| Author |
Message |
    
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 1700
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 02:09 pm: | 
|
The World Agrees: Stop Bush Before He Kills Again
By Robert Scheer
Printed on January 28, 2007
Stop him before he kills again. That is the judgment of the American people, and indeed of the entire world, as to the performance of our president, and no State of the Union address can erase that dismal verdict.
President Bush has accomplished what Osama bin Laden only dreamed of by disgracing the model of American democracy in the eyes of the world. According to an exhaustive BBC poll, nearly three-quarters of those polled in 25 countries oppose the Bush policy on Iraq, and more than two-thirds believe the U.S. presence in the Middle East destabilizes the region.
In other words, the almost universal support the United States enjoyed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks has been completely squandered, as a majority of the world's people now believe that our role in the entire world is negative.
"The thing that comes up repeatedly is not just anger about Iraq," said Steven Kull, the director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which helped conduct the global poll. "The common theme is hypocrisy. The reaction tends to be: 'You were a champion of a certain set of rules. Now you are breaking your own rules, so you are being hypocritical.' "
More depressing, that judgment is shared by those who know us best: our allies in Britain, the only country still willing to share our sacrifices in Bush's once ballyhooed "Coalition of the Willing." Despite British Prime Minister Tony Blair's dogged support of his American chum, fully 81 percent of Britons told the BBC they are opposed to U.S. actions in Iraq, while a scant 14 percent still believe the United States is a stabilizing force in the Mideast.
But it is not just our failure in that all-important region that disgraces us. Those around the world who still believe we play a positive global role has dropped to a miserable 29 percent, strikingly similar to Bush's overall performance numbers at home, according to the most recent CBS poll. So it's true: Bush is "a uniter, not a divider" -- uniting people across the world in their opposition to his policies.
With a whopping 71 percent saying in an ABC-Washington Post poll that the country is seriously off track, the Post called it "the highest such expression of national pessimism in more than a decade." And that's at a time when the economy, presumed to be the all-important bellwether, is in halfway decent shape.
It's the war, stupid, and ending it is the major concern of most Americans, while all other issues are in single digits of importance to them.
In a shocking twist, Americans are now turning to the Democrats in Congress for leadership on foreign policy. "Three in 5 Americans trust congressional Democrats more than Bush to deal with Iraq, and the same proportion want Congress to try to block his troop-increase plan," reported the Post. That is a mandate the Democrats ignore at their own peril.
Even an increasing number of congressional Republicans, most recently Sen. John Warner of Virginia, have made it clear that ending this disastrous adventure is vital to their electoral future. Warner, along with several moderates in both parties, proposed legislation on Tuesday opposing Bush's sending of 21,500 additional troops to Iraq.
In fact, it seems as if everyone gets it except the president and those still hunkered down with him in the White House. "They've backed themselves into a tough corner," GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio told the Post, "and the problem is his continued insistence for the troop increase, which flies in the face of what 70 percent of Americans want."
He added that it makes Bush seem to say, "I'll listen to you, but I'll do what I want anyway." Hardly the message that the leader of the world's greatest experiment in representative democracy should be sending to the world. It is a message voters in the midterm election soundly rejected, along with the association of this great country with torture and chicanery, and it is the basis of what the Post calls a mainstream America "honeymoon" with the Democrats.
Americans understand in their gut that the long-term consequences of disillusionment with democracy, here and abroad, would be disastrous. In the same way Congress repudiated an out-of-control president three decades ago, the House and Senate must show the world today that our celebrated system of checks and balances is not just a fanciful mirage.
Spreading the ideal of democracy throughout the world remains a compelling obligation of those who enjoy freedom, making this an excellent occasion to demonstrate that we still possess a system capable of holding a deceitful and egomaniacal leader accountable.
Robert Scheer is the co-author of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq <http://www.alternet.org/fivelies/>. See more of Robert Scheer at TruthDig <http://truthdig.com>.
|
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 8202
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 02:12 pm: |
|
Aren't we beginning to inch into a direction where we should SERIOUSLY begin to discuss the prospects of impeaching Bush? |
Chrishayden
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 3520
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 02:26 pm: |
|
They can't impeach him in time to stop him. Remember when they impeached Clinton?
They started those fires before the 1996 election and only got down to it in late 1998. By the time they would get around to impeaching him he would be out. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 7090
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 02:35 pm: |
|
It will be extremely gratifying, NTFS, if via checks and balances, Congress neutralizes Bush's war-making powers. And it would be extremely interesting to see if the conservative Supreme Court would side with the Executive branch or the Legislative branch on this crucial issue. Maybe Clarence Thomas would grow a spine and oppose Bush since he can't be removed from his lifetime appointment. Is this country once again on the brink of seeing history made! |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 8203
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 03:12 pm: |
|
Chris,
Maybe if some serious murmurs about impeachment started NOW, he'sd realize how SERIOUSLY mofos disagree with what his a$$ is trying to pull. |
Chrishayden
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 3523
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 03:50 pm: |
|
Abm:
He knows and he doesn't care. Nobody can stop him. He was selected in order to start this war, which The Complex has been wanting since 1992.
Cynique:
Congress will do nothing. The Complex wants this war and will have it.
|
Chrishayden
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 3527
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 04:09 pm: |
|
While y'all are still watching that one--y'all are one war behind
Hysteria at Herzliya
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted Jan 30, 2007
When Congress finally decides on just the right language for its "non-binding resolution" deploring Bush's leadership in this war, it might consider a resolution to keep us out of the next one.
For America is on a collision course with an Iran of 70 million, and the folks who stampeded us into Iraq are firing pistols in the air again.
At the annual Herzliya Conference, U.S. presidential aspirants, neoconservatives and Israeli hawks were all invoking the Holocaust and warning of the annihilation of the Jews.
