King Bush at work
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Catch 22 and The Hidden Face of War
In Joseph Heller’s World War II satire, Catch 22, his main character is John Yossarian, a B-25 bombardier stationed on an island off the coast of Italy. Yossarian is obsessed with the idea that the Germans are trying to kill him directly, by attacking his plane and his superiors are trying to kill him indirectly by increasing the number of missions required for discharge. He tries to claim insanity for a discharge but can’t because of an Army Air Force rule "Catch 22". It goes like this:
* One may only be excused from flying bombing mission on the grounds of insanity;
* One must assert one’s insanity to be excused on this basis;
* One who requests to be excused is presumably in fear of his life. This is taken to be proof of his sanity, and he is obligated to continue flying;
* One who is truly insane would not make the request. He would continue flying missions even though as an insane person he could be excused by simply asking.
That circular logic is a conundrum posited at the heart of every speech or comment made by President Bush in defense of his Iraq war. It goes this way:
* Criticism of my war in Iraq undermines our troops;
* Undermining our troops is unpatriotic;
* Only those who are unpatriotic would undermine our troops in time or war;
* Therefore criticism of my Iraq war is unpatriotic.
The other Catch 22 bolsters Bush’s sanitized war. It goes like this:
* Publishing photos of the war dead shows a lack of respect for the families.
* Showing lack of respect for families divides America
* A divided America cannot win the war on terrorism
* Therefore those who publish photos of the war dead support terrorism
Meanwhile bodies continue to pile up behind the sanitizing veil of media timidity and the Bush Administration sloganeering. While General Tommy Franks said, "We do not do body counts", the current conservative estimate is over 31,000 Iraqi dead. We specifically know that as of this posting 2,345 Americans have given their lives for Bush’s war. Yet we most Americans have not seen the hidden face of this war.
A recent Los Angeles Times article reported, "To measure how American publications have depicted the war in pictures, The Times reviewed six months of coverage from Iraq. The period from Sept.1 of last year until Feb. 28 of this year included the U.S. assault on Fallouja and the escalating insurgent attacks before January's election.
Despite the considerable bloodshed during that half-year, readers of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch and Washington Post did not see a single picture of a dead serviceman. The Seattle Times ran a photo three days before Christmas of the covered body of a soldier killed in the mess hall bombing. Neither Time nor Newsweek, the weekly news magazines, showed any U.S. battlefield dead during that time.
" There can be horrible images, but war is horrible and we need to understand that," said Chris Hondros, a veteran war photographer whose pictures are distributed by the Getty Images agency. "I think if we are going to start a war, we ought to be willing to show the consequences of that war."
Given the present mind-set in the mainstream media and in Washington, I would not hold my breath. For those who want a serious look at the face of war try: www.thenausea.com
Bill Sanders
* One may only be excused from flying bombing mission on the grounds of insanity;
* One must assert one’s insanity to be excused on this basis;
* One who requests to be excused is presumably in fear of his life. This is taken to be proof of his sanity, and he is obligated to continue flying;
* One who is truly insane would not make the request. He would continue flying missions even though as an insane person he could be excused by simply asking.
That circular logic is a conundrum posited at the heart of every speech or comment made by President Bush in defense of his Iraq war. It goes this way:
* Criticism of my war in Iraq undermines our troops;
* Undermining our troops is unpatriotic;
* Only those who are unpatriotic would undermine our troops in time or war;
* Therefore criticism of my Iraq war is unpatriotic.
The other Catch 22 bolsters Bush’s sanitized war. It goes like this:
* Publishing photos of the war dead shows a lack of respect for the families.
* Showing lack of respect for families divides America
* A divided America cannot win the war on terrorism
* Therefore those who publish photos of the war dead support terrorism
Meanwhile bodies continue to pile up behind the sanitizing veil of media timidity and the Bush Administration sloganeering. While General Tommy Franks said, "We do not do body counts", the current conservative estimate is over 31,000 Iraqi dead. We specifically know that as of this posting 2,345 Americans have given their lives for Bush’s war. Yet we most Americans have not seen the hidden face of this war.
A recent Los Angeles Times article reported, "To measure how American publications have depicted the war in pictures, The Times reviewed six months of coverage from Iraq. The period from Sept.1 of last year until Feb. 28 of this year included the U.S. assault on Fallouja and the escalating insurgent attacks before January's election.
Despite the considerable bloodshed during that half-year, readers of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch and Washington Post did not see a single picture of a dead serviceman. The Seattle Times ran a photo three days before Christmas of the covered body of a soldier killed in the mess hall bombing. Neither Time nor Newsweek, the weekly news magazines, showed any U.S. battlefield dead during that time.
" There can be horrible images, but war is horrible and we need to understand that," said Chris Hondros, a veteran war photographer whose pictures are distributed by the Getty Images agency. "I think if we are going to start a war, we ought to be willing to show the consequences of that war."
Given the present mind-set in the mainstream media and in Washington, I would not hold my breath. For those who want a serious look at the face of war try: www.thenausea.com
Bill Sanders
Monday, January 09, 2006
THE HIDDEN FACE OF WAR
On March 16, 1968, approximately 80 unarmed civilians were taken from the village of My Lai, Vietnam and huddled into the plaza. Lt. William Calley of Charlie Company told one of his soldiers, "You know what I want you to do with them." When Calley returned minutes later and found the Vietnamese still gathered in the plaza, he said to Meadlo, " Haven’t you got rid of them yet? I want them dead. Waste them." Meadlo and Calley began firing into the group from a distance of ten to fifteen feet. It was part of the massacre of an estimated 500 civilians that day.
Look at the above photographs. Examine them carefully. You will see that they are old men, women and babies. It is not the type of pictures we see coming from the American media in Iraq today. Indeed, we are not allowed to see the flag draped coffins of our war dead being unloaded at Dover Air Base. If President Bush had his way, National Public Television would not be able to list the names in role call fashion as they have been doing.
