Bush and Cheney loudly proclaim that they are oilmen. How could they in one week alienate the Arabs and Venezuela, our third largest supplier of oil?
George W. Bush, The Israelis and the Venezuelans As I write this in mid-April, 2002, the crisis in the Mid-East has been going on for some time. Until April 4th of this year, Bush elected to ignore the fighting going on between the Israelis, the Palestinians and lately, Lebanese forces in Northern Israel. When Bush finally spoke up on April 4th, he demanded that the Israelis withdraw from their invasion and he demanded that the Arab states stop terrorism. Both sides told him to get lost. The Israeli Army continued its complete destruction of Palestine homes and infra-structure and the Palestinians kept up the suicide bombings.
Bush then sent Colin Powell to the Mid-East where he was greeted by an insult from the Moroccan King (Why are you here? Why aren’t you in Jerusalem?), and a complete refusal from Sharon to pull back his army. For his part, Arafat said that he was going to resist as long as Israeli forces occupied Palestinian territory. And Powell was in the country when a new suicide bomber took his toll on a civilian target. On the way back to the United States, the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stiffed him and failed to see him. But Bush, the President with a pygmy sized brain said when Powell returned to Washington, that the Powell mission was quite a success. He was not joined in that assessment by Powell.
All of this followed the seven or eight country visit to the Middle East in March by the estimable oil man, Dick Cheney. Cheney was humiliated when he asked for Arab support in the proposed invasion into Iraq. All the countries he visited told him, “Hell No.” It takes an enormous amount of ignorance or hubris to ask Arab countries for their support in helping to destroy another Arab country. Ignorance and hubris come in large quantities in the Bush crowd.
All the while, Bush has issued countless statements urging support of Sharon while condemning Arafat. Well, for sake of argument, let’s just say that Arafat deserves all the vitriol that Bush has unloaded on him. What this says to the world is that the United States and Israel are joined at the hip. American policy is Israeli policy and vice versa. Bush has mortgaged the United States foreign policy to the arms of Sharon, who is not called the “Butcher of Beirut” for nothing.
Arabs will never forget the cruelty visited upon them in their miserable camps this year. Houses knocked down with occupants still inside. Civilians shot for the crime of looking out windows.
Now I ask, does anyone think that anyone in the whole Middle East would have a kind word or thought about the United States? And when the Arabs wake up, does anyone think that they will cheerfully continue to supply us with oil?
While all this was going on, Bush’s Assistant Secretary of State, Otto Reich, is meddling in Venezuelan politics. Needless to say, he is an unreconstructed right-winger who was a recess appointment by Bush. He was turned down by the Senate. The Venezuelan president was overthrown this past weekend, April 14th by elements in the Venezuelan Army. In two days, the president, Chavez, returned to power and the Army ran for cover. During this whole mess, Otto Reich said he was in touch with the insurgents. When the insurgents put their new President Pedro Estanga Carmona in power, he immediately moved to stamp out the National Assembly and the Supreme Court. In U. S. terms, the National Assembly is equivalent to the United States Congress.
Reich told Estanga Carmona that dissolving the National Assembly and the Supreme Court would be “a stupid thing to do.” So Reich views himself as a patron of the insurgency. What Reich overlooks is that by destruction of a president elected in a democratic election, the Bush administration is in clear violation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter – which Colin Powell had much to do with as recently as last Fall. The Bush administration thought Chavez was not on their side so obviously, he has to go and let’s not worry about democratic principals.
Today, April 17, the New York Times reports that Otto Reich has now claimed that Cubans had tried to kill opponents of Chavez. When Reich was asked through a spokesman for proof of these assertions, it turns out there is none. When Reich was asked today April 17, for an interview by the Times, he refused. Draw your own conclusions.
Well, the long and the short of it is clear. The Arabs will be angered at us for many generations. The Venezuelans, who control a good part of the world’s oil, will always regard the United States as interlopers who are ready to overturn their democratically elected government.
So if the Arabs and the South Americans elect to sit on their oil, it becomes clear that Crawford, Texas or Brooklyn, New York must now take the place of Saudi Arabia in terms of furnishing us with oil.
And one further thought. We are not finished with terror in this country. If I thought the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were things of the past, I would sleep easier. But to the extent that Bush deliberately arouses Arab anger, it is entirely possible that more strikes – against the American homeland – may occur. That is why I am appalled at Bush’s mortgaging the future of this country to a completely destructive mad man such as Sharon.
Bush has so provoked and angered Arabs and other like-minded people, that retaliation against the American homeland or on an American traveler becomes an inevitability. Given Bush’s propensity for poking the Arabs in the eye, my belief is that September 11th was not an end of terrorist violence in this country. The Arabs are prideful men as we are. In my estimation, they are not done, particularly as long as they are needlessly provoked by the amateurish Bush.

