US Military Powers Turned on Americans

This is one of the most strange issues I have come across in a long time when it comes to the Congress and the President passing a bill to basically fund and authorize the activities of our United States Military. I happened to get this link (working link to read the actual bill on Naturalnews.com) from a really pretty girl that thinks my blog is awesome and she thinks I'm pretty hug-gable but I need not reveal who my girlfriend is other than the fact that you should check out the following links when it comes to your basic American rights.

The basic summation is that the US Military can be authorized to detain indefinitely citizens of the United States here in America based on requirements that are not defined in the bill. The requirements can be defined in any manner if you are protesting against the US Government and the military could have the authority to pick you up off the street and detain you with a simple label of terrorist. Even if you were protesting against the wars.

The ACLU is up in arms over Senate Bill S1867 because of two sections of the bill, 1031 & 1032. Check it out at the ACLU site. HERE or read the actual bill sections below.

Here is the actual language in question:

S.1867

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Engrossed in Senate [Passed Senate] - ES)

---

Subtitle D--Detainee Matters

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

(f) Requirement for Briefings of Congress- The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be `covered persons' for purposes of subsection (b)(2).

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

(c) Implementation Procedures-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.

(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:

(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.

(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.

(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation session which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing session.

(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.

(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.

(d) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.

I am by far not a lawyer or ever want to be one but the idea that the US Military would be or could be directed against its own people, inside our own country, is an indirect possibility of S1867. The power it gives to the President is vague. The White House is ready to veto the bill as it stands.

This all still has to go through the House so it should be an interesting bill to follow to see if the House is willing to abandon its people because they too are sheep.

Papamoka

Eve of Destruction

Today we honor all of those lost on this day back on September 11, 2001. We also should pay tribute to all the men and woman serving in our nations military that paid the ultimate price for our freedom from terrorists on 9/11. On this day of all days there is no difference of political opinion when it comes to the thousands of lives lost in our nation on 9/11. We all lost a piece of ourselves that day with the cowardly attack on our citizens. Many of us are far less than six degrees of separation from someone that died that day. Too many of us.

My heart and prayers go out to all the families who lost a loved one in New York in the World Trade Center Towers, to the families of all the firefighters and police that ran toward the burning building rather than away from it only to loose their lives in the collapse. To the families that lost a loved one in the Pentagon, to the families that lost a loved one in the countryside of Pennsylvania, and to the families that had loved ones on all of those hijacked planes. I offer my humble thoughts and prayers.

Video Link



What we can all be proud of is the amazing ability of this nation to heal from its wounds but never forget. That is something we need to remind ourselves over and over again my friend. Politics aside, we need one another as Americans, as neighbors, and as an extended family to survive an ever changing world.

Papamoka

One last thought, if you were thinking this was a political post it isn’t. May Osama Bin Laden rot in Hell for eternity! I think we can all agree on that.

What is Pelosi Hiding

When it comes to this nation using torture, authorizing its use, and engaging or contemplating in the practice of torture, political parties on both sides of the aisle are showing severe signs of guilt and our representatives in our government, based on the land of the free are not innocent by any means. Even leaders in high positions in our Congress such as the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is waffling on what she knew and how she knew it. Speaker Pelosi is dodging the Sunday news shows that more or less ask the most pertinent questions based on the latest issues. Running from them is a sign of guilt in my honest opinion and Speaker Pelosi has refused all interviews for Sunday.

Pelosi turns down Sunday show invitations
By Emily Goodin
Posted: 05/16/09 03:03 PM [ET]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) turned down invitations to be on several Sunday morning talk shows and is instead spending the weekend with her family.

The Speaker was invited to appear on NBC's "Meet the Press,” ABC's "This Week,” “Fox News Sunday” and CNN’s “State of the Union,” according to sources at the networks.

One source said Pelosi (D-Calif.) will be attending her granddaughter's first communion in Phoenix on Sunday. - The Hill

Video Link


A person in the position of Speaker of the House has to be very careful what they say and how they say it. Speaker Pelosi claims that she was never told the truth by the CIA on the issue of torture and when it was first raised under the Bush Presidency and yet the new Director of the CIA under President Obama claims she was told the truth. So who is telling the truth? I’m betting my poker chips on neither and just folding my hand. That doesn’t make me a fool, it just lets me play the next set of cards and study who is better at bluffing the media into thinking that Pelosi is innocent, the CIA is innocent, or that former Vice President Cheney was a political guru in manipulating the media once more. When everything is said and done, Cheney went on the Sunday morning news shows, he pointed out his reasons to defend torture. (I still think he is the Anti-Christ) So why is Speaker Pelosi avoiding the Sunday news circuit when it could clear her of any doubt?

If Speaker Pelosi has nothing to hide then I’m sure that the networks would have been willing to accommodate her for a delayed broadcast if she had personal family obligations. All of the networks would have flown their crews to her. This is the news story for the week! And yes a grandchild’s first communion is a valid reason for not attending the Sunday news requests for a guest spot. And yet something still smells funny and I can’t put my fingers on it.

If you look at the torture issue with an open political mind then many people are guilty of compliance and allowing it to happen. No political party is innocent and it was a severe lack in judgment by all affiliated with our nation endorsing and using torture against an enemy that has no qualms against killing thousands for the sake of their twisted belief in God. Is President Obama wrong to think that this issue, all of the people involved and prosecuted under his predecessors orders could be detrimental to moving on and making sure that it never happens again?

If we are to be true to ourselves as Liberal American’s then we need to look at those amongst us that have not served the standards we expect our leaders to stand up to. If the Speaker of the House has a clear conscience then she should have gone out of her way to clear her name on Saturday when she was available and then had the full right to have chucked the bird at the Sunday news shows.

What are you hiding Speaker Pelosi? This Liberal Democrat wants to know! And how does this help Darth Cheney and President Bush look innocent when it comes to torture? Is Speaker Pelosi playing right into the Cheney mastermind of the media? We shall see. Or as my cousin Jules says, only God will ever know.

Papamoka

Thanks to Memeorandum for the hat tip!

Bush and Responsibility to Graduates???

When it comes to facing the responsibility for your actions in this world George W. Bush is not someone to speak freely on the subject. Especially, when discussing that personal trait to graduates of a proud higher education facility. In his last commencement address he fluffed his lame duck Presidency to dictate responsibility to the graduating class but not since the days of the Teflon Presidency of Reagan has there ever been an occupant of the White House that has never accepted blame for any situation that has gone wrong during their administration.

His war on Terror, blame Colin Powell for selling it too well and accept his resignation as Secretary of State. Outing a CIA agent, blame Scooter Libby and let him face the prosecutors. Problems at the Justice Department, accept a resignation. The list of “No touch the President or Vice President” list goes on and on. Getting to my point is that President Bush is a shame to the office of President and his last days should be highly reveling on how far he will push the shame bar. Common practice in outgoing Presidential politics is to flood the courts with Presidential pardons. Bush and company should raise that bar to a new level of unbelief!

Over at the Washington Post they have this on President Bush speaking about facing responsibility for your actions… LOL!!!

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 1, 2008; Page A03

In a lighthearted speech peppered with personal details, Bush also urged graduates to embrace "a culture of responsibility" and referred to his drinking problems as a younger man. The topic has become something of a touchstone for Bush during his last year in office.

"There was a time in my life when alcohol competed for my affections, but I found salvation in my family and in my faith," Bush told the crowd at Furman's outdoor stadium, including more than 600 graduating seniors.

"There is no shame in recognizing your failings or getting help if you need it," he added. "The tragedy comes when we fail to take responsibility for our weaknesses and surrender to them."

