|
Home
Links
Contact Us
Books
Order
Now

Archives
Imperial
Bush
A closer look at the Bush record -- from
the war in Iraq to the war on the environment
2004 Campaign
Will Americans
take the exit ramp off the Bush presidency in November?
Behind
Colin Powell's Legend
Colin Powell's sterling reputation in Washington hides his life-long role
as water-carrier for conservative ideologues.
The
2000 Campaign
Recounting the controversial presidential campaign
Media
Crisis
Is the national media a danger to democracy?
The Clinton Scandals
The story behind President Clinton's impeachment
Nazi Echo
Pinochet & Other Characters
The Dark Side of Rev. Moon
Rev. Sun Myung Moon and American politics
Contra Crack
Contra drug stories uncovered
Lost History
How the American historical record has been tainted by lies and cover-ups
The October Surprise
"X-Files"
The 1980 October Surprise scandal exposed
International
From free trade to the Kosovo crisis
Other Investigative Stories
Editorials
|
|
|
More Readers React to Bush Tirade
September 20, 2006 |
Editor's Note: First, via
Truthout, this
commentary by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann in which Olbermann says Bush
owes the American people an apology for his news conference tirade
declaring that "it's unacceptable to think" that there might be any
comparison between his administration's actions and those of Islamic
extremists. Olbermann, who is one of the few brave voices left in the
mainstream media, said that what was truly "unacceptable" was that a
President of the United States would be "even hinting at an America
where a few have that privilege to think and the rest of us get yelled
at by the President."
Below are readers' comments
about President Bush's explosion over criticism of his torture policies:
Dear Sir,
while I agree with most of your assertions, analyses and
prognostications, I beg to differ with some of the illustrations you
provide.
Certainly: Bush is blackmailing America when he threatens to order
the CIA to stop its interrogation programs if Bush's way is not
adhered to; like a spoiled brat, he threatens to take his toys and
games home if the other boys won't play by his rules. He is a
disgrace to the US, and for his blackmailing, the FBI should
investigate him. (Fat chance!).
Quite right of you to illustrate the fawning by David Brooks.
But the examples you cite to underpin the statement that the "Bush
administration is responsible for slaughtering thousands of women and
children in Afghanistan an Iraq" to "achieve an objective" are not
very good. Bombing a restaurant to get at Saddam Hussein is terrible,
is horrific, considering the deaths of innocent civilians, but it is
not slaughter. In almost all bombing raids, by whomever, innocent
people get killed. You are right: war is horror. Bombing should be
outlawed.
If you had stated that the war is certainly ill-advised and more
probably illegal, that the US invaded a country that had not done it
any harm, the Bush lied and continues to lie, that he insists on
bending American constitutional law to his primitive, childish
fantasies, you would be easier to agree with. America catches the
Bush administration lying all the time, and does nothing. Hungarians
catch their prime minister with one lie about the economy and they
ransack the official radio station. There's a lesson to be learned
from the Hungarians.Michael S. Cullen
--
I'd like to respond to Michael Cullen's comments in "Readers React
to Bush
Tirade". He says: "Bombing a restaurant to get at Saddam Hussein is
terrible, is horrific, considering the deaths of innocent civilians,
but
it is not slaughter. In almost all bombing raids, by whomever,
innocent
people get killed."
Interesting how Americans don't regard 9/11 in the same light - that
9/11
is what happens when America meddles in the affairs of other
countries,
overthrows democratically elected governments, props up dictators,
gets
itself involved in conflicts, and chooses war over diplomacy.
If America had no hard evidence Saddam Hussein was in that restaurant,
if
it was merely wishful thinking, then it WAS slaughter, plain and
simple -
it was America, yet again, treating the lives of foreigners with
complete
contempt.
When America is attacked, and innocent people die, it's wrong, it's
immoral, it's inexcusable, and it's time for revenge! When Americans
are
subsequently told how many innocent foreigners they have killed, they
shrug their shoulders and say, well, that's war! Yes, that's "war",
except
when that "war" is taken to America, and then it becomes terrorism,
and
the loss of life is a real tragedy; one the whole world should mourn.
Michael Cullen then states: "If you had stated that the war is
certainly
ill-advised and more probably illegal, that the US invaded a country
that
had not done it any harm, the Bush lied and continues to lie, that he
insists on bending American constitutional law to his primitive,
childish
fantasies, you would be easier to agree with."
In other words, if Robert Parry had stated the bleeding obvious. The
bleeding obvious isn't worth the time of day.
Mike Richards
--
Here's an angle for you. I haven't seen anybody
commenting on the fact that Bush's arguments for torture all boil down
to claiming that the ends justify the means.
Joel Shimberg
Back
to Home Page |