Vietnam and Iraq have many common aspects but public exposure is not one of them. The Bush administration, with the shameful cooperation of America’s mainstream media have, for the most part, hidden that face of war behind a veil of jingoism and a meticulous weave of deceptions,lies and secrecy.
A recent AP story told of the death of Hugh Thompson, a former helicopter pilot in Vietnam who was honored in 1998 for his courage in rescuing a number of Vietnamese civilians from that massacre at My Lai. It motivated me to go through my old files on Vietnam and revisit my notes on my time there. I was drawing and reporting from Vietnam and left the country just prior to the Tet Offensive in 1968.
The deja vu is stunning. Vietnam and Iraq are blood brothers at their core.
The U.S. crept into the war in Vietnam on the tunnel vision of its leadership. After the French occupation ended with a humiliating defeat at Dien Bien Phu in May of 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower ( a supporter of French) lobbied to delay a free election in Vietnam out of fear that the expatriate Ho Chi Minh would win. John Kennedy bought into the "communism domino" theory and sent 16,000 troops as U.S. "advisors" to prop up the South Vietnam dictator Ngo Dinh Diem.However, it was the testosterone of Lyndon Johnson that sent over 200,000 troops to Vietnam.
George W. Bush took us to war more directly—using the terrorists attack of 9/11, supplemented by lies, deceptions, and the gutlessness of congressional democrats.
The embedding of the media, dictatorial secrecy and Bush’s imperial presidency—i.e. he is not only above the law (domestic spying), he IS the law (enemy combatant declarations)—have kept Americans from getting an unsanitized look at his war.
Unlike the America of the 60s we do not see beyond the looped yellow ribbons that proclaim the euphemisms "support out troops" and "God bless America". We are not exposed to photographs of the torn and mutilated men, women and children who are victims of our bombs and the terrorist violence that has followed us into Iraq. Our only discomfort is the American body count that the Bush administration is forced to disclose. They do not keep a count of Iraqi bodies except for those victims of Saddam Hussein.
The run up to the Vietnam war was a precursor to Iraq. Does this sound familiar?:
*"We are there (Vietnam) because the people of South Vietnam have the right to remain non-Communist."
* "...if they are allowed to go Communist, all of Southeast Asia will fall like dominoes."
* "First, because a friendly nation has asked us to help against communist aggression. Second, our own security is tied to the peace of Asia."
In 1971, Daniel Elsberg photo copied a secret study of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war, called the Pentagon Papers, and gave it to 17 newspapers. The Nixon administration asked the courts for a restraining order arguing that its publication would put our national security at risk and jeopardize our future as a free society.
The court rejected that argument and America got an unvarnished look at the truth underlying our involvement in Vietnam—a striking parallel to Iraq.
President Johnson deceived Congress with a disputed North Vietnam attack on a U.S. Destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify authorization of escalating the war. The U.S. tactical decisions were based on colossal misjudgments. Johnson lied about battle field requests for more troops as did Secretary of Defense McNamara.
Moreover, as the Johnson Administration was publicly putting on a positive we-will-win spin--–they were privately admitting to possible settlements that included a pullout leaving a status quo and a compromise that would result in a unified Vietnam under Ho Chi Mi.
It is unfortunate that we don’t have a Pentagon Papers type leak today, that would shine some convincing light on the truth behind the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld propaganda. It is even more unfortunate that we don’t have a national media willing to get out of bed with the Administration and show us the real face of war. Bill Sanders
Look at the above photographs. Examine them carefully. You will see that they are old men, women and babies. It is not the type of pictures we see coming from the American media in Iraq today. Indeed, we are not allowed to see the flag draped coffins of our war dead being unloaded at Dover Air Base. If President Bush had his way, National Public Television would not be able to list the names in role call fashion as they have been doing.
Vietnam and Iraq have many common aspects but public exposure is not one of them. The Bush administration, with the shameful cooperation of America’s mainstream media have, for the most part, hidden that face of war behind a veil of jingoism and a meticulous weave of deceptions,lies and secrecy.
A recent AP story told of the death of Hugh Thompson, a former helicopter pilot in Vietnam who was honored in 1998 for his courage in rescuing a number of Vietnamese civilians from that massacre at My Lai. It motivated me to go through my old files on Vietnam and revisit my notes on my time there. I was drawing and reporting from Vietnam and left the country just prior to the Tet Offensive in 1968.
The deja vu is stunning. Vietnam and Iraq are blood brothers at their core.
The U.S. crept into the war in Vietnam on the tunnel vision of its leadership. After the French occupation ended with a humiliating defeat at Dien Bien Phu in May of 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower ( a supporter of French) lobbied to delay a free election in Vietnam out of fear that the expatriate Ho Chi Minh would win. John Kennedy bought into the "communism domino" theory and sent 16,000 troops as U.S. "advisors" to prop up the South Vietnam dictator Ngo Dinh Diem.However, it was the testosterone of Lyndon Johnson that sent over 200,000 troops to Vietnam.
George W. Bush took us to war more directly—using the terrorists attack of 9/11, supplemented by lies, deceptions, and the gutlessness of congressional democrats.
The embedding of the media, dictatorial secrecy and Bush’s imperial presidency—i.e. he is not only above the law (domestic spying), he IS the law (enemy combatant declarations)—have kept Americans from getting an unsanitized look at his war.
Unlike the America of the 60s we do not see beyond the looped yellow ribbons that proclaim the euphemisms "support out troops" and "God bless America". We are not exposed to photographs of the torn and mutilated men, women and children who are victims of our bombs and the terrorist violence that has followed us into Iraq. Our only discomfort is the American body count that the Bush administration is forced to disclose. They do not keep a count of Iraqi bodies except for those victims of Saddam Hussein.
