These are important times in which we live, although not for any of the reasons he gives. While there is a terrorist threat out there, it's one that he has greatly exacerbated through his cock waggling and mideast
For some reason, at quitting time at work yesterday, we got into a discussion about bin Laden, which led at least one guy to start in about how crazy Muslims were. As in ALL Muslims. I brought up the fact that Osama does not represent all Muslims any more than a sensible person would believe that Dobson or Falwell or Donohue speak for all Christians. Fuck... the Pope, I'm sure, doesn't even speak for all Roman Catholics. I also brought up that there are fringe loony fundamentalist "Christians" who are every bit as reactionary and stone age-ish as Osama, and I didn't mean Amish or Mennonite. I'm talking about the fundies who think it's perfectly OK to keep their daughters out of school (so they can take their place in the home) and throw clothing on statues (in the name of decency.) OK, so they don't machine gun little girls on their way to school like the Taliban do, saving that for their policing of Planned Parenthood clinics, but sooner or later they'll get there I'm sure. My point, which no one seemed to want to acknowledge, is that we can match those (insert racial /religious slur here), wacko for wacko, with their legions of followers, and at the head of the column, his imperial lowness, Dubya I.
At least one guy didn't want to accept or concede my point. He wondered if Osama doesn't speak for all Muslims, where are the voices of opposition? Hmmm... kinda true, we don't hear a whole lot of grass roots opposition voices, although I know they're out there; Riverbend, for one, comes to mind. And while there are voices of reasonable opposition in the Christian camp, Blue Gal for one, I wonder just how much of them get out to the average non-Osama Muslim. For that matter, how much gets to any one, anywhere. We sure as hell know that it doesn't get out through the mainstream media; most of them act more like cheerleaders for the crazies.
Somehow or other, we have to let the rest of the world know that Dubya may be "President of the United States," but he is not "Our President." I know he does not represent ME. His policies are not mine; his opinions are not mine. Most of all, his war is not mine. It never was, and it never will be. I can't remember the specifics, but I remember him saying some line about a "policy we could all get behind." Bull fucking shit. Unless it's a policy of getting out, I'm sure as hell not behind it.
He made it clear that he plans to pass the buck to the next president. He knows he can't win -- he's known it all along -- but he can't admit to losing. He's so shallow, vacuous and lacking in humanity, that he sees no price not worth paying to keep his fragile ego intact. For years he claimed there was no comparison between his war and Vietnam. Until such comparison suited his purpose that is. Was it THE lesson or just one of the lessons we/he learned from Vietnam, that, "we didn't stay long enough?" Of course when Dubya speaks of Vietnam, or any war for that matter, there is no "we." It's "they." Even when it comes to losing this war, a war that was lost from the start, from the first stirrings in his weanie at the thoughts of shock and awe and blood spewing 'splosions, it will be they who lose it.
There's no undoing what Dubya's done: The death and destruction and chaos he's unleashed to fulfill his fantasies and resolve his personal issues. Is there any hope that we can somehow convince the Iraqis and the rest of the world that this was Dubya's doing and not ours? That all Americans are not as crazy as he is? We certainly can't convince anyone by remaining silent. If we remain silent, Dubya and the terrorists have won.
All that horse-shit and today I find THREE words that basically say it all with regard to listening, and reacting to the spewings of Dubya: "Silence gives consent." Read the article here to get the original context.