Although he received a warm welcome, Bush's visit was preceded by controversy as more than 200 faculty and students signed a letter objecting to his policies on the Iraq war, detentions and other issues. A conservative group responded with its own, larger list of signatories, and said the protesters were being disrespectful of the presidency and of graduating seniors. - Washington Post

Twenty or thirty years from now the graduates of Furman University in South Carolina will finally see if George Bush was a total hypocrite or a Godsend to America in this point in time of our nations history. My personal thoughts are that they will be shocked to see all of the personal liberties and rights that this President stripped from his people for the sake of progressing a war that had no basis to begin with. Destroying the foundation that was American law by personal interpretations for each bill he signed into law to isolate the office of President from each new law enacted. Bush’s legal office called them signing statements, most people call them law busters and against the Constitution. Thus making each law he passed not able to pass the Supreme Court litmus test.

Scott McClellan and his book will only be the finger in the damn revelation of all the damage this President has done to the Constitution. The flood gates on the rest of the devastation will come slowly as the dam begins to weaken with the exodus of Presidential appointments by Bush. One of the untold secrets of being in public service is that there are no secrets if a book deal will garner huge personal gains for confirmation of dirty deeds done dirt cheap by the biggest of bosses.

McClellan’s book is only the tip of the iceberg and the Bush ship is about to go down in history as the Titanic of the White House that went full steam ahead to the bottom of the pile of Presidential historical facts. Warren Harding, move up one space to make room for W!

Papamoka

Syndicated to:

Bring It ON!

To the Center

Terrorist Skeleton

Now for something completely off topic but bust your gut funny...

This from Comedy Central and Jeff Dunham...



Hope you enjoyed it.

Papamoka

9/11 FATIGUE, OR 9/11 FRUSTRATION?

Picture courtesy of Terrorism Victims.org

By Michael Linn Jones

I refer you to FREEDOM EDEN and its post, 9/11 TRIBUTE FATIGUE. I believe the article quoted by Freedom Eden is from a Sept. 2, piece written by N.R. Kleinfield of the New York Times.

Again it comes, for the sixth time now — 2,191 days after that awful morning — falling for the first time on a Tuesday, the same day of the week.

Again there will be the public tributes, the tightly scripted memorial events, the reflex news coverage, the souvenir peddlers.

Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level — still?

Each year, murmuring about Sept. 11 fatigue arises, a weariness of reliving a day that everyone wishes had never happened. It began before the first anniversary of the terrorist attack. By now, though, many people feel that the collective commemorations, publicly staged, are excessive and vacant, even annoying.

“I may sound callous, but doesn’t grieving have a shelf life?” said Charlene Correia, 57, a nursing supervisor from Acushnet, Mass. “We’re very sorry and mournful that people died, but there are living people. Let’s wind it down.”

Some people prefer to see things condensed to perhaps a moment of silence that morning and an end to the rituals like the long recitation of the names of the dead at ground zero.

I don't agree with the above sentiments. There is history, and then there is our own personal history. The world doesn't share the grief of someone losing a loved one to disease or accident. There are, though, certain intersections where an historical event becomes part of our own personal history.

There are many to choose from aside from 9/11, and I recall quite vividly the death of John F. Kennedy. I was 10 years old. School was dismissed and I'll never forget one of my fellow students hopping and skipping down the sidewalk saying, "He got shot in the head; he got shot in the head" over and over while pointing a finger gun at his own skull. Even at that age I was astounded that anyone could feel such joy at the death of another.

I cannot watch anything about November 22, 1963 without a strong sense of despair and frustration. If only this had happened; if only someone had been looking at the buildings instead of the motorcade...and on and on. This feeling I will carry to my grave. It is also frustrating to accept that one man; one loser like Lee Harvey Oswald changed our nation so much.

Frustrating also is to accept that 19 fanatics managed to alter the course of our nation, along with murdering over 3,000 innocent human beings. The use of airliners to inflict such damage will probably never happen again. Osama Bin Laden and his band of losers will constantly seek a new approach, one that will be overlooked by U.S. authorities. Like any terrorist organization, their credo says that we have to be lucky all the time, while they only have to get lucky once.