Israel's "Bibi" Netanyahu, who compares Iran's Ahmadinejad to Hitler, said: "The world that didn't stop the Holocaust last time can stop it this time. ... Who will lead the effort against genocide if not us? The world will not stand up on behalf of the Jews if the Jews do not stand up on behalf of the world."
Said former Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz: "Iran is the heart of the problem in the Middle East. It is the most urgent threat facing the world, and needs to be dealt with before it's too late." After meeting with the Department of State's Nicholas Burns, Mofaz called 2007 "a year of decision."
Richard Perle assured the conference that Bush will attack Iran rather than see it acquire nuclear weapons capabilities. Newt Gingrich also brought his soothing touch to the proceedings: "(C)itizens who do not wake up every morning and think about possible catastrophic civilian casualties are deluding themselves.
"Three nuclear weapons are a second holocaust. ... I'll repeat it. Three nuclear weapons are a second holocaust. ... Our enemies are fully as determined as Nazi Germany and more determined than the Soviets. Our enemies will kill us the first chance they get.
"If we knew that tomorrow morning we would lose Haifa, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, what would we do to stop it? If we knew that we would tomorrow lose Boston, San Francisco or Atlanta, what would we do?"
Mitt Romney agreed. Ahmadinejad's Iran is more dangerous than Khrushchev's Soviet Union, which put missiles in Cuba. For the Soviets "were never suicidal. Soviet commitment to national survival was never in question. That assumption cannot be made to an irrational regime (Iran) that celebrates martyrdom."
Ehud Olmert, mired in scandal, his popularity in the tank after the Lebanon fiasco, was as hawkish as Bibi: "The Jewish people, with the scars of the Holocaust fresh on its body, cannot afford to let itself face the threat of annihilation once again. ... We will stand up against nuclear threats and even prevent them."
Came then U.S. peace candidate John Edwards. Keeping Iran from nuclear weapons "is the greatest challenge of our generation. ... To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep all options on the table. ... Let me reiterate -- all options."
Wrote the Financial Times' Philip Stephens of Herzliya, "I gave up counting the times I heard the words 'existential threat' to describe Iran's nuclear program capability."
A few weeks back, according to UPI's Arnaud De Borchgrave, Netanyahu declared that Israel "must immediately launch an intense, international public relations front first and foremost on the United States -- the goal being to encourage President Bush to live up to specific pledges he would not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons. We must make clear to the (U.S.) government, the Congress and the American public that a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S. and the entire world, not only Israel."
Israel's war is to be sold as America's war.
The project is underway. According to Peter Beaumont, foreign affairs editor of the Guardian, Israeli media are reporting that the assignment to convince the world of the need for tough action on Iran has been given to Meir Dagan, head of Mossad.
Listening to the war talk, Gen. Wesley Clark exploded to Arianna Huffington: "You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided, but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office-seekers."
The former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe was ordered out of ranks and dressed down by Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League. But Matt Yglesias of American Prospect, himself Jewish, says Clark spoke truth: "(I)t's true that major Jewish organizations are pushing this country into war with Iran."
Yet is the hysteria at Herzliya justified? Consider:
Not once since its 1979 revolution has Iran started a war. In any war with America, or Israel with its hundreds of nuclear weapons, Iran would not be annihilating anyone. Iran would be risking annihilation.
Not only has Iran no nukes, the Guardian reported yesterday, "Iran's efforts to produce highly enriched uranium ... are in chaos." That centrifuge facility at Natanz is "archaic, prone to breakdown and lacks the materials for industrial-scale production."
There is no need for war. Yet, Israelis, neocons and their agents of influence are trying to whip us into one. Senators who are seeking absolution for having voted to take us into Iraq ought to be confronted and asked just what they are doing to keep us out of a war in Iran.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2007 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 7104
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 04:20 pm: |
|
Mel Gibson was right. It's all the Jews' fault. |
Chrishayden
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 3529
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 04:37 pm: |
|
Not Jews. Zionists and Neocons. |
China_b
Regular Poster
Username: China_b
Post Number: 58
Registered: 12-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 01, 2007 - 01:33 am: |
|
YA'LL's JUST JEALOUS CUZ A "C STUDENT" IS RUNNIN' THE WORLD. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 1713
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 01, 2007 - 02:06 am: |
|
"YA'LL's JUST JEALOUS CUZ A "C STUDENT" IS RUNNIN' THE WORLD."
Well, I'm not jealous. But you're one out of two.
|
China_b
Regular Poster
Username: China_b
Post Number: 62
Registered: 12-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 01, 2007 - 02:21 am: |
|
Ntfs_encryption,
I was nevvvvvver a "C Student", and I wasn't trying to be funny either.
NONE OF US WILL BE LAUGHNG WHEN 'CURIOUS GEORGE' HAS ALL OF US PAYING $6.00 FOR A GALLON OF GASOLINE.
OUR PRESIDENT IS AN IDIOT, PERIOD.
(AND HE SHOULD'VE BEEN IN SPECIAL ED BUT BARBARA LET HIM SLIDE BY) |
Chrishayden
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 3537
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 01, 2007 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Had he made these moves on his own there would be some chance that he might be held to account for them.
The power structure wanted these moves made. The only mistake he made was in bungling them--that is not listening to the Generals and going in with overwhelming force. He won't be held to account for that because there is the chance that he will spill the beans that the plans were laid for all this before he even started running for office.
Just think, had everything gone like Wolfowitz, Perle, Chalabi, Rumsfeld and the others said we wouldn't even be talking about it.
Finally, none of the Democrats want to be involved in a big impeachment battle when the campaign season starts.
Crime pays. He and the others have gotten away with it and there is nothing we can do. |
|
Email This Page