Our blogs about
America's Wars
War on Iraq
War on Drugs
War on Afghanistan
War on Columbia
War on Philippines
War on Venezuela

MORE
Matrix Masters
Blogs
World Events
Katrina's Aftermath
US News
Bush Crime Family News
Science & Health
Earth News
Free Speech
News from Africa
News from Palestine
Bill of Rights Under Attack

Support Bloggers' Rights!

Lorenzo's
Random Musings
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope

 

Go F*ck Yourself, Mr. President
(Justin Raimondo, AntiWar.com, November 26, 2003)
I am so sick of George W. Bush: sick of his petulant preppie voice, sick of his studied belligerence, and, most of all, damned sick of his threats. If we don't toe the line and support his crazed foreign policy of "preemptive self-defense," he constantly claims, we will reap the whirlwind. As he puts it in a recent television ad paid for by the Republican National Committee: "It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known." . . . Well, then, how come we're fighting in Iraq � thousands of miles away from the scene of the terrorists' target? Instead of kicking the shit out of Iraqi POWs, why aren't those Army reservists inspecting each and every crate that comes into this country? One vial, one canister, one crate � yes, and if it gets through, Georgie boy, we're gonna hold you responsible! . . . Like everything else about his Presidency, this line � taken from his State of the Union address � is a lie. In the speech, you'll remember, he flubbed this line, pausing uncertainly before the word "vial," and then pronouncing it as if it were "while." But in the ad, the presidential pronunciation is perfect, and there is no uncertainty: the pause has been edited out. "Cut and pasted," according to Republican officials. Yeah, just like the "intelligence" they used to justify the Iraq war. . . . The makers of this ad have entitled it "Reality," which they apparently believe is infinitely malleable, averring: "Some are now attacking the President for attacking the terrorists." . . . This is a flat-out lie. Critics of the Iraq war are attacking the President for not attacking the terrorists � for ignoring Osama bin Laden and, instead, going after the tinpot tyrant of a fifth-rate military power, because, as deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz put it, it was "doable." . . . We must act, even if the threat is nonexistent � because of the potential danger. If "self-defense" consists of necessary "preemption," then what would happen if we started acting on this Bushian principle domestically? After all, killers, robbers, and rapists don't announce their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike. Why not just jail them before they have a chance to commit a crime? This principle, if applied within the U.S., would lead straight to totalitarian rule. Applied abroad, it means perpetual war. . . . For the President to constantly invoke 9/11 is to focus on the single greatest failing of his adminstration: after all, it happened on his watch. Not a single person has been fired, demoted, or otherwise held responsible for letting 19 terrorists slip through our fingers and deliver a devastating blow from which we are still reeling. . . . "It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known." . . . The only proper answer to this is: go f*ck yourself, Mr. President. You don't scare me one friggin' bit. Americans will never be intimidated in this fashion: and, if they are, they will cease being Americans. . . . It was a Republican administration that dropped the ball on 9/11 � which is why the White House is stonewalling the 9/11 Commission. . . . And this injection of neoconservative rhetoric into the campaign seems potentially dangerous for the President. Does he really want to make the extremism of the neoconservative ideologues who dominate his administration the central issue of the campaign? The RNC, by exhorting their followers to "call Congress" on behalf of the policy of preemption, is in effect telling them to demand new wars, more casualties, and fresh invasions. Syria, Iran, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt � which of these are now in the President's sights? That is the question his opponents need to be asking.

posted by Lorenzo 1:42 PM