The run up to the Vietnam war was a precursor to Iraq. Does this sound familiar?:
*"We are there (Vietnam) because the people of South Vietnam have the right to remain non-Communist."
* "...if they are allowed to go Communist, all of Southeast Asia will fall like dominoes."
* "First, because a friendly nation has asked us to help against communist aggression. Second, our own security is tied to the peace of Asia."
In 1971, Daniel Elsberg photo copied a secret study of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war, called the Pentagon Papers, and gave it to 17 newspapers. The Nixon administration asked the courts for a restraining order arguing that its publication would put our national security at risk and jeopardize our future as a free society.
The court rejected that argument and America got an unvarnished look at the truth underlying our involvement in Vietnam—a striking parallel to Iraq.
President Johnson deceived Congress with a disputed North Vietnam attack on a U.S. Destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify authorization of escalating the war. The U.S. tactical decisions were based on colossal misjudgments. Johnson lied about battle field requests for more troops as did Secretary of Defense McNamara.
Moreover, as the Johnson Administration was publicly putting on a positive we-will-win spin--–they were privately admitting to possible settlements that included a pullout leaving a status quo and a compromise that would result in a unified Vietnam under Ho Chi Mi.
It is unfortunate that we don’t have a Pentagon Papers type leak today, that would shine some convincing light on the truth behind the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld propaganda. It is even more unfortunate that we don’t have a national media willing to get out of bed with the Administration and show us the real face of war. Bill Sanders
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Thursday, January 05, 2006
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Friday, December 30, 2005
Thursday, December 22, 2005
War on Christmas----or intellect?
The so called “war on Christmas” is a phony straw man constructed by religious know-nothings and hyped by television’s talking heads hypocrites. As a “call to arms", it is about as honest and substantive as President Bush’s hype and rational for invading Iraq.
Most bible thumping “Christians" are biblical illiterates who don’t have a clue about the book they claim as the foundation of their belief. They have not done a whit of serious study of the scholarly investigations as to how the Bible was written, why it was written nor about the theological politics that litter the path of its evolution.
As a result our information landscape is occupied by controversies that range from the frivolous---war on Christmas, seeing religious symbols in grilled cheese sandwiches---to the serious---trying to force “intelligent design” as a scientific study in schools.
If you lined up a hundred of the religious dimwits supporting these causes, I’d wager you couldn’t find a one who could tell you who Huldah was or what role she played in the origin of the bible---much less discuss the politics of how the bible was edited, or why their favorite “birth of Christ” story is found in the most unreliable of the synoptic gospels.
If there is an " intelligent designer" he (or she) missed the boat in the distribution process to bible thumpers! Meanwhile, happy holidays, season's greetings, happy Hanukkah, happy Kwanzaa and merry Christmas!
Bill Sanders
Most bible thumping “Christians" are biblical illiterates who don’t have a clue about the book they claim as the foundation of their belief. They have not done a whit of serious study of the scholarly investigations as to how the Bible was written, why it was written nor about the theological politics that litter the path of its evolution.
As a result our information landscape is occupied by controversies that range from the frivolous---war on Christmas, seeing religious symbols in grilled cheese sandwiches---to the serious---trying to force “intelligent design” as a scientific study in schools.
If you lined up a hundred of the religious dimwits supporting these causes, I’d wager you couldn’t find a one who could tell you who Huldah was or what role she played in the origin of the bible---much less discuss the politics of how the bible was edited, or why their favorite “birth of Christ” story is found in the most unreliable of the synoptic gospels.
If there is an " intelligent designer" he (or she) missed the boat in the distribution process to bible thumpers! Meanwhile, happy holidays, season's greetings, happy Hanukkah, happy Kwanzaa and merry Christmas!
Bill Sanders
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
SHAME ON THE NEW YORK TIMES
Lost in the wake of President Bush’s assertion that he has an inherent power to break the law, is the outrageous action of The New York Times that it sat on the NSA domestic spying story for a Year. The results of the Times decision was to facilitate the President’s lawlessness for a year at the expense of thousands of Americans' right to privacy.
Over the past year, the Times’ journalism ethics and allegiance to the First Amendment have been shown to be less than admirable. Moreover, the downward trend in Journalism to a more casual guardian of the public’s right to know does not bode well for a democracy.
I give you a quote from someone with substantial experience in the area of keeping dirty government laundry from the public’s prying eyes---H.R. Haldeman, in a recorded conversation with President Richard Nixon regarding the publication of the Pentagon Papers:
“…the implicit infallibility of presidents, which has been an accepted thing in America, is badly hurt by this because it shows that people do things that the president wants to do even though it’s wrong and the president can be wrong.”
Bill Sanders
Over the past year, the Times’ journalism ethics and allegiance to the First Amendment have been shown to be less than admirable. Moreover, the downward trend in Journalism to a more casual guardian of the public’s right to know does not bode well for a democracy.
I give you a quote from someone with substantial experience in the area of keeping dirty government laundry from the public’s prying eyes---H.R. Haldeman, in a recorded conversation with President Richard Nixon regarding the publication of the Pentagon Papers:
“…the implicit infallibility of presidents, which has been an accepted thing in America, is badly hurt by this because it shows that people do things that the president wants to do even though it’s wrong and the president can be wrong.”
Bill Sanders
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
IT IS TIME---IMPEACH BUSH!
It is time for Democrats to get up off their jelly backbones and impeach George Bush before his Imperial Presidency completely dismantles what is left of our democracy! But first, they will have to find the courage to aggressively campaign and expose his fear mongering for the demagoguery that it is! Second, they will have do their homework and take no prisoners when confronting the evangelical fascists and the media that is imbedded with the Imperial Presidency. Third, in this campaiagn, they should name and confront every Republican who voted to impeach Bill Clinton and expose them with a comparison of the charges!
President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to illegally spy on Americans inside the United States, without obtaining a warrant and bypassing the court that was specifically established to sanction (or prohibit) such domestic activity. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush has deprived two United States Citizens of their constitutional rights by incarcerating them indefinitely, incommunicado, in Military Prisons ---and denied them legal representation.Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush allowed the diversion of funds allocated for the action in Afghanistan---to develop plans for a war on Iraq---a direct violation of the appropriations language enacted by congress. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush failed to take corrective action against members of his staff involved in the unlawful disclosure of a covert CIA agent’s identity which is considered a serious security violation. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
Moreover, President Bush has orchestrated an assault on U.S. citizens' civil liberties and constitutional protections. This includes the construction of the Patriot Act provisions that facilitate broad scale invasions of privacy--- entering a home when occupants are not there and, without notice, snooping thru library records and other private papers. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
He has also presided over the authorizing of FBI intelligence operations against citizen’s protest groups active in causes such as the environment, animal cruelty, poverty relief and those protesting te Iraq war.
In his hubris, he defines the law as being what he declares it to be. He assumes presidential powers that makes Richard Nixon look like a piker. And with monumental comtempt, he looks us in the eye and announces he will continue down his imperial path whether we like it or not.
It is time to say NO MORE to the slicing and dicing of the core values that made this a great nation. It is time to stop curtailing the very freedoms we say we are fighting for in Iraq!
Bill Sanders
President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to illegally spy on Americans inside the United States, without obtaining a warrant and bypassing the court that was specifically established to sanction (or prohibit) such domestic activity. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush has deprived two United States Citizens of their constitutional rights by incarcerating them indefinitely, incommunicado, in Military Prisons ---and denied them legal representation.Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush allowed the diversion of funds allocated for the action in Afghanistan---to develop plans for a war on Iraq---a direct violation of the appropriations language enacted by congress. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
President Bush failed to take corrective action against members of his staff involved in the unlawful disclosure of a covert CIA agent’s identity which is considered a serious security violation. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
Moreover, President Bush has orchestrated an assault on U.S. citizens' civil liberties and constitutional protections. This includes the construction of the Patriot Act provisions that facilitate broad scale invasions of privacy--- entering a home when occupants are not there and, without notice, snooping thru library records and other private papers. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
He has also presided over the authorizing of FBI intelligence operations against citizen’s protest groups active in causes such as the environment, animal cruelty, poverty relief and those protesting te Iraq war.
In his hubris, he defines the law as being what he declares it to be. He assumes presidential powers that makes Richard Nixon look like a piker. And with monumental comtempt, he looks us in the eye and announces he will continue down his imperial path whether we like it or not.
It is time to say NO MORE to the slicing and dicing of the core values that made this a great nation. It is time to stop curtailing the very freedoms we say we are fighting for in Iraq!
Bill Sanders
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
The Price of Hubris and Delusions
The most popular man under a democracy is not the most democratic man, but the most despotic man. The common folk delight in the exactions of such a man. They like him to boss them. Their natural gait is the goosestep.
–H.L. Mencken
In America we get what we deserve in our leaders because we elect them. Often, by design, ignorance or apathy—we do not closely examine their exhortations or philosophy. We embrace their delusions as our own and ride them on the shallow surface of reality’s riptide. Only when reality tugs at our person do we begin the confront the delusion. In this pattern we are condemned to repeating history.
George W. Bush embraced his inner circle's delusions that, as the world’s superpower, the United States could successfully impose democracy in the Middle East by the invasion and occupation of Iraq—thus assuring us of a solidified and tranquil source of oil. In one bold swoop of Pax-Amricana, we would rid the world of a two-bit dictator and erode the fervor of Islamic radicals.
Nevermind that Saddam Hussein had no relationship with Al Qaeda. Nevermind that Saddam Hussein was a secular egotist who's military had been decimated by the Gulf War. Nevermind that he was in line behind much more dangerous tyrants---like Kim Jong-il of Korea, for example. Americans fell in lockstep behind the Big Lie that Iraq was an imminent threat our way of life
Now, we are now seeing the tug of reality at work in the debate over how to free our troops from the Tar Baby of Iraq. In fact, the debate is only posturing to cover the political rear ends of the Bush administration and the democrats who gave them the green light to invade Iraq. The outcome of all this was preordained.
George Bush will bring the troops home in a fashion dictated by maximum political advantage. There will be much breast beating by the GOP chicken hawks--- and the substitute delusion will be that we are leaving a free Iraq, having established a fledgling democracy and set it on its course.
The reality is that by abandoning the real war on terrorism in Afghanistan and buying into the phony scenario that linked Iraq with Al Qaeda and 9/11—we have facilitated an increase in terrorism and made the world a much more dangerous place. The reality is that President Bush will ride away into a Crawford sunset, leaving Iraq in the jaws of chaos.
The price is untold thousands of Iraqi lives sacrificed on the alter of George Bush’s hubris and delusions. The price will be seen in the eyes of thousands of Americans who will struggle to find justification in the loss of a loved one.
The legacy will be a tear in the social fabric that will haunt us for years to come, much like that of Vietnam.
Bill Sanders
–H.L. Mencken
In America we get what we deserve in our leaders because we elect them. Often, by design, ignorance or apathy—we do not closely examine their exhortations or philosophy. We embrace their delusions as our own and ride them on the shallow surface of reality’s riptide. Only when reality tugs at our person do we begin the confront the delusion. In this pattern we are condemned to repeating history.
George W. Bush embraced his inner circle's delusions that, as the world’s superpower, the United States could successfully impose democracy in the Middle East by the invasion and occupation of Iraq—thus assuring us of a solidified and tranquil source of oil. In one bold swoop of Pax-Amricana, we would rid the world of a two-bit dictator and erode the fervor of Islamic radicals.
