No End in Sight

-

That’s what former top US Commander in Iraq Ricardo Sanchez calls our current situation there.
It’s also the name of a must see, Sundance Special Grand Jury Prize winning movie. No End in Sight was produced by internet guru and concerned American citizen Charles Ferguson.
New America’s own Nir Rosen shot much of the Baghdad footage in the film — and people like Paul Hughes who used to be in the Coalitional Provisional Authority, Walter Slocombe who was a Senior Adviser to the the operation, Lawrence Wilkerson, Jay Garner, Richard Armitage and others paint a picture of what went on in the early days of our Iraq stewardship that make Sanchez’s comments rather old hat.
But still — the trend continues to disturb. Ferguson is now writing a book that tracks some of the film but has secured a great deal more information about Bush’s role (or non-role) in the management decisions on Iraq.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

24 comments on “No End in Sight

  1. Sandy says:

    Wow, I really did, Kathleen. Thanks so much. And, I found it again over at Jim Lobe’s blog…so he liked it, too. I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD READ IT — (go back and read Kathleen’s post of the Uri Avnery piece — Clash of Civilizations (or whatever he called it).
    What excellent insights! So true! And, so absolutely appropriate for the Everything-is-black-and/or-white mentality of the Bush administration! Either-or. Them or us. Such a limited, narrow bunch of thinkers. To USE that…to make themselves RICH (Carlyle, Halliburton….the booming military-industrial complex). Why ELSE start wars? They’re so PROFITABLE! And, you MUST go shopping! And, Tax Cuts for the Richest Americans! Look how all-powerful I am….me…THE DECIDER.
    Trillion-dollar wars against dem big bad Islamofascists. Us against them. Before they destroy us (ironic because Bush/Cheney are, in fact, the ones who have destroyed us. Good “Christian” (so-called) boys.
    Fits right in…perfectly. Thank you, Uri Avnery….and Kathleen. I wouldn’t have found it till today…at Jim Lobe’s website. And, it’s far too good to miss!
    (It’s up above…dated Oct. 14, 1:09 p.m.)

    Reply

  2. Kathleen says:

    Screaming.. what a good idea, but I’m not for the silent part. Perhaps the next anti-war demonstration should skip all the speeches and people should just do a group primal scream, all day. Maybe then our Dem “leaders’ will get the point???
    That last post with my name doesn’t make sense to me and I didn’t post it, but thank goodness it didn’t say something gross.
    … & Sandy, glad you liked the Uri Avnery piece.

    Reply

  3. ... says:

    kathleen, thanks for the above post… that needs to be disseminated more thoroughly..

    Reply

  4. Sandy says:

    Hmmm. I didn’t know the <> I used blanked this out in my last post (thus it makes no sense):
    It was this:
    Posted by Kathleen at October 14, 2007 11:07 AM
    that made me smile.

    Reply

  5. Sandy says:

    Oh, I like his writing, too, Kathleen, thanks for this post. I hadn’t seen it yet.
    Laugh or cry? How about silent scream?
    But gee:
    >
    That whole post made me smile.
    …as did….what is this??? Steve has a baby??? I DIDN’T KNOW THAT!! HOW ADORABLE!!!
    Tell us more, Steve? Or, maybe y’all (just kidding) already know and can share about Steve’s family. I’ve only ever seen the beautiful doggies!

    Reply

  6. Kathleen says:

    Marcia.. good idea…. arm bands would be more visible. The Republic is dead, long live the republic!!
    And speaking of no end in sight, here’s Uri
    Avnery…
    The Mother of all Pretexts
    By Uri Avnery
    10/13/07 “ICH” — – WHEN I hear mention of the “Clash of Civilizations” I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry.
    To laugh, because it is such a silly notion.
    To cry, because it is liable to cause untold disasters.
    To cry even more, because our leaders are exploiting this slogan as a pretext for sabotaging any possibility of an Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation. It is just one more in a long line of pretexts.
    WHY WAS the Zionist movement in need of excuses to justify the way it treated the Palestinian people?
    At its birth, it was an idealistic movement. It laid great weight on its moral basis. Not just in order to convince the world, but above all in order to set its own conscience at rest.
    From early childhood we learned about the pioneers, many of them sons and daughters of well-to-do and well-educated families, who left behind a comfortable life in Europe in order to start a new life in a far-away and – by the standards of the time – primitive country. Here, in a savage climate they were not used to, often hungry and sick, they performed bone-breaking physical labor under a brutal sun.
    For that, they needed an absolute belief in the rightness of their cause. Not only did they believe in the need to save the Jews of Europe from persecution and pogroms, but also in the creation of a society so just as never seen before, an egalitarian society that would be a model for the entire world. Leo Tolstoy was no less important for them than Theodor Herzl. The kibbutz and the moshav were symbols of the whole enterprise.
    But this idealistic movement aimed at settling in a country inhabited by another people. How to bridge this contradiction between its sublime ideals and the fact that their realization necessitated the expulsion of the people of the land?
    The easiest way was to repress the problem altogether, ignoring its very existence: the land, we told ourselves, was empty, there was no people living here at all. That was the justification that served as a bridge over the moral abyss.
    Only one of the Founding Fathers of the Zionist movement was courageous enough to call a spade a spade. Ze’ev Jabotinsky wrote as early as 80 years ago that it was impossible to deceive the Palestinian people (whose existence he recognized) and to buy their consent to the Zionist aspirations. We are white settlers colonizing the land of the native people, he said, and there is no chance whatsoever that the natives will resign themselves to this voluntarily. They will resist violently, like all the native peoples in the European colonies. Therefore we need an “Iron Wall” to protect the Zionist enterprise.
    When Jabotinsky was told that his approach was immoral, he replied that the Jews were trying to save themselves from the disaster threatening them in Europe, and, therefore, their morality trumped the morality of the Arabs in Palestine.
    Most Zionists were not prepared to accept this force-oriented approach. They searched fervently for a moral justification they could live with.
    Thus started the long quest for justifications – with each pretext supplanting the previous one, according to the changing spiritual fashions in the world.
    THE FIRST justification was precisely the one mocked by Jabotinsky: we were actually coming to benefit the Arabs. We shall redeem them from their primitive living conditions, from ignorance and disease. We shall teach them modern methods of agriculture and bring them advanced medicine. Everything – except employment, because we needed every job for the Jews we were bringing here, which we were transforming from ghetto-Jews into a people of workers and tillers of the soil.
    When the ungrateful Arabs went on to resist our grand project, in spite of all the benefits we were supposedly bringing them, we found a Marxist justification: It’s not the Arabs who oppose us, but only the “effendis”. The rich Arabs, the great landowners, are afraid that the glowing example of the egalitarian Hebrew community would attract the exploited Arab proletariat and cause them to rise against their oppressors.
    That, too, did not work for long, perhaps because the Arabs saw how the Zionists bought the land from those very same “effendis” and drove out the tenants who had been cultivating it for generations.
    The rise of the Nazis in Europe brought masses of Jews to the country. The Arab public saw how the land was being withdrawn from under their feet, and started a rebellion against the British and the Jews in 1936. Why, the Arabs asked, should they pay for the persecution of the Jews by the Europeans? But the Arab Revolt gave us a new justification: the Arabs support the Nazis. And indeed, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, was photographed sitting next to Hitler. Some people “discovered” that the Mufti was the real instigator of the Holocaust. (Years later it was revealed that Hitler had detested the Mufti, who had no influence whatsoever over the Nazis.)
    World War II came to an end, to be followed by the 1948 war. Half of the vanquished Palestinian people became refugees. That did not trouble the Zionist conscience, because everybody knew: They ran away of their own free will. Their leaders had called upon them to leave their homes, to return later with the victorious Arab armies. True, no evidence was ever found to support this absurd claim, but it has sufficed to soothe our conscience to this day.
    It may be asked: why were the refugees not allowed to come back to their homes once the war was over? Well, it was they who in 1947 rejected the UN partition plan and started the war. If because of this they lost 78% of their country, they have only themselves to blame.
