Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Wide Is the Gate ...

Today is Tuesday, 5 December 2006.

In the realm of the Junior W-arlord, travesties continue to abound.

After less than a day of hearings, the Senate Armed Services Committee unanimously approved the nomination of Bobby Gates as Secretary of War.

Bobby, as Deputy Director of CIA, didn’t know anything about Iran-Contra crimes. Meaning: either he lied or was incompetent.

And back during the criminal Iraq war of aggression against Iran (1980-1988), when the Reagan-Bush junta supported Iraq, does anyone really believe Bobby had nothing, as DD/CIA, to do with supplying targeting information to Iraq, so Iraq could use poison gas against Iranians and Kurds?

Gates is not merely unfit to be Secretary of War: he should be, as American law was formulated at the Nuremberg Trial, sentenced to life without parole, for participating in a war of aggression, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

Following is the rollcall of shame of those who proved themselves traitors to humanity:

John Warner (Virginia), Chairman
John McCain (Arizona)
James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma)
Pat Roberts (Kansas)
Jeff Sessions (Alabama)
Susan M. Collins (Maine)
John Ensign (Nevada)
James M. Talent (Missouri)
Saxby Chambliss (Georgia)
Lindsey O. Graham (South Carolina)
Elizabeth Dole (North Carolina)
John Cornyn (Texas)
John Thune (South Dakota)

Carl Levin (Michigan), Ranking Member
Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts)
Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia)
Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut)
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
Bill Nelson (Florida)
E. Benjamin Nelson (Nebraska)
Mark Dayton (Minnesota)
Evan Bayh (Indiana)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York)

Matthew 7:13 - "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it."


Anonymous P of the Farm Realms said...

OK then, HH, who should have been nominated for Secretary of Defense? You seem to have a boat load of criticism for lots of folks. Who then, would be the proper person(s) to take on this huge responsibility?

Not withstanding your criticism of his previous work, I have to admire the fact that he left a job he likes very much, giving up a more substantial salary, and agreed to get back in the national spotlight/grid to help sort out the mess. And I, too, admire his plain talk. From what he says, he will be consulting with top brass in the field who, I am sure, have additional ideas on how to handle the Iraq situation in addition to the ones that the Iraq Study Group is going to release today. Mr. Gates will have the unenviable task of sorting through the ideas to determine way(s) to proceed.

You poo-poo many people regarding this whole thing. Who do you think would be more appropriate to take charge of this situation? Bear in mind you do have to live with Mr. Bush for two more years. That is a fact you cannot change. I would like to hear some suggestions and not just whining.

8:27 AM  
Anonymous RtR said...

It sticks in my craw as well. If Gates and the rest of Bushco Sr. put together a plan that works to begin the process of scabbing over the multiple stab wounds we have inflicted on the Middle East as we all hope will happen, then the criminals that made their bones orchestrating the Reagan treason (arms for hostages if anyone cares to look behind the curtain), state sponsored domestic terrorism (technical support to the El Salvadoran death squads as just one of many examples), obstruction of justice (anyone remember the Ollie North inquiries) will get a chance to rehabilitate their reputations and we will garland them with laurels.

Oh, and then there is the small matter that the architects of the most recent Iraq murder spree are the same folks that facilitated Saddam's technological advances in the use of chemical weapons to engage in "politics by other means." The"saviors" in this case are merely the second line (to use a hockey reference) that haven't yet publicly dirtied their hands in the current mess while they were sitting on the bench.

I think that HH remarks remind us that being smarter about the "how" of bringing the immense power of the U.S. to overbear in the advancement of imperialistic multinational corporate interests, should neither excuse nor legitimize criminal behavior.

Kind of like putting perfume on a pig.

BTW, I read HH posts from the perspective of someone who every now and then seeks an answer to the continuing existential questions of "Where are we going, and why am I in this handcart?" The posts may not address the "Why" question but at least I get a frame of reference concerning direction.

Although you didn't ask me, I would have suggested bringing Brother Jimmy back on board. If I recollect correctly, he was the last U.S. official to broker anything like a lasting peace in any part of the region. The Nobel Prize selection committee has usually done a pretty good job of recognizing talent and achievement.

(Apologies to Jim Hightower for the thefts/borrowing.)

8:07 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home