Ahmadinehjad in LaLa Land

Letter to the Lake Charles American Press:

Dear editor:

It was an interesting picture on page 10 of the September 26th edition of the paper, which showed a Sayyad-1 surface to air missile displayed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to commemorate the 27trh anniversary of the start of the Iran-Iraq war, which lasted from 1980 to 1988 and had over a million casualties on both sides.

What made this especially interesting were the remarks made by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinehjad at the National Press Club in Washington just two days before. His statement that “For hundreds of years, we’ve lived in friendship and brotherhood with the people of Iraq” was in complete denial of that “Sacred Defense Week” celebration commemorating the eight year war that cost so many lives. His words, which he has to know are lies (or he is a complete dumbbell,) ignore all those deaths and those fatalities that occurred during the 500 years of fighting with Iraq during the Ottoman Empire.

Some of his other statements at the Press Club were just as amazing and completely out in “left field.” Does he really think that we are so uninformed that we believe his untruths? Does he really think that his own people believe him?

He also said that “Our people are the freest people in the world.” What about the dissidents that are executed and the academics who are jailed. Women are treated like second class citizens and newspapers are shut down and their journalists imprisoned. Are they all part of the “freest people?”

Ahmadinejhad’s statement that “In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country” would be a joke if it wasn’t so sad. You don’t have gay and lesbian people when you send them to prison and kill them if they are found out.

And when questioned about Iranian weapons showing up in Iraq, he answered “No this doesn’t exist. Well, again, this too is one of those distortions by the press.”

The Iranian President has learned his lessons well from the likes of Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler and the use of “The Big Lie.” He thinks if you say it often enough people will believe it. But that doesn’t work in the world of today with instant 24 hour news and the internet. I think the only people he has truly convinced (and pulled the wool over the eyes of) is himself and his henchmen.

Bush and Nixon, Iraq and Vietnam

Dear editor:

For quite some time President Bush took a stand that there was no comparison between the Vietnam War and his Iraq War. Lately, though, he has taken the opposite tack and is comparing the two and speaking about the dangers of abandoning our commitment to “success” (what ever that means on a constantly sliding scale.) We hear how anyone who is in favor of pulling our troops out is a “cut and run” liberal and giving aid and comfort to the enemy. So much of this is so familiar that it forces one to look back to recent history and the stand that Mr. Nixon took on the same subject. It is amazing what the White House tapes have revealed about the words of the only president who resigned his position in disgrace.

Those tapes show that Nixon in his reelection bid for the White House demanded that everyone at the White House slam Democratic critics as “the party of surrender,” which wanted “a Communist South Vietnam. We should drop the subtleties and fight. It is vital to sustain a massive counterattack on the partisan critics of our proposal.” They should be described as “consciously giving aid and comfort to the enemy…They want the United States to surrender.” He wanted everyone to say that “the Democrats are unpatriotic;” they should be described as putting political gain ahead of national security.

Obviously the Bush, Cheney and many of the Republican candidates for the presidency have been mining Nixon’s old speeches for slandering anyone who disagrees with them. Nothing in the rhetoric has changed. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

Basic Math for 'W'

Evidently Mr. Bush thinks we are too stupid to understand grammar school math. Maybe someone should teach it to him, as it applies to his troop “surge” and “maybe withdrawl.”


Troop level as of January 2007 ...........130,000
Troop surge April-July 2007 ..............+30,000
“Maybe cutback” by April 2008 .........<30,000>
Troop level as of April 2008 .................130,000
Net effect .....................................................-0-

Isn’t that where we started?

Time and History Have Changed Nothing in Iraq

A very interesting quotation:

"I have to say that it is my belief that there is no Iraqi people inside Iraq. There are only diverse groups with no national sentiments. They are filled with superstitious and false religious traditions with no common grounds between them. They easily accept rumours and are prone to chaos, prepared always to revolt against any government. It is our responsibility to form out of this mass one people that we would guide, train and educate. Any person who is aware of the difficult circumstances of this country would appreciate the efforts that have to be exerted to achieve thee objectives."

And who said these words and when? Faisal I, King of Iraq in 1932. Nothing has changed in the past 75 years, and the area known as Iraq is not a country with a central government, but rather a collection of military and religious fiefdoms with no allegiance to the "capital" of Baghdad. It is a shame that George W. Bush and his crew have never recognized this in their sham of an effort to establish a democracy where it is neither needed or wanted. Keeping our troops there and spending almost a trillion dollars will change nothing in the long run.

Misleading Reports of Troop Deaths

Dear editor:

Well, the Bush administration and its minions in the Departments of Defense and State are once again getting out “the word” of how there is so much improvement in Iraq. Republican congressmen and senators are taking their obligatory visits to the war zone and declaring how the morale of our troops is upbeat and the Iraqi government, while not accomplishing a lot, is moving forward.

All of this is expected politics and really doesn’t affect much. But, the troubling and misleading statements about our troop deaths are where the real damage is done. Everyone, including the media, is talking about how the number of American deaths in Iraq is down from the high water mark of early summer. They note that the past two months has seen a drop to less than 100 fatalities as being a real accomplishment. The truth, though, is not a drop, but really an increase.

Eighty-one (81) Americans died in Iraq during the month of August 2007. This was an increase of 25% over the previous year’s August. It was the second deadliest August in the five year war. This brought the current total for the year 2007 to 738 troop fatalities, which was an increase of 60% over 2006. In fact, the first eight months of this year was the worst for losses since the war began. That’s improvement?

Doonesbury's Debt Facts

Rarely do I read the Doonesbury cartoon strip by Garry Trudeau, which is more political comment than “comic.” But, today I did and picked up some very interesting facts that check out with actual history. Here is a word-for-word repeat of what is shown in this strip.

************************************************************************
Since 1776, the United States has accumulated a national debt of $9 trillion, over half of which was incurred when a Bush was on watch! What a family legacy. If you throw in Reagan, fully 70% of the national debt was created under just three Republican presidents. What’s more, they didn’t even try to restrain spending! Out of 19 submitted budgets, only 2 were balanced.

So, here’s my question. Where did the myth of GOP fiscal responsibility come from?
************************************************************************

That’s a very good question. After all, it is the Republicans who always accuse the Democrats of “tax and spend” and talk a good game of wanting a smaller government. Smaller government? Has anyone looked at the new US embassy in Baghdad?

Of course the GOP reduces taxes on the rich and spends the money of the middle class like crazy, leaving the debt for some other poor shnook to pay.