    Then came the Cold War. We were, of course, on the side of the “Free World”, while the great Arab leader, Gamal Abd-al-Nasser, got his weapons from the Soviet bloc. (True, in the 1948 war the Soviet arms flowed to us, but that’s not important.) It was quite clear: No use talking with the Arabs, because they support Communist tyranny.
    But the Soviet bloc collapsed. “The terrorist organization called PLO”, as Menachem Begin used to call it, recognized Israel and signed the Oslo agreement. A new justification had to be found for our unwillingness to give back the occupied territories to the Palestinian people.
    The salvation came from America: a professor named Samuel Huntington wrote a book about the “Clash of Civilizations”. And so we found the mother of all pretexts.
    THE ARCH-ENEMY, according to this theory, is Islam. Western Civilization, Judeo-Christian, liberal, democratic, tolerant, is under attacked from the Islamic monster, fanatical, terrorist, murderous.
    Islam is murderous by nature. Actually, “Muslim” and “terrorist” are synonymous. Every Muslim is a terrorist, every terrorist a Muslim.
    A sceptic might ask: How did it happen that the wonderful Western culture gave birth to the Inquisition, the pogroms, the burning of witches, the annihilation of the Native Americans, the Holocaust, the ethnic cleansings and other atrocities without number – but that was in the past. Now Western culture is the embodiment of freedom and progress.
    Professor Huntington was not thinking about us in particular. His task was to satisfy a peculiar American craving: the American empire always needs a virtual, world-embracing enemy, a single enemy which includes all the opponents of the United States around the world. The Communists delivered the goods – the whole world was divided between Good Guys (the Americans and their supporters) and Bad Guys (the Commies). Everybody who opposed American interests was automatically a Communist – Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Salvador Allende in Chile, Fidel Castro in Cuba, while the masters of Apartheid, the death squads of Augusto Pinochet and the secret police of the Shah of Iran belonged, like us, to the Free World.
    When the Communist empire collapsed, America was suddenly left without a world-wide enemy. This vacuum has now been filled by the Muslims-Terrorists. Not only Osama bin Laden, but also the Chechnyan freedom fighters, the angry North-African youth of the Paris banlieus, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, the insurgents in the Philippines.
    Thus the American world view rearranged itself: a good world (Western Civilization) and a bad world (Islamic civilization). Diplomats still take care to make a distinction between “radical Islamists” and “moderate Muslims”, but that is only for appearances’ sake. Between ourselves, we know of course that they are all Osama bin Ladens. They are all the same.
    This way, a huge part of the world, composed of manifold and very different countries, and a great religion, with many different and even opposing tendencies (like Christianity, like Judaism), which has given the world unmatched scientific and cultural treasures, is thrown into one and the same pot.
    THIS WORLD VIEW is tailored for us. Indeed, the world of the clashing civilizations is, for us, the best of all possible worlds.
    The struggle between Israel and the Palestinians is no longer a conflict between the Zionist movement, which came to settle in this country, and the Palestinian people, which inhabited it. No, it has been from the very beginning a part of a world-wide struggle which does not stem from our aspirations and actions. The assault of terrorist Islam on the Western world did not start because of us. Our conscience can be entirely clean – we are among the good guys of this world.
    This is now the line of argument of official Israel: the Palestinians elected Hamas, a murderous Islamic movement. (If it didn’t exist, it would have to be invented – and indeed, some people assert it was created from the start by our secret service.) Hamas is terroristic, and so is Hizbullah. Perhaps Mahmoud Abbas is not a terrorist himself, but he is weak and Hamas is about to take sole control over all Palestinian territories. So we cannot talk with them. We have no partner. Actually, we cannot possibly have a partner, because we belong to Western Civilization, which Islam wants to eradicate.
    IN HIS book “Der Judenstaat”, Theodor Herzl, the official Israeli “Prophet of the State”, prophesied this development, too.
    This is what he wrote in 1896: “For Europe we shall constitute (in Palestine) a part of the wall against Asia, we shall serve as a vanguard of culture against barbarism.”
    Herzl was thinking of a metaphoric wall, but in the meantime we have put up a very real one. For many, this is not just a Separation Wall between Israel and Palestine. It is a part of the world-wide wall between the West and Islam, the front-line of the Clash of Civilizations. Beyond the wall there are not men, women and children, not a conquered and oppressed Palestinian population, not choked towns and villages like Abu-Dis, a-Ram, Bil’in and Qalqilia. No, beyond the wall there are a billion terrorists, multitudes of blood-thirsty Muslims, who have only one desire in life: to throw us into the sea, simply because we are Jews, part of Judeo-Christian Civilization.
    With an official position like that – who is there to talk to? What is there to talk about? What is the point of meeting in Annapolis or anywhere else?
    And what is left to us to do – to cry or to laugh?
    Uri Avnery is an Israeli author and activist. He is the head of the Israeli peace movement, “Gush Shalom”.

    Reply

  7. downtown says:

    10:40am
    “Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who joined Gates in Moscow, Saturday criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin for concentrating too much power in the Kremlin and undermining the checks and balances….”
    You couldn’t make this stuff up! There is perfect symmetry in this statement. Just replace Secretary of State with Foreign Minister, CR with Sergei Lavrov and then substitute White House for Kremlin and…voilà.

    Reply

  8. Marcia says:

    Speaking of black crepe on our doors, it would be far easier to wear a black band around our shirt, blouse or coat sleeves the way people used to do when they were in mourning…but now for the Constitution and our civil rights.
    I still have some black mourning jewelry that belonged to my grandmother. It may become necessary to obtain a chador for when the cameras start clicking on all the street corners.

    Reply

  9. Kathleen says:

    Sandy… I borrowed “Democraps” from another commenter here, JohnH… it was so perfect.
    I’ve never misunderestimated the evil plans of Dopey and Darth and still maintain that they will push the button to detonate another 9/11 before November and declare Martial Law and cancel further elections.
    Dopey likes to trace his ancestry back to the English crown and he’ll crown himself before November ’08. God told him to do it.
    The Roman Republic ended when Romans offered Julius Ceasar a crown. Despite the fact that the Roman Senate protected the Republic by assassinating Caesar in broad daylight on the steps of the Senate, future Roman Generals could read the writing on the wall and knew the public would accept an Emporer.
    We are there, folks. When this Regime could sneak fine print into recent legislation during the conference session, enabling it to declare Martial Law and round up “enemy combatants” to detain them in Halliburton built detention centers without a peep, you know the game is ovah.
    It is sheer folly, if not treason, to wait for Dopey’s term to be over, for him to leave office. It’s time to hang black crepe on our doors.
    Watch all the Pavlovian Patriots don their little flag lapel pins. Original thinkers are an endangered species.

    Reply

  10. Carroll says:

    This is funny for obvious reasons.
    Gates: Russia is saying, “We are back”
    By Nancy A. Youssef | McClatchy Newspapers
    Gates said he believes that Russia is asserting its resurgence in the post-Cold War period.
    “I think President Putin is coming back and saying you know you have to take us into account on all these things. In essence: ‘We are back. We’ve got a lot of money. And we are a key player.’ ”
    Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who joined Gates in Moscow, Saturday criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin for concentrating too much power in the Kremlin and undermining the checks and balances that are supposed to be provided by Russia’s legislature, judiciary and news media.
    “If you don’t have countervailing institutions, then the power of any one president is problematic for democratic development,” Rice told reporters accompanying her.
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/20511.html

    Reply

  11. Carroll says:

    He raises millions of dollars from his campaign supporting Israeli settlements on the West Bank, including much for himself….”
    Posted by Sandy at October 13, 2007 02:25 PM
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Somewhere, if I am not mistaken there is an obscure law about US citizens or officals “encouraging or aiding” another country to “defy” the US’s offical position or policy.
    Obviously it’s not enforced.
    I read about this a long time ago in relation to something else so my memory is fuzzy on exactly how it was worded.
    If any readers know about this it be would be interesting to see the exact law or description.

    Reply

  12. Frank says:

    No greater evil enabling comment was ever uttered than these words:
    “Impeachment is off the table”

    Reply

  13. bob h says:

    New NYRB has interesting Rory Stewart reviews of books on Gertrude Bell, Britain’s Queen of the Quagmire in 1920’s Iraq. Futility of colonial nation-building then and now.

    Reply

  14. Paul Norheim says:

    I have to correct an error in my comment above.
    Quote:
    “We`ll see if the next VP will accept that his or her power will be castrated, or if Cheney has set a precedence here too. ”
    I am not sure if it is correct to say that anybody can castrate “the power of” somebody (actually, I don´t think so!). But it certainly sounds alarmingly wrong if that power belongs to a woman – regardless of how tough some women in the history of politics may have been: Catherine the Great, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher…
    Since it`s more likely that a woman will become the President of America in the next election, than ending up as a Vice President, I guess the best solution would be to delete some words:
    “We`ll see if the next VP will accept to be castrated, or if Cheney has set a precedence here too. ”
    In any case, it´s impossible for Hillary Clinton to castrate herself, even as a VP.

    Reply

  15. Bruce Miller says:

    My reaction to Sanchez’ criticism was to think he’s making alibis. Let’s not forget that Sanchez bears significant responsibility for the torture at Abu Ghuraib.
    The “Stars and Stripes” article of 10/13/07 reporting on Sanchez’ criticisms highlighted that aspect of his record, including his own whining about how the press criticized him over it.
    He even praised (though surely unintentionally) the integrity of the Pentagon-funded paper when he said, “I also refused to talk to the European Stars and Stripes for the last two years of my command in Germany, for their extreme bias and single-minded focus on Abu Ghraib.”
    Article URL:
    http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=49460

    Reply

  16. Paul Norheim says:

    “The precise event which signaled the transition of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire is a matter of interpretation…Determining the precise end of the Republic is a task of dispute by modern historians; Roman citizens of the time did not recognize that the Republic had ceased to exist.”
    Nice quote from Wikipedia, JohnH!
    Perhaps 2000 years from now, historians will not only continue to argue about when the transition from Roman Republic to Roman Empire took place, but also disagree strongly about when that transition took place in Washington DC. Bush jr. may have to wait quite a while before “History” is able to judge his actions.
    The decisive question right now seems to be:
    Have Cheney, Addington, Yoo, Rove, W. and the Neocons been pushing their case too far, too fast, and with such incompetence that the concept of The American Empire will suffer a temporary set back?
    Or will the next administration, and the Legislative & Judicial branch as well, silently accept the essence of the work made by Addington & Co. in redefining the role of the “Unitary Executive” – and only make cosmetic changes?
    The answer does not only depend on the degree of impotence or bewilderment among those in opposition to the current administration, or the degree of ignorance or resignation among ordinary Americans. It depends perhaps more on a second question, which may be difficult to answer: Does the Bush administration represent a significant break with the past, or are they just speeding up, and perhaps driving too fast in (more or less) the same direction as former administrations? The lack of serious resistance from a majority of those belonging to the “opposition” during crucial events in this decade, may, or may not, answer that question.
    They obviously pushed things too far during the Nixon administration, and the presidential power was reduced as a result. This was during the cold war. Now the world has changed: the threats are different; new powers are on the horizon. Some of the players, or at least some of their significant supporters (in the US, as well as the Middle East and beyond), are suicidal zealots (often backed up by certain kinds of “hard liners” or “hawks” who believe in confrontation as a general method, but does not “believe” in any higher goals – not even Armageddon, although they may help things going in that direction).
    Perhaps the “moderates”, those representing the “center” (and also the “left”) in US policy, somehow are a mirror of the moderates in Israel, as well as in the Muslim world. They all seem paralyzed by the actions, as well as by the the hidden (and perhaps even more by the openly declared) intentions of the extreme minorities who have hijacked their national, political, or religious identities, and who are now setting the agenda.
    As we know, Cheney & Co have succeeded in increasing the power of the President. And, by the way, also that of the Vice President. We`ll see if the next VP will accept that his or her power will be castrated, or if Cheney has set a precedence here too. However, when we all look back, I think that both the American people and citizens in other countries should express some gratitude to the Bush-administration for making things so screamingly clear and recognizable: the intentions, the ideas, the way they act, and the way they screw up almost everything they have touched abroad (as well as some domestic events, like New Orleans). You could see that something was wrong during the counting of votes in the 2000 election, and again in a couple of cases before 9.11. But after that, their way of operating, as well as their ideas, were indeed very straight forward. Even their secrecy, their lies, were performed with such arrogance that anybody who watched them couldn`t avoid seeing what was going on. The only surprise for most of their critics, was probably the extreme incompetence of the administration, visible first in Iraq, than in New Orleans.
    Obviously they were incompetent abroad. And it is also clear that they have suffered domestic set backs. But only time will tell if they essentially succeeded, or lost, in their effort to increase the power of the “Unitary Executive” (aka: the Guts, or the Almighty God) of any future President and her/his administration.