Nevermind that Saddam Hussein had no relationship with Al Qaeda. Nevermind that Saddam Hussein was a secular egotist who's military had been decimated by the Gulf War. Nevermind that he was in line behind much more dangerous tyrants---like Kim Jong-il of Korea, for example. Americans fell in lockstep behind the Big Lie that Iraq was an imminent threat our way of life
Now, we are now seeing the tug of reality at work in the debate over how to free our troops from the Tar Baby of Iraq. In fact, the debate is only posturing to cover the political rear ends of the Bush administration and the democrats who gave them the green light to invade Iraq. The outcome of all this was preordained.
George Bush will bring the troops home in a fashion dictated by maximum political advantage. There will be much breast beating by the GOP chicken hawks--- and the substitute delusion will be that we are leaving a free Iraq, having established a fledgling democracy and set it on its course.
The reality is that by abandoning the real war on terrorism in Afghanistan and buying into the phony scenario that linked Iraq with Al Qaeda and 9/11—we have facilitated an increase in terrorism and made the world a much more dangerous place. The reality is that President Bush will ride away into a Crawford sunset, leaving Iraq in the jaws of chaos.
The price is untold thousands of Iraqi lives sacrificed on the alter of George Bush’s hubris and delusions. The price will be seen in the eyes of thousands of Americans who will struggle to find justification in the loss of a loved one.
The legacy will be a tear in the social fabric that will haunt us for years to come, much like that of Vietnam.
Bill Sanders
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Friday, December 02, 2005
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Padilla in Bushland
What happens when truth collides with the fantasy world of the Bush Administration? Why, the fantasy world mutates before your very eyes into something quite different.
Invading Iraq because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction becomes invading Iraq because Saddam was a dictator killing his own people.
Saddam Hussein’s direct sponsorship of the 9/11 attack becomes Saddam Hussein’s long time evolvement with Al Qaeda..
No White House involvement in the CIA leak becomes no White House ILLEGAlITY in mentioning a CIA agents identity. And so on and so on!
Now, we find that Jose Padilla, a former Chicago gang banger with an 8th grade education has gone from being one of the “most dangerous” persons to U.S. Security (named an enemy combatant–accused of plotting to construct and detonate a “dirty” radiation bomb) —to simply being a common criminal charged with conspiring to send money to support some foreign group somewhere.
What about the fact that Padilla, an American citizen was whisked off to a Military prison and held without charges, without a lawyer, without communications and without a trial for three years? Ah, well, says the nations chief law officer----Bush crony, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales–all that is “legally irrelevant”.
We have all fallen down the rabbit hole!
Bill Sanders
Invading Iraq because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction becomes invading Iraq because Saddam was a dictator killing his own people.
Saddam Hussein’s direct sponsorship of the 9/11 attack becomes Saddam Hussein’s long time evolvement with Al Qaeda..
No White House involvement in the CIA leak becomes no White House ILLEGAlITY in mentioning a CIA agents identity. And so on and so on!
Now, we find that Jose Padilla, a former Chicago gang banger with an 8th grade education has gone from being one of the “most dangerous” persons to U.S. Security (named an enemy combatant–accused of plotting to construct and detonate a “dirty” radiation bomb) —to simply being a common criminal charged with conspiring to send money to support some foreign group somewhere.
What about the fact that Padilla, an American citizen was whisked off to a Military prison and held without charges, without a lawyer, without communications and without a trial for three years? Ah, well, says the nations chief law officer----Bush crony, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales–all that is “legally irrelevant”.
We have all fallen down the rabbit hole!
Bill Sanders
Monday, November 21, 2005
Friday, November 18, 2005
SHADES OF THE 50'S
Anyone who doesn't believe McCarthyism is alive and well in the Bush White House and the Republican party, just stay tuned to the smear campaign that is already being geared up to discredit Rep. John Murtha. Have they no shame? ( You watch----the answer is no.)
ET TU MURTHA?
Pennsylvania Democrat, Representative John Murtha , has exposed George Bush and his apologists for the bankrupt policies to which they cling while adrift in a sea of contradicting facts and criticisms.
You see, Murtha is not a bleeding heart liberal. Unlike Cheney, Bush and many of their congressional lackeys who have never served a day in uniform defending this country----Murtha is a long time "hawk" and Vietnam veteran of combat. The poverty of their reaction to his critique is astounding.
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said at the press briefing, "he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the democratic party. The eve of a historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists."
Republicans said Murtha’s position was one of abandonment and surrender.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert said "They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world."
Bush, of course, has a recording device instead of a brain which has been spewing out the same reaction to Iraq critics for years: 1. They are irresponsible 2. They are unpatriotic 3. They undermine the war on terrorism and 4. (That all time favorite) Remember 9/11.
TORTURED BEDFELLOWS
On a related topic, the recent disclosure that the Shiite government was torturing Sunni Arabs (in a secret prison), gives lie to the Bush myth of how successful democracy has been implanted at gunpoint in the quagmire of Iraq. Surprise! Surprise!
What is more interesting is the official reaction to the news reports and pictures.
The official in charge of the Shiite-led Interior Ministry said the torture claims are sectarian bias (politically motivated).
Interior Minister Bayn Jabr said, "I reject torture and I will punish those who perform torture." Then he added justification, "No one was beheaded, no one was killed."Then the coup de grace:"Those who are supporting terrorism are making the exaggerations."
Sound familiar? Iraqi officials have been cribbing from Bush’s scrip.
Bill Sanders
You see, Murtha is not a bleeding heart liberal. Unlike Cheney, Bush and many of their congressional lackeys who have never served a day in uniform defending this country----Murtha is a long time "hawk" and Vietnam veteran of combat. The poverty of their reaction to his critique is astounding.
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said at the press briefing, "he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the democratic party. The eve of a historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists."
Republicans said Murtha’s position was one of abandonment and surrender.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert said "They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world."
Bush, of course, has a recording device instead of a brain which has been spewing out the same reaction to Iraq critics for years: 1. They are irresponsible 2. They are unpatriotic 3. They undermine the war on terrorism and 4. (That all time favorite) Remember 9/11.
TORTURED BEDFELLOWS
On a related topic, the recent disclosure that the Shiite government was torturing Sunni Arabs (in a secret prison), gives lie to the Bush myth of how successful democracy has been implanted at gunpoint in the quagmire of Iraq. Surprise! Surprise!
What is more interesting is the official reaction to the news reports and pictures.
The official in charge of the Shiite-led Interior Ministry said the torture claims are sectarian bias (politically motivated).
Interior Minister Bayn Jabr said, "I reject torture and I will punish those who perform torture." Then he added justification, "No one was beheaded, no one was killed."Then the coup de grace:"Those who are supporting terrorism are making the exaggerations."
Sound familiar? Iraqi officials have been cribbing from Bush’s scrip.
Bill Sanders
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Alito and the timid critics
Why any thinking person would be pussyfooting on where Samuel Alito is coming from (or going to) as a lawyer and judge, is beyond me. In the words of a Yale professor of law, Alito does not have a conservative judicial view—he has a “radical” judicial view. He is, in fact, far out of the judicial mainstream as his record readily indicates.
So he’s “qualified”. When is the last time your heard the American Bar Association say someone is NOT qualified? So, he has a quiet and polite judicial temperament. How did that come into play when he made the decision condoning the strip search of a 10-year old girl not covered by an authorizing warrant? He may be a Bork on tranquilizers—but a Bork none the less.
His 1985 anti-abortion memo speaks volumes as to where the future of women’s rights is headed when he tilts the balance of the court to the far right. What is even more telling is his rational for it. He was just “an advocate seeking a job”—an exuberance of youth. Since when is a 35 year old man a “youth”? He explains that he has learned more over the years about the Constitution. One would hope so, but if you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’ll give you for a good price.
Moreover if Alito takes the anti-women's rights position of his memo-- when he was just an “advocate seeking a job”–what will be his position when he is out from under the pressure of worrying about a job?
Bill Sanders
So he’s “qualified”. When is the last time your heard the American Bar Association say someone is NOT qualified? So, he has a quiet and polite judicial temperament. How did that come into play when he made the decision condoning the strip search of a 10-year old girl not covered by an authorizing warrant? He may be a Bork on tranquilizers—but a Bork none the less.
His 1985 anti-abortion memo speaks volumes as to where the future of women’s rights is headed when he tilts the balance of the court to the far right. What is even more telling is his rational for it. He was just “an advocate seeking a job”—an exuberance of youth. Since when is a 35 year old man a “youth”? He explains that he has learned more over the years about the Constitution. One would hope so, but if you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’ll give you for a good price.
Moreover if Alito takes the anti-women's rights position of his memo-- when he was just an “advocate seeking a job”–what will be his position when he is out from under the pressure of worrying about a job?
Bill Sanders
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Personal
I have never been inclined to do the personal thing on this blog site. It is just not my bag. As a matter of fact, I despise that bio title “About Me”—sounds like George Bush hubris. It came with the blog structure and I am a dummy with this technology (don’t speak computer language—am an English major)--and don’t know how to change it . (The bio was written by a writer for Who’s Who in American Graphic Arts.)
However, I am so in arrears on commentary and cartoons at a time when the blog has been getting some encouraging feedback—I am biting the bullet with this posting.
It has been a summer and fall from hell. A faulty roof on our house finally gave way to the elements—a week of heavy rain in July (not hurricanes)—flooding the drywall ceiling in our bedroom which collapsed. It took two weeks to dry out that wing of the house and another several weeks of me hanging and taping drywall. (Contractors were too busy still trying to catch up from hurricane Charlie)
Additional distractions—aside from painting, rehabing the house— included a family reunion, falling off a latter, breaking a wrist and rib, getting a new roof—plus working to finish a bronze sculpture.
Right after the election, I predicted to anyone who would listen—mainly my family—that there would be a major scandal with Bush and his neocons before his term ended. I regret missing the beginnings of this debacle—but hope to do some catch-up soon. Bill Sanders
However, I am so in arrears on commentary and cartoons at a time when the blog has been getting some encouraging feedback—I am biting the bullet with this posting.
It has been a summer and fall from hell. A faulty roof on our house finally gave way to the elements—a week of heavy rain in July (not hurricanes)—flooding the drywall ceiling in our bedroom which collapsed. It took two weeks to dry out that wing of the house and another several weeks of me hanging and taping drywall. (Contractors were too busy still trying to catch up from hurricane Charlie)
Additional distractions—aside from painting, rehabing the house— included a family reunion, falling off a latter, breaking a wrist and rib, getting a new roof—plus working to finish a bronze sculpture.
Right after the election, I predicted to anyone who would listen—mainly my family—that there would be a major scandal with Bush and his neocons before his term ended. I regret missing the beginnings of this debacle—but hope to do some catch-up soon. Bill Sanders
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
The Real Bush? Where he has always been!
In the wake of hurricane Katrina , the chorus of “How could this happen in America?” has be reworded by some of President Bush’s supporters to read “How could this happen with Bush?” They wonder, where was the decisive, firm, no BS leadership that wooed them to the voting booth. They wonder what happened to the tough guy who kicked Saddam Hussein out of power and is “protecting “ us from the terrorists?
Well, folks, both Bushes are one and the same! In this disaster there has been no metamorphosis from the President Bush of 9-11 and the Iraq war—to the President Bush of hurricane Katrina.. Bush has been absolutely consistent in the pattern of who he is and what he stands for. It is just that voters and the mainstream media have not been very bright in figuring it out!
Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” only floats in the wake of corporate wealth and privilege. The fact that the poor (of any color) are not high on the Bush radar screen , should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention in the last six years.
The “true” Bush has a consistent record of cutting taxes for the wealthy and cutting programs for the poor. The “true” Bush has been trying to take the Social Security safety net out from under the elderly poor for the past year. The “true” Bush has been cutting health care for the elderly. The most recent “true” Bush appeared after the disaster, when he awarded huge no-bid contracts to Halliburton and subsidiaries—then gave those companies a legal exemption that allows the lowest wages to be paid to victims who work for the reconstruction.
George W. Bush’s hubris has been a lifetime lens through which he assesses the world. It is the measure against which most other ideas are found wanting and are of tainted origins. It is a construct where only parallel goals contribute to his comfort zone. He confuses fact with fantasy—“Mission Accomplished!”----and justifies decisions based on the certainty of his personal suspicions. It is a pattern deeply rooted in privilege. Should it really be a surprise that he cited the loss of Trent Lott’s house to epitomize the disaster of the Gulf Coast
He lives in a world of the “haves” nourishing a fantasy best described by columnist Maureen Dowd as being “born on third base but thinking he hit a triple.”
So, if Bush The Bold needs a war to fulfill his fantasies of hubris, and he can do it by unleashing the world’s most powerful military against a third world two-bit dictator, why not? And if Bush The Privileged has tunnel vision for the wealthy—let the poor eat cake, if they can find their way out of the Superdome.
Anyone besides me for impeachment? Bill Sanders
Well, folks, both Bushes are one and the same! In this disaster there has been no metamorphosis from the President Bush of 9-11 and the Iraq war—to the President Bush of hurricane Katrina.. Bush has been absolutely consistent in the pattern of who he is and what he stands for. It is just that voters and the mainstream media have not been very bright in figuring it out!
Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” only floats in the wake of corporate wealth and privilege. The fact that the poor (of any color) are not high on the Bush radar screen , should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention in the last six years.
The “true” Bush has a consistent record of cutting taxes for the wealthy and cutting programs for the poor. The “true” Bush has been trying to take the Social Security safety net out from under the elderly poor for the past year. The “true” Bush has been cutting health care for the elderly. The most recent “true” Bush appeared after the disaster, when he awarded huge no-bid contracts to Halliburton and subsidiaries—then gave those companies a legal exemption that allows the lowest wages to be paid to victims who work for the reconstruction.
George W. Bush’s hubris has been a lifetime lens through which he assesses the world. It is the measure against which most other ideas are found wanting and are of tainted origins. It is a construct where only parallel goals contribute to his comfort zone. He confuses fact with fantasy—“Mission Accomplished!”----and justifies decisions based on the certainty of his personal suspicions. It is a pattern deeply rooted in privilege. Should it really be a surprise that he cited the loss of Trent Lott’s house to epitomize the disaster of the Gulf Coast
He lives in a world of the “haves” nourishing a fantasy best described by columnist Maureen Dowd as being “born on third base but thinking he hit a triple.”
So, if Bush The Bold needs a war to fulfill his fantasies of hubris, and he can do it by unleashing the world’s most powerful military against a third world two-bit dictator, why not? And if Bush The Privileged has tunnel vision for the wealthy—let the poor eat cake, if they can find their way out of the Superdome.
Anyone besides me for impeachment? Bill Sanders
Kathleen Parker meets reality
Since I took Kathleen Parker to task for her column defending Bush from his Katrina critics, I must give her credit for the 180 degree turn in her latest column. She has finally seen Bush’s failure as a leader, pointing out " As commander in chief, Bush should have helicoptered into New Orleans, parked himself next to the Superdome and started ordering his generals to get the job done."
In flash of insight, she added, "By his performance in this time of extreme stress, Bush may have revealed a truer self than we were meant to see."
In flash of insight, she added, "By his performance in this time of extreme stress, Bush may have revealed a truer self than we were meant to see."
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Columnist Kathleen Parker's straw man defense!
Kathleen Parker’s recent column chastising administration critics regarding hurricane Katrina, misses the point completely! She tries to neutralize the outcry by saying you can’t blame "mother nature" and that even though critics (read, liberal democrats) try----" not even George Bush can take the fall for this one!" She then adds her coup de grace, "Some things cant be helped. Nature, ever untamable can’t be thwarted."
True, the administration can’t "thwart" a hurricane. What any administration can and should do, is everything within its power to limit the human toll of suffering and death. Clearly this administration failed miserably!
1. President Bush, his Director of Homeland Security and his Director of FEMA were briefed by the Director of the National Hurricane Center--- prior to landfall— on the severity and possible impact of Katrina on the levees. Yet Bush claimed after the disaster, "I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees."
2. FEMA Director Michael Brown waited five hours after landfall on August 29, to ask Homeland Security ( via a memo) to send 1,000 employees to the region within two days. Then suggested another 2,000 after seven days.
3.President Bush waited five days before setting foot in the stricken area. When he did, he joked about his drinking days in New Orleans and then said of his FEMA Director, "...and Browne, you’re doing a heck of job. The FEMA Director is working 24 hours a day."
If the President is serious about investigating "what went wrong", he should re-read his own National Response Plan which claims to "help save lives and protect America’s communities by increasing the speed, effectiveness and efficiency of incident management." Then he should measure it against himself and the actions of his administration.
True, the administration can’t "thwart" a hurricane. What any administration can and should do, is everything within its power to limit the human toll of suffering and death. Clearly this administration failed miserably!
1. President Bush, his Director of Homeland Security and his Director of FEMA were briefed by the Director of the National Hurricane Center--- prior to landfall— on the severity and possible impact of Katrina on the levees. Yet Bush claimed after the disaster, "I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees."
2. FEMA Director Michael Brown waited five hours after landfall on August 29, to ask Homeland Security ( via a memo) to send 1,000 employees to the region within two days. Then suggested another 2,000 after seven days.