In our fractured and selfish society, 9/11 was a rare common experience. For those who lost loved ones on that day, I say ring the bell and read the names. The least I can do is respect their grief. Of course, those who died in Afghanistan and Iraq also have grieving families, and they too should be honored and remembered. I only hope that they will not have to wait and fight for recognition of their struggle as did those who fought in Vietnam or those who to this day grieve for the loss of their boys four decades ago.

No, scars heal but slowly for the human heart. One can't seriously dismiss the healing process. It's slow....very slow. Be patient with the suffering as you, too, may someday know what it feels like. I hope you never do. But that 'ole Golden Rule may not be a bad one to apply to any remembrance of 9/11.

Compare 9/11 with Pearl Harbor for a moment. The lives lost are roughly equal. But, unlike Pearl Harbor, 9/11 provided no nation to direct anger towards. True, the Taliban in Afghanistan had it coming, so to speak. Iraq we invaded, yet as brutal as Saddam Hussein was, his dictatorship was as close to being secular as any in the Middle East.

The true supporters of the attack on 9/11 are still out there. They are scattered among differing nation states. They claim to share the same faith, resulting in the idiocy of Bin Laden recommending America become Muslim, or the rank insensitivity of a Saudi prince telling Rudy Giuliani that the attack was due to American support of Israel.

So, convert to Islam; throw the Jews onto the fire, and the world will return to peace. Failing those disgusting goals, terrorism is a convenient tool for nations to take advantage of; it changes the life of the target population. And for those inside certain nations rooting them on (silently, of course) there is the option of claiming outrage over acts that they privately endorse and support.

If I have to strip down to my BVD's to see the National Archives, or the National Air & Space Museum, or the Smithsonian...then why should not those who, to this day, applaud my having to live like this be allowed the luxury of innocence?

Rather than punish an entire nation, or an entire religion, why not have a policy evolve that would make these financiers and faceless bureaucrats live in fear for their own lives?

I think on 9/11 the names of the murdered should be read while watching the film of the thousands of Palestinians cheering the deaths of those innocents on that day.

Those who supported 9/11 then, and rejoice at this anniversary, should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it, too.
*************************
Cross posted at MICHAEL LINN JONES.COM

Former FISA Judge Slams Bush

Picture courtesy of Smithsonian NMAH

Finally, there is someone other than the press and the blogosphere questioning President Bush use of warrantless wire taps. Who better than a former judge of the court that used to approve wire taps to speak out on this issue?

Even though the warrantless wire taps were labeled by the courts as technically illegal without the courts approval the President to this day uses them at his own discretion because the laws of the courts do not apply to him.

Over at the Washington Post they have this to say about it…

Ex-Surveillance Judge Criticizes Warrantless Taps

By Michael J. Sniffen
Associated Press
Sunday, June 24, 2007; Page A07

A federal judge who used to authorize wiretaps in terrorism and espionage cases criticized yesterday President Bush's decision to order warrantless surveillance after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

"We have to understand you can fight the war [on terrorism] and lose everything if you have no civil liberties left when you get through fighting the war," said Royce C. Lamberth, a U.S. District Court judge in Washington and a former presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, speaking at the American Library Association's annual convention.
Lamberth, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan, expressed his opposition to letting the executive branch decide on its own which people to spy on in national security cases.

The judge said it is proper for executive branch agencies to conduct such surveillance. "But what we have found in the history of our country is that you can't trust the executive," he said.
"The executive has to fight and win the war at all costs. But judges understand the war has to be fought, but it can't be at all costs," Lamberth said at the Washington Convention Center. "We still have to preserve our civil liberties. Judges are the kinds of people you want to entrust that kind of judgment to more than the executive." - Washington Post

Can we get an Amen from the choir?

President Bush using warrantless wire taps for expedience purposes was blown out of the water by Judge Lamberth when on 9/11 the darkest day of this century he approved FIVE warrants during the commute from his home to the court. Is that not quick enough for President Bush?