    Reply

  17. JohnH says:

    “The precise event which signaled the transition of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire is a matter of interpretation…Determining the precise end of the Republic is a task of dispute by modern historians; Roman citizens of the time did not recognize that the Republic had ceased to exist. The early Julio-Claudian “Emperors” maintained that the res publica still existed, albeit under the protection of their extraordinary powers, and would eventually return to its full Republican form. The Roman state continued to call itself a res publica as long as it continued to use Latin as its official language.” –Wikipedia

    Reply

  18. Sandy says:

    ….and, in keeping with the title of this piece ‘No End in Sight’….
    God help us if the Rovians are successful with their caging/voter suppression tactics, together with some electronic machines fixed in strategic states….and Giuliani wins….because Democraps (as Kathleen rightly calls them) aren’t fond enough of Hillary (like me)….
    because…(caveat emptor):
    http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=70#more-70
    More Neo-Cons for Giuliani

    Reply

  19. Sandy says:

    Yes, Susan, and, the PNAC…as well as a related Neo-Con paper: “A Clean Break. A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (that “realm” being Israel) — TOGETHER with the James Hagee’s…and the End-Timers/Evangelists (who WANT to see the world end)– TOGETHER with the Messianic, delusional Bush and the equally monomaniac Cheney — and we have here a very lethal….very frightening brew.
    Hard not to feel….some days….one can fully exhale.
    It used to be — years ago — that people thought you were exaggerating when you (I) tried to talk/warn about these combinations. Now, with their track record, lies, and some of the insane and contradictory things they say…now…not so much. People are waking up. And realize they didn’t dream it. It’s true. We’ve been living a nightmare….for seven long years.

    Reply

  20. susan says:

    “I am beginning to believe this Administration, and the forces behind it, have far greater aims…”
    Yes, it has very ambitious aims:
    Project for the New American Century is a neo-conservative think-tank that promotes an ideology of total U.S. world domination through the use of force. The group embraces and disseminates an ideology of faith in force, U.S. supremacy, and rejection of the rule of law in international affairs.
    The group’s core ideas are expressed in a September 2000 report produced for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, and Lewis Libby entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century. The Sunday Herald referred to the report as a “blueprint for U.S. world domination.”
    The fundamental essence of PNAC’s ideology can be found in a White Paper produced in September of 2000 entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century.” In it, PNAC outlines what is required of America to create the global empire they envision. According to PNAC, America must:
    * Reposition permanently based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East;
    * Modernize U.S. forces, including enhancing our fighter aircraft, submarine and surface fleet capabilities;
    * Develop and deploy a global missile defense system, and develop a strategic dominance of space;
    * Control the “International Commons” of cyberspace;
    * Increase defense spending to a minimum of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, up from the 3 percent currently spent.
    Most ominously, this PNAC document described four “Core Missions” for the American military. The two central requirements are for American forces to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars,” and to “perform the ‘constabulary’ duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions.”
    Note well that PNAC does not want America to be prepared to fight simultaneous major wars. That is old school. In order to bring this plan to fruition, the military must fight these wars one way or the other to establish American dominance for all to see.

