<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d32483413\x26blogName\x3djunk+and+crap,+amen\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLACK\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://junkandcrapamen.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://junkandcrapamen.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-8100207821001685458', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Bah...Who Needs Credibility?

It looks like the proverbial flying crap is about to hit the thermantidote. Someone in American mainstream media has finally said what the rest of the world has known for years, that the Bush administration has no-zero-nada credibility. From Keith Olbermann:
"If the Iraq debate seems especially exhausting, it may be due to the steady erosion of the foundation for any productive debate, facts."

But hey, who needs credibility when you can count on the rest of the media to stand slack jawed with their brains oozing out of their ears. The following is from an interview between Bush and David Ignatius, Washington Post Sept 15/06, concerning Iran:
The Khatami visit "said that the United States is willing to listen to voices," Bush explained. "And I hope that sends a message to the Iranian people that we're an open society, and that we respect the people of Iran." Clearly, the White House wants to reach out to segments of Iranian opinion beyond the hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Aside from the inane nature of this statement (and proveably false), a search of the White House web site on Middle East policy turns up only this on Iran (about 3/4 down the page):

The World Faces A Grave Threat From The Radical Regime In Iran

This Summer's Crisis In Lebanon Has Made It Clearer Than Ever That The World Faces A Grave Threat From The Radical Regime In Iran. The Iranian regime arms, funds, and advises Hezbollah, which has killed more Americans than any terrorist network except al Qaeda. It interferes extensively in Iraq, denies basic human rights to millions of its people, and is pursuing nuclear weapons in open defiance of its international obligations. We know the death and suffering that Iran’s sponsorship of terrorists has brought, and we can imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

Many Nations Are Working Together To Solve This Problem. The UN has passed a resolution demanding Iran suspend its nuclear enrichment activities.

Today Is The Deadline For Iran's Leaders To Reply To The Reasonable Proposal The International Community Has Made, Yet So Far They Have Responded With Further Defiance And Delay. We'll continue working closely with our allies to find a diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran’s defiance, and we must not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon.

It ends on a rather threatening note, and no mention of any programs or initiatives, other than the UN's, towards a peaceful resolution.

Ignatius' article quotes Bush as saying:
"I would say to the Iranian people: We respect your history. We respect your culture. We admire the entrepreneurial skills of your people. I would say to the Iranian people that I recognize the importance of your sovereignty -- that you're a proud nation, and you want to have a positive future for your citizens," Bush said, answering quickly and without notes.

(Ooooh, without notes!)
Here's some US/Iran history for both Bush and Ignatius to mull over. Here's some more (CIA overthrows democratic govt. in 1953)......and more (US backs Saddam Hussein in Iran/Iraq war). There's lots more, enough to to keep their collective (ha!) brains busy for a while.

Bush goes on to say:
"I know that the more we can show the Iranian people the true intention of the American government," Bush concluded, "the more likely it is that we will be able to reach a diplomatic solution to a difficult problem."

They know the true intention of the American government, it's being demonstrated quite clearly right next door.

Father: Well son, what are your intentions with my daughter?
Suitor: Well, first I'd like to beat her. When she's all softened up I'll probably rape her repeatedly, and when I'm done with that I'll drain all her blood.

The article ends on a happy note, with Ignatius being unable to frame any sort of perspective other than fawning obedience:
I came away with a sense that Bush is serious about finding a peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis, and that he is looking hard for ways to make connections between America and Iran.

He can make no sense, apparently, of history; that what George Bush says is rarely (never?) what he means.

Labels: , , ,

« Home | Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »

» Post a Comment