Papamoka

Is Bush Taking on Iran Too?

Picture courtesy of U.S. Department of Defense


In my own mind I can picture the President setting up his game board of the Middle East with his tin soldiers with the full intent of stamping the entire region as “Property of BIG U.S. OIL”. You can literally see the President staging the props for his next conquest and that target is Iran. Piece by piece he is building the set. Iran is building “Nuc’lar” weapons, Iran is funding the terrorists, Iran is going to wipe Israel off the map and as the President builds the set and arranges the lighting the stage and reasoning for his last “Preemptive War” is set.

It should be interesting to see him try and pull this one off now that the entire press of the United States and the world knows that his sources for information are not credible or reliable. His own personal reputation and his word is no longer acceptable as “Good enough for me too” amongst even our staunchest allies anymore.

Over at the Washington Post they have just a sound bite on yet another part to the Bush reasoning to attack Iran. I found it interesting that this information was released in Paris of all places…

U.S. Envoy Says Iran Is Arming Taliban
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 12, 2007; 1:10 PM

PARIS -- A senior U.S. diplomat accused Iran on Tuesday of transferring weapons to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan, where NATO forces are deployed to bring stability to the country.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, speaking to reporters in Paris, said Iran was funding insurrections across the Middle East and "Iran is now even transferring arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan. - Washington Post

All of this preparation for the President to pull the trigger on Iran will give him the reasons he needs to tell the people why our sons and daughters will be fighting and loosing their lives on yet another front. I’m beginning to think this President hates all nations that start with a vowel!

Tell me that I am wrong but wasn’t this the same information we started to hear about Iraq before he gave the go ahead to invade. Was Iraq not lead by a leader that despised the United States so much that supposedly he too was building weapons of mass destruction. The list of accusations went on and on and most of them turned out to be false. Other than Saddam Hussein being a bastard to his own people there was no reason for our troops to invade Iraq.

With all of the suggested possibilities for reasons to attack any sovereign nation given by the Bush administration, I’m keeping a real close eye on them Canadians. They have to be plotting against us during them long cold winters. They might not have yellow cake but I’m pretty sure there just might be some biscuits hidden in a bread drawer somewhere up there.

Mexico is okay because nobody really lives there anymore but that is another discussion for another day.

Papamoka

Cross Posted at Bring It ON!

THE GLOBAL WAR ON TRUTH

Contributed by Michael Linn Jones

Having become somewhat accustomed to a constant feeling of nausea, I was thrown off by the realiization that it was passing. So, in order to rectify this, I listened to Rush Limbaugh for a while today. It doesn't take much, but something he said stuck with me. It starts at one point but can race off in several directions.

The Great Bloviator made the statement that liberals were aiding and abetting terrorists by ciriticizing President Bush. It is wartime, and to question or criticize is tantamount to treachery. According to that logic, should I pose the question: "Is George W. Bush capable of pouring piss out of a boot with the instructions printed on the heel?"....I am encouraging terrorists to attack us. I am apparently giving carte blanche to Bin Laden and his lunatic band of murderers.

As the saying goes, I may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb. So I will proceed with this 'aiding and abetting.' One of the great dangers of warfare is how it changes the nations involved in it. Never in history has a nation been the same at the end of a conflict as it was at the beginning. So, how is George's War changing us? To continue to refer to it as the Iraq War is a misnomer. It is George's War, pure and simple. He wanted it; he got it, despite any information or advice to the contrary. He steamrolled over any opposition inside or outside the goverment to get what he wanted.

In so doing, he declared this "global war on terror." If we don't fight them in Iraq we'll have to fight them here, blah, blah, blah. The six terrorists arrested for plotting an attack on Ft. Dix is a good case in point. It doesn't really matter when they entered this country, but three of them entered the U.S. VIA THE MEXICAN BORDER. That is so impolite to say, as it might imply that a porous border could be used by terrorists. There is no doubt about it and to pretend otherwise is spitting in the face of the oaths these oafs took to protect the people of the United States.