3.President Bush waited five days before setting foot in the stricken area. When he did, he joked about his drinking days in New Orleans and then said of his FEMA Director, "...and Browne, you’re doing a heck of job. The FEMA Director is working 24 hours a day."
If the President is serious about investigating "what went wrong", he should re-read his own National Response Plan which claims to "help save lives and protect America’s communities by increasing the speed, effectiveness and efficiency of incident management." Then he should measure it against himself and the actions of his administration.
Monday, September 05, 2005
Hurricane Katrina: Pussyfooting about accountability
To hear Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and FEMA Director Mike Brown tell it, the delayed response to the devastation of hurricane Katrina was simply that they were ambushed by unforseen (infer unpredictable) events —i.e. the severity of the storm and the New Orleans levee collapse. That is sheer baloney!
Days before Katrina slammed into the gulf coast, the National Hurricane Center advised FEMA and Homeland Security that the expected storm surge could top the antiquated levee protecting the city. More than thirty-six hours before landfall, the NHC marveled at the historic dimensions of the storm and reported winds of 100 mph at the edges of the hurricane—---some one hundred miles from its eye!
As for President Bush, he appeared to be more worried about the rising resentment of the Iraq war than the potential destruction of a monster hurricane poised to strike the most venerable city in America.. Katrina ripped into the gulf coast on Monday. Tuesday, Bush flew to California for a fund raising dinner and another rote speech on “staying the course” in Iraq. (Contrast that to standing amid twin towers rubble the day after 9-11.)
There are many hard questions that demand answers. Why didn’t President Bush federalize the disaster effort and immediately send in the elite 82nd Airborne unit from Ft. Bragg, who’s mission is being ready for “instant” deployment? Why didn’t he tap into the Helicopter units at Ft. Campbell, Kentucky? Why didn’t he order the Navy and Marines to immediately dispatch their small water craft loaded with food and water? Why did he wait four days to set foot on the gulf coast ground?
The call for accountability by the Bush Administration for its shameful response to the human suffering left in the wake of Katrina, floats like a bloated corpse in the flood waters of New Orleans–---untouched and largely not confronted by the hordes of television commentators and politicians who speak on the subject.
Oh, there is plenty of cursing the darkness----everyone speaks loudly and clearly there—but few are willing to name the person who’s finger is on the switch.
For example, New York times columnist David Brooks put it this way, “On September 11th Rudy Giuliani took control. The Government response was quick and responsive. Last week in New Orleans, by contrast, nobody took control. Authority was diffuse and action was ineffective.” I wonder who Mr. “Nobody” was? I wonder who Mr. “Authority” was?
The Mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin , in a rare departure from political protocol, demanded the Federal Government “get off your ass and let’s do something!” Interesting. Even hunkered down in the stench, suffering and isolation of his own people he could not bring himself to pronounce the words “President Bush”.
As the horrific scenes of death and suffering give way to more visual space of evacuation, rescues and food and water distribution—it is vital that specific accountability move to the front on our national consciousness.
Politicians aspire to the pinnacle of our system because it where the power lies for their agenda for our country and their personal ambition. They embrace the responsibility for running our government and protecting our people. And “we”—including the media—should not be timid about calling them to account when they screw it up! The collective “we” elected George Bush—who appointed Michael Chertoff—who was approved by Congress
The last thing we should do is accept “The dog ate my homework!” .
Days before Katrina slammed into the gulf coast, the National Hurricane Center advised FEMA and Homeland Security that the expected storm surge could top the antiquated levee protecting the city. More than thirty-six hours before landfall, the NHC marveled at the historic dimensions of the storm and reported winds of 100 mph at the edges of the hurricane—---some one hundred miles from its eye!
As for President Bush, he appeared to be more worried about the rising resentment of the Iraq war than the potential destruction of a monster hurricane poised to strike the most venerable city in America.. Katrina ripped into the gulf coast on Monday. Tuesday, Bush flew to California for a fund raising dinner and another rote speech on “staying the course” in Iraq. (Contrast that to standing amid twin towers rubble the day after 9-11.)
There are many hard questions that demand answers. Why didn’t President Bush federalize the disaster effort and immediately send in the elite 82nd Airborne unit from Ft. Bragg, who’s mission is being ready for “instant” deployment? Why didn’t he tap into the Helicopter units at Ft. Campbell, Kentucky? Why didn’t he order the Navy and Marines to immediately dispatch their small water craft loaded with food and water? Why did he wait four days to set foot on the gulf coast ground?
The call for accountability by the Bush Administration for its shameful response to the human suffering left in the wake of Katrina, floats like a bloated corpse in the flood waters of New Orleans–---untouched and largely not confronted by the hordes of television commentators and politicians who speak on the subject.
Oh, there is plenty of cursing the darkness----everyone speaks loudly and clearly there—but few are willing to name the person who’s finger is on the switch.
For example, New York times columnist David Brooks put it this way, “On September 11th Rudy Giuliani took control. The Government response was quick and responsive. Last week in New Orleans, by contrast, nobody took control. Authority was diffuse and action was ineffective.” I wonder who Mr. “Nobody” was? I wonder who Mr. “Authority” was?
The Mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin , in a rare departure from political protocol, demanded the Federal Government “get off your ass and let’s do something!” Interesting. Even hunkered down in the stench, suffering and isolation of his own people he could not bring himself to pronounce the words “President Bush”.
As the horrific scenes of death and suffering give way to more visual space of evacuation, rescues and food and water distribution—it is vital that specific accountability move to the front on our national consciousness.
Politicians aspire to the pinnacle of our system because it where the power lies for their agenda for our country and their personal ambition. They embrace the responsibility for running our government and protecting our people. And “we”—including the media—should not be timid about calling them to account when they screw it up! The collective “we” elected George Bush—who appointed Michael Chertoff—who was approved by Congress
The last thing we should do is accept “The dog ate my homework!” .
Friday, September 02, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)