Alice in Wonderland

This is Alice in Wonderland stuff and hard to accept. Yesterday,
April 18, 2002, Bush met the press and announced that Powell’s trip was a considerable success. Among other accomplishments, he said Powell had laid out a “vision” for peace in the region. Remember, his father had trouble with the “vision thing,” but of late, the junior Bush uses it a lot. As if that is not enough of a fairytale, Bush said Sharon was in compliance with his (Bush’s) pull-back schedule – a complete lie – and that – get this – Sharon is a “Man of Peace.” He also says that in spite of his words on April 4th, he understands now why Sharon wants to continue to punish the Palestinians.
I hope you stayed with me as we zoomed around the curves. What Bush said yesterday is a complete reversal of his earlier demand on April 4th, two weeks ago that Sharon pull his Army back, without delay.
If Bush had produced his miraculous stuff say a century ago, there would have been no need for Alice in Wonderland to have been written.

Bush’s Mouthpiece, The Canadians, The Mexicans and Nada

In the past week or so, Ari Fleisher the Bush mouthpiece, has tried to replace the term “Suicide bombers” with a new construction, “homicide bombers.” I have no faith that Fleisher is ever telling the truth. Recall him – and later Bush – blaming the whole Mid-East war on Clinton? Both had to eat their words.
So I went to see what led the Bush mouthpiece to substitute the word “homicide” for suicide. I have pondered over Fleisher’s semantic choice of words and it leads me to conclude this is a difference without a distinction.

Suicide – an act or instance of taking one’s own life voluntarily and intentionally especially by a person of years, of discretion and of sound mind.
Homicide – (a) a person who kills another, (b) killing of one human being by another.
Source: Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973

The new construction came originally from Sharon’s people. Some other people around Bush have tried the new term out. For better or for worse, it is gaining no currency at all. No other commentators have picked it up so the “homicide bombers” seems headed for early oblivion which is probably what it deserves.
While Bush’s mouthpiece was trying, without success, to peddle his “homicide bombers,” he had nothing to say about four Canadian soldiers killed by a 500 pound bomb dropped by an American pilot. Fleisher had nothing to say.
The day after this “friendly fire” tragedy, Bush made five speaking appearances and in none of those exchanges, did he ever express the sorrow of the United States. Canadian papers exploded. Finally, someone got to Bush and he belatedly called the Canadian Prime Minister to express American regrets.
Bush has yet to visit Canada, our closest friend and ally. He has called Mexico our closest friend. In what Bush calls his “War on Terror,” the Canadians put 900 troops under the command of the United States. The four that were killed were part of that contingent.
Our close friends in Mexico have not joined in Bush’s call for a wide coalition. They sent no troops. No aircraft. No naval support. The Spanish word is “Nada” – nothing.
Now you tell me, who is the most friendly country to the United States? It’s not Mexico. And in World War II, Mexican support for the U. S. came out to “Nada.” Our best friend? Bush thinks so.
E. E. CARR
APRIL 19, 2002
~~~
I wonder what Pop thought about all the remote control war happening in oil-rich countries right now. Drones and satellites against radicals and bombers. That’s certainly what this has come to, yet even despite possessing every advantage (but the homefield one) I don’t see us closing out this campaign anytime soon.