But I digress. I meant to talk about my own culpability in this. This is hard for me to do as I voted against Bush twice, and for very good reasons as it turned out. Unlike our current president, no one will attribute to me the statement that "the constitution is nothing but a goddamned piece of paper." Nor have I stood in a room full of the richest people in America and declared that the haves and have-mores are my "base." Nor have I rushed through legislation that flies in the face of the very reason our republic was founded and have the gall to refer to it as a "Patriot" act.

Gagging, I turned off the radio. Rush is great if you're bulemic. After the spin and hype and repetition of the Bush non-doctrine, I thought of a pie. A very small slice is quite rich and tasty. But 95% of it tastes like....well....

I thought of calling Rush and reminding him of the old adage: "Don't go stepping in the stuff you're trying to sell us."

A SUGAR-COATED LEGACY

Contributed by Michael Linn Jones

George S. Patton was a brilliant tactician. He served his nation well despite his tendency at times to put his foot in his mouth. His nickname was "'ole blood and guts." Some of the soldiers who served under him groused that yes, it was his guts, but their blood. In other words, Patton's roaring rhetoric was paid for by someone else's physical sacrifice. It must be said, though, that General Patton was no coward; he was a brave man, a throwback to 19th century thinking that even generals should be prepared to stand the front lines if need be.

I mention this because it has come to the forefront of my mind that enough is enough. The much-vaunted "Operation Iraqi Freedom" has become nothing more than a huge millstone around the neck of the United States of America. It has become a disease eating at the vitals, and the vitality of our nation.

Say what you want about anyone in the Bush administration involved in starting the debacle on its downhill lurch towards disaster. Take your list of names....Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Wolfowitz, Pearl, Rice, and so on. The fact is, no buck stops with them. It stops, one way or the other, in the Oval Office. And the man currently employed there by the American people is the ONLY one who matters. It is HIS judgment that we live with.

The point has been reached where the grasping of straws is commonplace; the tried and true method of blowing smoke up the ass of the populace. But....but, as Lincoln said, not with all the people all of the time. When I hear these complaints that the media is not telling the "full story" on Iraq, that the wonderful works being done with schools and hospitals is going unheeded in the press.....I no longer cringe. I get angry.

For, it is put across like some dubious business deal. Look at all this great stuff that's been done in Iraq. They have water, electricity, facilities, their zoo is making a comeback. And ALL it is going to cost you to 3,500 (so far) totally forgettable people and a mere trillion dollars or so. So give us your son or daughter, and even if they return home in a coffin, well, you get a free flag. And, the eternal thanks of a nation.....along with a passing glance by the man at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Maybe a tear or two if the cameras are rolling.

I woke up thinking about the scene from the film "Full Metal Jacket." Sgt. Hartman discovers a contraband jelly doughnut in the footlocker of Private Leonard Lawrence, branded by Hartman as "Gomer Pyle." Hartman has the entire platoon do push-ups while Private "Pyle" stands on his footlocker and eats the jelly doughnut. He tells "Pyle" to enjoy it, because the other marines are paying for it.

And so goes our nation. We have a rich boy who will never really grow up sitting in the White House. His flawed decision making is evident in business and politics. After 9/11 he really broke bad and proved to his daddy that he, not his father, has the bigger pee-pee. What is life, after all, if one is asked to face the consequences of their own decisions? Such burdens are for the little people.

So, enjoy your sugar-coated jelly doughnut, Mr. President. In 2009 you can do the 1,000-mile mosey back to Crawford and rest your laurels. Enjoy it all, because everyone else is going to be paying for your sweet tooth for a very, very long time.

Recommend this post to a friend...
Link to this post and we will reciprocate...

Technorati Tags:george patton, george w. bush, washington politics, politics, bushism, decider, republicans, democrats, guiliani, romney, mccain, thompson, dodd, 9/11, bush legacy, bush library, special interest, karl rove, cheney
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator