Some things remain timely

I realize that many people are currently very angry and afraid about how horrible and scary the world is starting to look with a possible sociopath in charge of the nuclear codes, but things were pretty fucked up in the sixties and they weren’t much better in the seventies. In fact, the 80s sucked immensely, if you forget about the Macintosh introduction, and what happened in the 90s? I can’t remember, but it was probably a pile of shit as well, and then we got George W. Bush and his gangrenous gang of rape and pillagers who played the media every bit as well as Donald J. Trump does, but Bush gave the White House press whores affectionate nicknames so a complete imbecile allowed the country to be razed and its citizens buttfucked for eight goddamn years while the MSM turned into nightly disinformation disseminators, pretty much where we find ourselves today, despite eight years of relative sanity with Obama in office.

Today, the less-than-one-month president* of the country gets cheers when he refuses to take questions from ANY major mainstream news organization, and there appears to be no believable outrage over the new regime playing the fourth estate for a fool and watching reporters saying: “Hey! You forgot me!”

At any rate, I came across this piece from the end of First Idiot Bush’s first term which asks a lot of questions that I never heard any reporter ask at any press briefing or press conference as the reelection campaign war ground on and on.


Connect the Dots

I half expected old Rummy to trot out the Ronald Reagan defense of amiable infirmity. "Am I sorry that these horrible things happened?" I could hear him say, "My goodness, you know I am. And should I have told everyone sooner what was going on? Well, of course, I should have, and I would have, except my hearing isn't what it used to be. I could have swore those boys told me there had been some complaints about some soldier amusing the prisoners. And I thought, well what's wrong with that? What’s the harm in lightening things up a bit?”

Whatever this hubbub around Ronald C. McRumsfeld is all about, it has nothing to do with prisoner abuse. This administration has been arrogant, belligerent, and aggressive since Fubar and the rule of law crew decided a purchased election gave them the right to screw up the world and nine months later produced a spectacular failed opportunity for change on 9/11. 

Has everyone forgotten the abrogated treaties, the total disregard for international law, the slow erosion of individual rights? These all were occurring PRIOR to 9/11, and despite all attempts by politicians and the media to lead us to believe otherwise, the attacks changed nothing. The inexorable march toward war with Iraq to avenge the honor of King Stupid the First was simply given a convenient justification, although it took nearly an additional year of fabrication before my obsequious countrymen all hailed the chief in his noble endeavor to rid the world of democracy.

Closer to the present, Joint Chief Dickie Wanker now says that the reason he asked CBS to delay the 60 minutes airing of the torture photos for two weeks was to protect our troops in Falluja. 

And why were the troops in Falluja? To apprehend the people who killed and mutilated four "civilian" contractors. 

And why did the Iraqis kill the contractors? Because they were paramilitary security forces, working for the same company that was supplying interrogators to Abu Graibass prison. 

Why are paramilitary contractors working in Iraq to such an extent that they constitute the second largest military force in the coalition of the willing (behind the Force of Gooditude)? Because Ronald McRumsfeld wanted to avoid the constraints placed on the military by having to comply with international law, among other things. 

And why were the civilian contractors in Falluja to get themselves killed? Because they were trying to neutralize Moqtada al Sadr, whose paper had just been shut down because it was inciting Iraqis to oppose the American occupation.

And how was the paper inciting the Iraqis? By printing accounts of prison torture and the killings of civilians by the occupation forces.

And why were occupation forces torturing and killing Iraqis?

Ah, now we're finally getting to some real questions.

Unfortunately, I don't have the answers, and no one even wants to hear questions like: Is it helpful for the leaders of the free world in the most powerful nation on the planet to continually refer to their conduct in the war on terror as a series of attempts to kill or capture the enemy? I don't think so.

Elio

Originally posted to Elio Emiliano Ligi’s Uncommon Sense on Friday, May 7, 2004 at 03:01 PM Pacific

Providing Imaginary Cures For Your Imaginary Ailments Since 1896. © Elio Emiliano Ligi 1946-2017. Oil Rights Reserved. Accept no substitutes.