NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










George Bush is not America « Thread Started on Nov 19, 2005,

Daily newsbrief journal for November 2005, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


George Bush is not America « Thread Started on Nov 19, 2005,

Postby admin » Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:42 pm

George Bush is not America « Thread Started on Nov 19, 2005, 4:13am » --------------------------------------------------------------------------------George Bush is not America read source: http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanheral ... spWhenever some of us think of America, Bush’s face looms up before us with its hall-mark compound of arrogance, ignorance, incompetence and patented smirk. And of course, that is all wrong. Bush is not America. True, his less agreeable characteristics are not wholly unshared by his fellow citizens. Yet belatedly, though steadily, he is being rejected by what could be called the American norm. A norm consisting of just that amount of decency, human warmth, and a sense of hospitality and fair play that le Carre had in mind when he called on the American people to “give us back the America we love”. It is an America above all, as its severest critics will admit, which is able and willing to correct itself. Its highly competitive internal spirit ensures that no major wrong goes unnoticed or unchallenged. Easily the most penetrating, trenchant criticism of America’s involvement in Vietnam came from American commentators, analysts, reporters, specialists, academicians and professors. True again, this ruthless self-assessment often doesn’t take off as quickly as it should. Bush has been a cynical beneficiary of the peculiar respect the Americans nourish for the high office of President and the media, print and TV, has been scolded for this. Nevertheless the fact remains that despite the America-bashing that is going on outside America, it is America itself, that enduring norm, which will steer it back to what it truly is. It will take time but it will be done after which Bush will be relegated to a footnote in American history. The chimera of unity in pain Off and on disparaging things are said about the LoC, that it has no claim to any permanency, that it has no political validity, that it is a line whose only merit lies in being progressively “softened”, and that opening it up will be a positive step towards a final settlement. These optimistic noises have been climaxed by the fiction that the earthquake tragedy provides an opportunity for both countries to generate a higher level of mutual trust. Several decades of hostility and suspicion, not to mention ongoing memories of inconclusive wars, can hardly be erased by a natural disaster. On the contrary, post-earthquake humanitarian aid and cooperation across the LoC was hampered by a notable lack of the required amount of mutual trust. To pretend otherwise is to underestimate the LoC’s potential as a source of stability and also as a landmark by which the ups and downs of the volatile relations between the two countries can be reliably measured. Political correctness of the wrong sort in both Islamabad and New Delhi seems responsible for the cliche that the Line is all the better for being “softened”. There is here a general shying away from acknowledging that a gradually “hardening” LoC is a key to a more acceptable future. Stage-managing the future Stage-managing things and projecting “images” are the techniques by which the Bush administration has tried to solicit public support. Among governments it is not alone in doing so. But in a very Bush-like manner he has given this policy a twist that is both grotesque and hilarious. The point about stage-managing an event is that it should not be known to be stage-managed. It is supposed to be a happening that happens on its own volition. However, at a time when so many things are going wrong for Bush, he apparently finds it necessary to ensure that stage-managing goes the way he wants it to go. So an upcoming interchange between the President and a selected number of American soldiers was rehearsed, and a coach was given the responsibility of overseeing this tiny bit of drama. A captain was instructed to ask the first question. Another was told how to answer it, and to whom to hand over the mike for the next arranged question. If, they were warned, the tricky question of training Iraqi troops came up, no one was to utter a word save a properly tutored Captain Pratt. How very like America that the rehearsal itself, never mind the event, was covered by the media. A minor case surely of dictating the future and of transparency carried to extremes. Oil-for- food and scam-for-politics If all the reports on the oil-for-food programmes are boiled down to their essentials, the only possible conclusion is that it is not, as has been implied by interested powers, a UN scandal. Companies worldwide, individual members of the relevant UN agencies, a captive Security Council, contractors and professional smugglers of unspecified origin were all involved in varying degrees. The UNSC was informed that many billions of dollars worth of oil were smuggled into certain countries. Yet it failed to act because these countries had cosy ties with the major powers, including the United States. Just before Iraq was attacked, what was described as “the single largest oil consignment” was smuggled out of Iraq under the programme with approval. An inquiry revealed that money also under this programme was misused by the occupation authorities. Many billions more were handed over to the Iraqi government. Yet the documentation relating to all this has not been released by the US government. A scandal certainly but one exploited by Bush to down-size Kofi Annan and the United Nations. “The United Nations”, Bush declared, “must stand for integrity and live by high standards”. The few powers with clout in the Security Council set out the terms, including loopholes, for the oil-for-food operation and thereafter turned a blind eye on what went on. Allawi, the earlier PM in Iraq, was more true than he realised when he said that corruption charges were politically motivated.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to November 2005

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest