The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Wattree's picture

    A Retrospective on George W. Bush: Am I a Prophet, or Did America Ignore Reality?

    BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE


     

    A Retrospective on George W. Bush:
    Am I a Prophet, or Did America Ignore Reality?
    .
    On September 15, 2002–six months and four days prior to the Iraqi invasion--I published an article entitled "Would Bush's Saber Rattle as Loudly Against China?" in the Portland Independent Media Center http://Portland.indymedia.org/en/2002/09/21292.shtml –no one else would publish it at the time–that said the following:

    .
    WOULD BUSH'S SABER RATTLE AS LOUDLY AGAINST CHINA
    .
    Now that we've reached the anniversary of 9-11, I am consumed by one thought--in light of what I've seen over the past year I find myself much more afraid of Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft than I am the Al Qaeda. While I understand that terrorists strike without warning to destroy life and property to promote their own agenda, it has become increasingly clear that Bush and his cohorts threaten to be even more destructive by attacking life, liberty, and the very foundation of this nation in the promotion of theirs.
    .
    Over the past year these conservative war mongers have been playing the American people like a fiddle. Now they want to sacrifice American lives for nothing more than their own political advantage. Just ask yourself, what does Saddam Hussein have to do with 9-11? Absolutely nothing. Evidence of that can be found in the fact that if Saddam had been involved in 9-11 the administration would have gone after him initially.
    .
    So why is it suddenly so imperative that we invade Iraq now? I'll tell you why. Since Bush was unable to produce the head of Osama Bin Laden, he now needs another villain to take Bin Laden's place in order to keep his numbers up in the polls-- and if that means having to sacrifice a few American lives and ignite even more terrorist activity on American soil in the process, so be it.
    .
    It is a well known political fact that the American people tend to rally around the president when the country's at war. That's why the Bush Administration fell all over themselves after 9-11 to declare "a war against terrorism." And the American people reacted just as planed-Bush's numbers immediately went up in the polls. But now with the mystery surrounding the fate of Osama Bin Laden, the administration has found itself without a war to sustain those numbers, so now they have to create one.
    .
    While I'm not prepared to say that the Bush Administration allowed 9-11 to take place, it is clear that the timing of the 9-11 tragedy was without a doubt the best thing that could ever happened to Bush's presidency.
    .
    Bush was a lame duck the minute he was sworn in. It seems that as soon as Bush entered The Oval Office the stock market began to falter and the economy started to weaken. And whenever he spoke, the next day's news was not so much what he said, but whether or not he got through the speech without falling on his face. In addition, his big tax cut that was touted as the key to boosting the economy turned out to be a bust, and he was so inept in dealing with congress that a Republican senator changed parties costing Bush control of the senate. As a result, when 9-11 took place, it was embraced by conservatives more like it was a football rally than the sober occasion that it was--thus, all the flag waving, ceremonies, and strutting about.
    .
    But where was all that bluster prior to 9-11? ABC News reported on May 16th of this year [2002] that the Bush Administration acknowledged that U.S. Intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before 9-11 that Osama Bin Laden's terrorists might try to hijack a plane. It was also reported that Bush privately alerted transportation officials and security agencies, but other than that, simply sat on the information.
    .
    The administration claims that the information they received was non-specific, but one would think that even if they couldn't determine exactly when and where the attack was going to take place, at the very least they could have warned the American people. If they had, maybe some of the people who died would have chosen not to fly-or possibly, chosen to leave their children behind. But no, this president who now claims to be so concerned with protecting our welfare that he feels compelled to launch an unprovoked attack against Iraq, was at that time more interested in the impact that warning us would have on the airline industry.
    .
    What the American people needs to understand is that the power elite in this country doesn't view the United States in the same way as its citizens. They see the United States as a huge corporation, with its various industries as its subsidiaries. They see American citizens, particularly the lower and middle class, as simply pawns to be cajoled and manipulated in whatever way is necessary to meet the goals of the corporation. Therefore, they didn't view the tragedy of 9-11 in the same patriotic way as the average American citizen. After the initial shock, they saw 9-11 in terms of dollars and cents. Ultimately, it was viewed as an assault on their corporate superstructure. Later they recognized that the incident could be used as a distraction for the American people, and still later, an opportunity to move on Middle Eastern oil interests.
    .
    So let there be no doubt, all of the flag waving, ceremonies, and patriotic speeches have nothing to do with 9-11; they are designed to whip the American people into such a frenzy that they're blinded to Bush's actual agenda. And that agenda includes the following:
    .
    1). Committing America (and American lives) to a war in order to get
    himself re-elected.
    2). Taking control of Iraqi oil fields to benefit his friends in big business.
    3). Keeping the American voter distracted from considering the ramifications of the recent corporate scandals.
    4). Keeping the American people from recognizing how inept he is as president.
    .
    The rest of the world sees Bush's agenda for what it is, and the American people would too if they'd stop waving their flags long enough to consider the flag's true meaning. The American flag represents freedom and justice, not trying to dictate who should lead other countries. It represents the open debate of issues, not intolerance to any and everyone who disagrees with your point of view. It represents the guarantee of personal freedom, not the suspension of the Bill of Rights.
    .
    If the American people would just stop to consider these facts, it would become clear that even while Bush and his conservative cohorts are frantically waving our flag, they are simultaneously waging war against the very values that the flag and this great country represent.
    .
    These issues can, and will, be debated ad nauseam, but the American people need only ask themselves two questions to put all of the administration's nonsense into perspective. First, would the administration be so anxious to go to war if we were talking about China as opposed to Iraq? And secondly, do we think that invading Iraq will make us more, or less safe from terrorist attacks? If we answer those questions honestly, it becomes clear that the administration is being disingenuous at best.
    .
    So what I'd like to know is this--if a shade tree "journalist" sitting up in his den in the heart of a Los Angeles ghetto could see what was going on, why couldn't the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, CNN and all of the networks; Harvard, Yale, and the various and sundry Ph.D.s from the other great institutions of learning; the nation's think tanks, all of the nation's political scientists, the United States Congress and Hillary Clinton couldn't figure it out?
    .
    It kinda makes you wanna go, hmmmmmmm.
    .
    Eric L. Wattree
     

     
    Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

    Comments

    George W Bush usually gets some cover because a perception is created that Dick Cheney was the real President while GW was a puppet.Bush can remain the guy you'd love to have around to share a beer. The truth is President George W Bush should take the blame for his Presidency just as Bill Clinton had to  and Barack Obama will have to.


    Exactly my thoughts, RM. 


    Should take the blame by whom? The puppets or the puppeteers? .... I have to remind myself, in times past, it was construed as Sedition to speak ill of the Flag Idol. WE  have no real choice; either serve it willingly or be drafted into it's service. Remember you serve it, it doesnt have to serve us. It doesnt have to be a respecter, although it demands respect and worship.


    You are correct to the extent that there are forces attempting to keep voters who disagree the platform of a party from voting. In the last election, the Black vote was higher than in 2008 based on fears of having the vote taken away.

    Occupy Wall Street dents rated that there was public outrage over how things happen in DC.Occupy was a true people's reaction compared to the Tea Party that was a corporate sponsored movement. In my view Occupy should have focused more on pressuring Congress. It is currently hard to show an ongoing impact ofOccupy.

    Regarding direct overthrow of the government, most citizens do not trust rag tag groups on either the Right or the Left to be the answer to current political problems.Take, for example, gun control. Most citizens want background checks and limits on the number of rounds in a clip. Congress voted against these measures, overruling the will of the people.Some groups would be on the side of halting gun control measures, thus putting themselves outside of the will of the people. Because of that issue and others, the public will focus on continuing to try to vote the bums out. Better the devil you know than a nebulous savior.


    How you going to throw the bums out? They control the whole aperatus. Once those in power have the guns;  good luck forcing them to have empathy; with your spoons and soup dish in hand, begging on bended knee "please master, be more kind?  Get in the real world. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.


    To be blunt, why would I expect some random folks with guns to be better?


    To be blunt, we accepted the fact, that lo-life's and scoundrels. Criminals and slaves fought the British, side by side with General Washington; in order set us free, from the bondage to British rule and British commercial interests; who only viewed our Nation  and it's citizens, as a colony to be exploited, for it's raw materials and forcing us to buy British finished goods...... Today, Foreign interests have captured our leadership, who no longer serve the best interests of the American working class or it's soldiers....... Foreign interests allowed to own mega - farms and they also want migrant workers to do the work. The same scheme Britain used, to supply it's OWN country's industries, with tobacco and cotton, before the war and it's why they supported the South in the Civil War. CHEAP LABOR COSTS to allow British manufacturers, to comepete against the OUR OWN  Nations Industrial BASE  Where is the Industrial North now? Offshore, controlled by Mega Corporations, who no longer need American workers; BECAUSE The world is full of slaves, willing to work for the new royalty class, the pluotcracy. You ready to throw some TEA overboard and endure the blockade? 


    Sheldon Adelson spent $100 million dollars to get Romney elected. The plan failed. Chaos is easy Democracy is hard. Look at the polling on some of the folks who voted against background checks they are plummeting.Our views on the issue are much different from a concern standpoint,I'd be more worried about the random guy with a gun compared to the government

    The arrested the second bombing suspect.He was not lynched or riddled with bullets which is what I'd expect from random guys with guns.

    No 2023 tea parties for me.


    Well, Iraq isn't China just as Vietnam wasn't the Soviet Union.  And if the brother that is annoying you is older, your response to him will be different than if the annoying brother is younger.  So if Americans say "yes, it would be different if Iraq was China," how does that change the response to Iraq. 

    And while I personally think invading Iraq hasn't made me safer as an American, I can't prove it.  Maybe if we hadn't there would have been more Boston Marathon liken bombings.  The only way to know for sure is to witness a parallel universe where everything remains the same except for the  invasion (occupation) of Iraq.

    It is this kind of 20/20 hindsight ego trips that makes it difficult, in part, to have a real discussion about how we should move forward.


    Trope,

    Saddam Hussein was a natural enemy of Iran, so when we took out Saddam, we destabilized the region. That made the United States, and many other areas of the world, less safe. That’s not a matter of speculation. That’s a fact.

     


    That is my take too!

    Hell, Saddam was fighting the commies for chrissakes. ha!