    Reply

  21. Sandy says:

    POA, of course, you are right. There IS a much larger picture at work here. Among other things (like the Neo-con vision of world domination), it’s that steadfast 30%, the “base” of Evangelicals, they are counting on. And, some of them are bat-shit crazy. No other words for it! It is what is fueling Bush’s pathetic Messianic vision of himself. He told us….GOD TOLD HIM…and he sees himself as part of some MUCH LARGER scheme here — way beyond anything any of us mere mortals could “get”….which is why he’s so adamant that HE is “the decider”….because he listens to “his Father”….(God)…not Poppy (41). THE MAN IS INSANE. A narcissistic sociopath, remember? He HAD to conjure up such visions of himself….to somehow…. somehow….surpass his daddy…and Jeb “the smart one” that his folks believed would be presidential material. Not him….not the black sheep….frat boy….DUI….AWOL….business failure. How could he SHOW them? How could he secure his place….not only in the family….but also in history? I know! (he thought) Karl will make me president, the “leader of the free world”….and *I* will show them all. My place in history will be ever so much larger….than any of them! Why, I have been chosen by God to SAVE the BELIEVERS! They are counting on ME! Who could have dreamed it (he thought to himself). He is DELUSIONAL!
    Consider this now powerful contingent in this White House:
    “…The organizer of the conference, Rev. John Hagee, is often welcomed at the White House, although his ratings are among the lowest on integrity and transparency by Ministry Watch, which rates religious broadcasters. He raises millions of dollars from his campaign supporting Israeli settlements on the West Bank, including much for himself….”
    http://www.antiwar.com/utley/?articleid=11735
    And,
    October 11, 2007
    America’s Armageddonites
    by Jon Basil Utley
    Utopian fantasies have long transfixed the human race. Yet today a much rarer fantasy has become popular in the United States. Millions of Americans, the richest people in history, have a death wish. They are the new “Armageddonites,” fundamentalist evangelicals who have moved from forecasting Armageddon to actually trying to bring it about.
    Most journalists find it difficult to take seriously that tens of millions of Americans, filled with fantasies of revenge and empowerment, long to leave a world they despise. These Armageddonites believe that they alone will get a quick, free pass when they are “raptured” to paradise, no good deeds necessary, not even a day of judgment.
    Ironically, they share this utopian fantasy with a group that they often castigate, namely fundamentalist Muslims who believe that dying in battle also means direct access to Heaven. For the Armageddonites, however, there are no waiting virgins, but they do agree with Muslims that there will be “no booze, no bars,” in the words of a popular Gaither Singers song.
    These end-timers have great influence over the U.S. government’s foreign policy. They are thick with the Republican leadership. At a recent conference in Washington, congressional leader Roy Blunt….” (excerpt)

    Reply

  22. David N says:

    But he’s just listening to the generals!!!
    At least, the ones who have been allowed near him, because it has been determined by his handlers that they will tell him what he wants to hear.
    Just like in the campaign last year, he was asked about the overwhelming public opinion that his policies are a disaster, and he actually answered that he saw no evidence of that in his travels, and his meetings with people who are carefully screened so that all real opinions are arrested and excluded from his bubble.
    What has this country become, that an idiot like this has been given such power. It’s worse than the fact that a criminal psychopath like the VP has been given so many responsibilities, and that so many supposedly intelligent people fear the VP so much that they will not object to his psychotic fantasies — legal or political — in his presence.
    La patria e mortua.

    Reply

  23. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Personally, I am beginning to believe this Administration, and the forces behind it, have far greater aims than even I have given them credit for. The world has best sit up and take notice, because these maniacs are just getting started.

    Reply

  24. Klaus Farbie says:

    Give a starving man a fish and he can eat for a day. Give a genocidal ignoramus the keys to a nuclear arsenal and he can set the world on fire. Literally.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *