August 19, 2005
The BuzzFlash Mailbag
The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Read the BuzzFlash FAQ for info on submitting to the Mailbag.
THIS IS PART 2 OF THE AUGUST 19, 2005 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1
Finally I have an explanation for the "why" of the Iraq war. On Air America someone gave my Brain the jump start for what I can believe is the most accurate scenario of what is taking place.
Iraq Oil was just about to be allowed by the UN to flow freely into the mainstream pipelines of commerce. Saudi King & Princes with fellow member of the Oil Cartel, Bush senior, arranged with jr. to attack and destroy the Oil flow competition. Why not! Halliburton and the war machine industries would profit very nicely with the rebuilding of whatever the US destroyed. Oil prices would rise to $3. maybe even $5. Record profits for all.
When you march in, make sure you disband the military, the Police and political infrastructure, which they did. Above all, knock out all forms of press including the free world's.
Any of this sound plausible, sound familiar?
Democracy for Iraq? Our Democracy is being destroyed,so who still believes that this was all about installing Democracy in Iraq? Democracy would be a president who openly met and grieved publicly with Cindy Sheehan. Maybe Hillary could skip running for Senator and get right on to running for Pres.?
Subject: Learn From The Life of Cindy Sheehan
For sure she's representing we the people. Through her life our values are out there in full view for everyone to see. Family comes first, of course, but we've extended the family to include all life on earth which means that when a gay couple decides to get married - so be it. That the family counts most is also why Cindy has left Crawford to be at the bedside of her stricken mother. As to whether Cindy's responding to a higher calling - It's not just for Casey and herself that she's in the forefront of our struggle to bring the troops home and to end the Iraq war. Selflessness in the service of humanity is what Cindy's all about, and that's the reason the president still refuses to meet with her. He knows that in a face-off with Cindy, what chance would a mass-murderer such as himself have against our Saint Cindy? None whatsoever, that's how much!
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: The US NAFTA Deals with Mexico aAnd Canada
Finally! Canada is standing up for what has been happening since signing on to that ridiculous NAFTA deal. After years of all the debates and going to litigation and winning time and again, we finally caught onto the fact that the American admin is never going to abide by anything but their own desires (bigger profits, or as in corporate speak, the great Prophet, Money). The 'free' part of free-trade is only for American corporations, for the rest of us; we can starve.
You think that only you hard-labouring Americans got the rotten end of the stick? All of Mexico and Canada got it too. The ones who did make out like bandits in this trade agreement are the same bandits who are going to make out like crazy in the new CAFTA deal. It isn't those who are in the lower echelons of society either. I think that those who signed on to the CAFTA trade agreement should have consulted all of us who are suffering the after-effects of the NAFTA trade agreement before jumping on the CAFTA one.
Unfortunately for you Americans who are trying to keep up to mind-boggling job losses and maintain some standard of living such as basic food and shelter, you are getting both ends of the shaft instead of only one.
Subject: Judy Miller, The NYT and the CIA?
Why is the NYT still standing tall behind Judy Miller? What could come out if she goes before the Grand Jury that would be more injurious to the Times than what is already happening?
Considering Judy's actions while she was embedded in Iraq with the people looking for WMD, is it possible that Judy is actually an operative of the CIA? That would explain how she could be the source for the information on Valerie Wilson.
If she is an operative of the CIA that would explain a lot. It would explain how she would know that Valerie Plame worked for the agency. That would explain some of the impetus for her unsubstantiated reporting that encouraged our going to war. That would explain the NYT willing to do anything to keep her from talking.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Cheney--Tells Why Casey Sheehan Died
Dick Cheney says spreading democracy in the mid-east will not come easily. He is finally giving a reason why Casey Sheehan died. It wasn't WMD's. It wasn't terrorism. Our men and women were sent to war to spread democracy to the mid-east. He didn't say Iraq. He said mid-east. Does this tell us something?
Subject: National Security
Please discuss how is it possible for refugees from Cuba to land at Sanibel Island, Florida some 300 miles from their departure point without being detected? Refugees coming into our Country is not the problem here or the subject, what is repulsive is that this (so-called) administration has "bush-whacked" everyone into thinking that we are safer because of their Homeland Security. What scares us the most is that the news media is obviously controlled by the white house. This is just another example of how something so important can be covered up - where did this story go? How did it happen? They did not come in on a Stealth, they came in a boat.
"Homeland Security" is nothing more than another cash cow, just as the war.
Please persue this.
Cuban Refugees Come Ashore on Sanibel (Sun Herald)
Subject: Joe Biden
Joe Biden ... 'send more troops to Iraq" ...
that's the end of his bid for President....NEXT!
Subject: Letter to Armstrong
Just sent this along to Lance Armstrong via the "guest book" section of www.thepaceonline.com:
You have publicly stated your opposition to the war in Iraq in the recent past (http://www.alternet.org/story/23743/). I find it hard to believe that if this remains true you would succumb to being used for a media stunt ride by the President. Want to show your true colors? Ride out to the Peace Camp and ask the President to meet you there.
Is there no end to what republicans can get by with now? This is so off the wall, it does not even make sense....but, hey....our republican governor here in Missouri......is gonna mow down very expensive homes in Sunset Hills....to make way for a higher tax paying shopping center. We are overrun by shopping centers now...and at least four of these things are being declared eminent domain now...people are screaming....likely the same ones who voted for the little creep! He is a jerk...just like his father.
Subject: Columbia/Ecuador Story
Maybe you have posted this and I've missed it -- a few other blogs have. But there was a story out of El diario, a newspaper in Ecuador (I believe from Portoviejo) about an American security contractor, EPI Security, hiring Colombian mercenaries to work in Iraq:
Daily Kos and one called World War 4 Report
have posted on it.
And here is a link to another Latin American publication, but in English:
Subject: Re: A Face in the Crowd
I have the movie----GREAT film! Definitely NOT the Sheriff Andy of Mayberry. 5-Stars! (or more if more are available)
Another right-on-target here's-what's-coming film is Network ("I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore"). Watch it and then watch the daily local/national newscasts---and try to tell the difference. No one can say it wasn't coming; it's just that no one thought it was possible.
Subject: Comparing Sheehan and Schiavo
In thinking back to the Terri Schiavo circus I've observed some interesting hypocrisy on the right, now that we have the Cindy Sheehan ordeal.
*In the Sheehan case they complain that the president can't adjust his schedule just for one woman, but during the Schiavo case Bush left Crawford (ironic, huh?) and flew to D.C. just to sign legislation that concerned one single woman, Terri Schiavo.
*In the Sheehan case they hold Sheehan guilty by association because her cause has been hijacked by extremist fringe groups on the left. But they didn't have a problem with the Schiavo case being hijacked by extremist fringe groups on the right (Randall Terry of Operation Rescue, for one).
*They take quotes from Sheehan out of context to show how outrageously extreme and unbalanced she is, but they had no problem with pundits on the right suggesting that Schiavo's husband beat her and may have even murdered her. Sheehan's a nut job if she calls Bush a murderer, but it was okay to call Schiavo's husband a murderer.
*They trivialize what Sheehan is trying to accomplish because the whole thing has become a media circus, but they had no problem with the Schiavo thing becoming a media circus.
One similarity I've observed from the right-wingers is that in both circumstances they possess(ed) the truly astounding ability to read the mind of the dead, or brain-dead people. In the Schiavo case they were somehow able to know that Terri really would want to be kept alive and that she was working out the whole cold-fusion problem inside her head. They dismissed her husband, who knew Terri as well as anyone on earth. In the Sheehan case they somehow are able to discern that Casey Sheehan would be embarrassed or ashamed at how his mother is honoring his memory, dismissing Mrs. Sheehan, who knew Casey as well as anyone on earth.
Subject: Is This Where You Want To Be?
IS IRAQ ACTUALLY THE “CRITICAL FRONT IN THE WAR ON TERROR”?
President Bush says so. Vice President Cheney Says so. Condoleezza Rice says so. Donald Rumsfeld says so. Actually, most of the Republican Party says it’s true. Therefore it must be true. The split down party lines is rather fascinating, yet confusing. How is it that millions believe that Iraq is the critical front in the war on terror, while millions more do not? How is it that an issue so fundamental to the country’s safety can create a divide so cavernous? The rift continues to swell and intensify.
Of course, mine is only opinion, and I wouldn’t dare to go against the big boys when it comes to matters of State. Therefore, I will simply offer a different perspective that collectively describes my consideration of the information put forth by our leaders. ILLOGICAL & RIDICULOUS! I Hope that wasn’t too strong or disagreeable. I wouldn’t want to offend anyone. I mean…we all know that Iraq was a harbinger for all terrorist agencies across the globe. Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Qaeda Mother’s Against Drunk Driving, Dog Walkers of America, and The Knights of Columbus…just to name a few. They were there throughout the 1990’s stirring up trouble amongst the general Iraqi population. All of the exploded buildings, the oil pipelines destroyed, the roadside bombs, the I.E.D’s that have become so popular. We’ve been hearing about these things right up until America’s arrival on the scene…haven’t we?
Oh…wait a second. That wasn’t Iraq, was it? I don’t seem to remember such occurrences happening prior to the US led invasion. I do remember that Saddam was an animal, and would torture and kill his own people. I also seem to have some vague memory of working telephones, electricity 24 hours a day, expansive cities (all in one piece), reliable water distribution, plenty of food, good health care, schools, and employment. If this is so, then what the hell were the terrorists doing while they hid out in Iraq, those lazy bastards? Of course, there is another theory, but that would be antithetical to those espoused by our great leaders. Maybe, just maybe, they weren’t there in the first place.
What if…and please remember, this is only speculation…what if there was no actual base of terror in Iraq other than ‘Saddam the Tyrant.’ What if the ‘Mothers Against Drunk Driving’ really weren’t the ones blowing up the wine production facilities causing massive unemployment? What if the Knights of Columbus never really planted a road-side bomb on the route to a company picnic? What if the Dog Walkers Union didn’t kidnap and behead those mangy hounds? What if the ‘Insurgency’ as it is called by our government, was only the result of our being there, and would not exist if not for our provocation (the occupation of their country)? As our leaders search high and low for rationales that will quiet the growing multitude of individuals against the war, the more we recognize how their scrambling denotes failure. When the Twin Towers fell and evidence pointed to Osama and Afghanistan, no one quibbled. No one is complaining now about Afghanistan. Isn’t that amazing? But Iraq…that breeding ground for diseased human beings…that festering boil that produced so many evils around the world…the common person just isn’t getting it.
I will offer two more thoughts. These are part of some previous postings of mine:
The reasons for going into Iraq changed too many times. They evolved faster than an egg becomes a chick! And to top it off, the only one that holds water is that Saddam was a brutal dictator...but this had nothing to do with actual urgency or the war on terror. If you read my post on spin, part of spin is using only the information that fits your scenario. Bush and cronies did this when they cherry-picked which information to use, then proceeded to trash the rest. The problem is that the rest was actually the reliable information...which points to the lies the administration told to get us into Iraq in the first place. The real perpetrators of the crime (Osama, Zawahiri, etc.) remain free to create new horrors. Had Bush paid enough attention to ALL the intelligence, he might have been more prepared to stop 911 (if he wanted to???)
Terrorists exist all over the world. Many have COME to Iraq at our military invitation. If the philosophy is that "the US will go to Iraq and “hopefully” all the bad guys will come here and we can wipe them out," that’s pretty naive. The radical Muslim leader can easily sway the general population, particularly if they've been living in poverty and misery for so long. The average Arab nation has immense unemployment, and resulting low self-esteem and purpose. When those things are gone, it is easy to generate loyalty to a "much larger cause." However, the real leaders wouldn't show their face in Iraq, except on a whim, just to tease the US. We let a big one go in Osama. That was a real shame!! Yes, I think the terrorists in Iraq will leave. I think they'll go back to their own countries and hope for a change for the better. I think that most of who you fight aren't terrorists anyway...I think they are simply disenfranchised, unemployed and hopeless people who are gaining strength just by feeling they are doing something.
Alan H. Levinson