, this rate had increased to about half a metre per year.

The record annual loss during these two decades - 0.7 metres in 1998 - has now been exceeded by three out of the past six year (2003, 2004 and 2006).

On average, one metre water equivalent corresponds to 1.1 metres in ice thickness. That suggests a further shrinking in 2006 of 1.5 actual metres and since 1980 a total reduction in thickness of ice of just over 11.5 metres or almost 38 feet.

In its entirety, the research includes figures from around 100 glaciers, with data showing significant shrinkage taking place in European countries including Austria, Norway, Sweden, Italy, Spain and Switzerland.

Norway's Breidalblikkbrea glacier thinned by almost 3.1 metres in one of the largest reductions.



VIDEO AND AUDIO NEWS
A rapidly shrinking Norwegian glacier



SEE ALSO
Antarctic glaciers show retreat
21 Apr 05 Science/Nature
Arctic dips as global waters rise
15 Jun 06 Science/Nature
Melting of glaciers 'speeds up'
29 Jan 07 Science/Nature

News feeds News feeds



  • MMVIII

  • Most Popular Now The most read story in Europe is: On holiday in North Korea
  • Back to top ^^
AmericasAfricaEuropeMiddle EastSouth AsiaAsia Pacific