Washington File

While the debate on this Osama card raises interest of the posters like Lee -from overseas,There is growing interest on the formation of quartet in Middle East to discuss Palestine issue.

Lee from overseas has a valid point that dislike for government of America persisted before Bush came in,he missed that resentment among people abroad can't be guaged from within America as you can't see what American foreign policies have been doing over time.

One important matter which is being missed by media due to continued interest in American congress committee's activities is Palestine.
Readers may want to see the Timeline on this ongoing issue.
Gaza border crossing with Egypt has been closed by Israel since June 10th 2007, There are approximately 6000 people reportedly locked out and those in Gaza are not allowed to leave Gaza as well. A Russian Doctor is unable to leave Gaza since June 14th 2007.His mother has a pathetic appeal for opening Gaza Border on youtube.
Political or military might doesn't always be to Israel’s credit.
Send email to Amnesty International London -UK Office and Knesset -Israel, with appeal to open Gaza Border crossing with Egypt on humanitarian consideration.

I'm somewhat stunned and shocked at the tone of my fellow citizens and their hatefilled comments regarding the US government and for some the Canadian Government and it's policies on Afghanistan. I suppose I'm shocked because I've spent the last 26 years in the military and private security sector hanging out in Africa, the Middle East, Washington and Latin America witnessing first hand the good and the bad...folks it's time to put all the politics aside and remember the hate didn't begin with the election of any one President and it certainly hasn't ended yet. The hate I have witnessed in Africa between fellow Africans and in Iraq and Afghanistan and in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo is far worse then anything I have ever witnessed being done to somebody by US or Canadian personnel. For those that want to portray the US, Canada or western civilization in general as the bad guys you may continue to do so from the comfort of their homes while watching CBC nightly but sadly you need to spend some time outside of Canada to truly understand where the hate is. For those who simply believe we need to be more compassionate and sensitive to others I say sadly and I mean sadly you would be the first to be tortured and killed. Those who truly hate see compassion and negotiation as weakness to be exploted...unfortunately a current case in point is the South Koreans being held by the Taliban...they went to help and received nothing but pain from those who hate. Our current policies may insire some to hate but all those who attacked US and Western interests during the 90's still hated the US while President Clinton was in power...although he was a popular President at home and abroad it didn't stop the haters from attacking US interests on 5 occassions killing thousands...haters hate period no matter who's running the show here in the west.

The funny thing to be honest with you and some of you may still find it funny, is that even and when Gen. Petraeus comes with his report concerning Iraq and it is found to be true that troop increase is not going to work. Some and a significant portion of the Republican Party are still going to disagree thinking they know the situation better than Gen. Petraeus all because of politics, particularly the President. This has been proven in the past with General Shinseki who first called for troop increase but was dismissed by the administration and many in the GOP. It is going to be interesting how the Republican presidential hopefuls see the report when it is published in September. Will they change their tone? OR will still be the same ol ignorant Party. To be honest with the Republican Party is dead. The Iraq war is the best thing that has happened to the Democrats and one doesnt need to be a genius to see that 2008 belongs to the democrats because the American people are tired and angry and it seems that Al Qaeda is stronger than ever according to the new report published by the CIA.

Gigi, you do not need to accept Bush's silly dichotomy of "with us or against us", a piece of post-911 rhetoric that is a premise for nationalism, jingoism, bigotry. And you accept it by choosing sides.

I am also "against Bush" but at the same time I am against terrorist attacks. It's not so difficult. I am not against Islam but does that mean that I am "with Islam"? I am against the Taliban but I am not against Islam.

When you talk about the suffering of Muslims rather than the suffering of people, you reveal your bigotry.

Let's go back to the epoch of the collapse of Communism. I recall a British journalist's article on Who's Next? He stated the US needed a new dance partner and Islamic world was the most likely candidate, if they chose to attend.

I was initially flabbergasted at Mike V's comments - how could anyone be so misinformed and narrow-minded, I thought to myself - but then remembered that a cocktail of limited intelligence, bad education and Fox News can do that to a person.

If the US got rid of Saddam's "rape rooms," it was only to move them out into the hallway, the better to make room for a human pyramid of degredation. And they've brought freedom, have they? The freedom to be blasted into a million bits by American, Syrian, Saudi or homegrown explosives, apparently. You think life is better for them now, or worse?

Your country (assuming you're American) was attacked on 9/11, and it was horrible. What to do next? Going after the people who did it might have been the reasonable, or at least the understandable thing; going into what might as well have been a random (if oil-rich) country, causing pointless chaos and horror and meanwhile allowing Osama Bin Laden to retire on the French Riviera or wherever he is, was not. How can you not understand that?

I'm sure you spent many a night pre-9/11 grieving for the life of the poor oppressed Iraqis, too.

To Mike V

Osama and Saddam are not two sides of the same coin and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so your argument that the Iraq war was somehow necessary simply doesn't stand up. It wasn't necessary, it was illegal - both internationally and domestically - and it was highly, highly immoral. Iraq was already down because sanctions had drained whatever life they had out of them. Their military was nothing more than in name only and there were no WMDs whatsoever. Sanctions had been responsible for the deaths of over have a million children - extremely conservative etsimate. The UN puts that number at over a million - and the war has not helped in the slightest. Sectarian violence is out of control and rising, 800,000 civilian men, women and children have died as a result of the conflict and it's aftermath, another two million are refugees. Yes, Saddam was bad but brother, he was NEVER this bad.

Like I said before, it's a sad, sad day when Saddam told the truth when Shrub lies, and we're in a world of hurt when Saddam's word carries more weight than Shrub's. But then, facts are facts aren't they and even the most extreme Shrub boosters will have to admit that Saddam was far more honest a man than George is. Funny that, Saddam goes to his death an honest man and Shrub will retire to undreamed of riches, his nation a smoking ruin, because of his lies. Oh yes, let's not forget the 3,600 and counting American troops who've died for no good reason except to line Shrub & co's pockets. There is no justice.

I am not in the least bit surprised by Gigi's post; muslims will almost always choose their religion over anything else. To do otherwise is haram (forbidden).

It is posts like Gigi's that only reinforce Huntington's concept of a "clash of civilizations" in my mind and the minds of many hawkish westerners. Islam is in an ascendant period, while the West stagnates. It is obvious that even "moderate" muslims, in order to actually be muslims, must acknowledge that the word of the prophet is the infallible message of allah; it's the basis of their entire theology. That leads us to sharia, and the islamic imperative to bring the "justice" of sharia to the world. Gigi has made her choice; how many western muslims will choose otherwise? Probably not many I bet.

Ultimately, if the debacle in Iraq (which was a dreadful, wasteful diversion from annihilating Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan) has any unintended benefit it is this; The shiite / sunni split in the ummah (islamic world) has been strongly exasperated.

Will an outright civil war between the two most populous islamic factions distract the ummah long enough to buy Western civilization enough time to prepare ourselves for a "clash of civilizations"? Only time will tell.

Jerry's point is a bit backwards - if we use that logic, the fact that 9/11 occurred "on Bush's watch" is more damning than the fact that no such attacks have occurred against the US itself since then. Saying "oh but they were new" is a cop-out - the Preseident and Cabinet were new, but not the agencies that fed them information. The gradual growth of Al Qaida's capabilities and boldness in the 1990's had been noticed everywhere, the hostilities between them and the US had excalated over years. The terrorist cell was already on its mission by the time Bush became president, but what is apalling is how Bush's administation immediately tirned their backs on the evidence already gathered and on those like Richard Clarke who pointed out the Al Qaida threat to the new president - they were more interested in going after Iraq (before 9/11, even before the 2000 presidential campaign they had made up their mind about it), and diverted key resources and attetion *away* from the Al Qaida threat. I am not one of those who believes the Bush gang did the 9/11 attacks or deliberately let it happen, but it's clear now from the revelations made by key anti-terror officials that they botched the job then. And the sad part is that they are also the ones who have failed to keep after Al Qaida as relentlessly as necessary - for a government that utters the phrase "9/11" every second sentence, they've still not destroyed the group that launched it. Instead, they've given them the time and space necessary to re-organize and much worse, with the Iraq war they gave their enemy a recruiting miracle, and alienated most of the US' potential allies. All this was done on Bush's watch. People may tend to "blame the current guy", but I don't think the next president will be wearing Bush's mistakes after 2009 as much as spending his or her whole term attempting to recover from them.

This thread has been long and whiney. It is also hate-filled. Bottom line - most comments seem to imply that the Iraqi people would be better served had Saddam remained in power, with the rape rooms, plastic shredders, gassing of towns, etc. Saddam could continue to use petro-dollars to support world-wide terrorism and to oppress his own people. The people here apparently don't consider the millions of Iraqi people as worthy of a chance at freedom. So are they bigots?
So many lies too. The average American military is trying to help the Iraqi people achieve that freedom, and the lies of a deserter are not valid. But the ignorant American hating bigot can choose to believe otherwise.
If America cuts and runs, like the Democrats want, and Al Qaeda declares victory, and the price of oil goes up to over $100/barrel, and the Middle East goes nuclear everywhere - it will be too late to say - George Bush was trying to do the right thing, but the surrender-monkees undercut the policy.
Mike

9/11 was the cumulative failure of the bureacracy to safe guard the nation. The permanent, non-elective, government is supposed to operate the day to day and hurly burly of the nation, including police forces, military command, legal, judicial, etc. The elected make policy and provide direction: even Jerry would have to assess his currently elected government as "rudderless" because the "captain" of the ship is a low grade buffoon incapable of offering leadership at any level. 9/11 happened on his watch all right, and it did play into the hands of the neo-cons running things while shrub was off on vacation.

For the neo-cons and their PNAC ,9/11 was the greatest of gifts. True, there hasn't been a repeat attack and this still Shrub's watch, but then again, why would there be another attack? Shrub & co. reacted exactly as the 9/11 planners had hoped: they attacked a Muslim nation in retaliation, but then, joy of all joys, they went ahead and attacked another, entirely different, nation that was completely innocent of having had anything to do with 9/11! Listen, if the infidel is going to play into your hands so easily, why waste time further by continuing to goad him unless absolutely necessary? Case in point: when it was thought that Kerry was making headway in the 2004 presidential election, Osama came out of hiding long enough to campaign for Shrub & co. and frighten everyone senseless. Osama doesn't want cooler heads to prevail: he likes things the way they are, He's convinced that the Arabs will rise once more. He needs the infidel to contaminate the holy places a bit longer until the great rising, so he'll continue to interfere here and there as needs must, but not before. His war is not with us, it's against secularism in the middle east. We're just "collateral damage." We're just another tool to use to his advantage if his real war is to succeed.

To Jim, I think you answered your own question. Yes he will be held to account by history. However the mitigating circumstances you point out do come into play in this judgement. A second successful attack would have a much more serious affect on the Bush legacy in this area.

A salient point by Jerry, it's always important to have different viewpoints if this is to be a "debate." Although it leads me to a point I've been raising for years. 9/11 happened under Bush's "watch". Granted, the Commission suggested there were holes, leaks and general carelessness in the American intelligence regime regardless of who was President at the time, but it "happened to happen" when the President was (at the time) in the midst of the longest vacation of a serving President in American history. Bush's most challenging address to that point had been on stem cell research....seems paltry in comparison to the events of 9/11.

Bush had barely taken office, and the reporting structure to the top of the policial pyramid was barely in place. The homeland was vulnerable to attack and you can bet the perpetrators knew this.

In the aftermath of 9/11 it was taboo to lay blame on anyone but the terrorists. Since then, it seems the only critical voice heard in America is resigned to conspiracy theorists using the bottomless pit of Youtube to suggest the attack was orchestrated by their own people. Is this really the only (ludicrous) voice of dissention?

To Jerry I say, 9/11 happened on George Bush's watch. He and his administration should be accountable.

Is he? Are they?

jerry wrote: "Since 9/11 there have been no successful attacks on this country by anyone. Whether you want to credit George Bush with this does not matter. It is his watch and he gets credit just as he would get blame if there were an attack."

True, but consider the cost! Think of the tens of thousands of civilian deaths, the orphans, the millions of displaced people, an American induced civil war, and the whole region on the verge of exploding.

You can't just stick your head in the sand and forget about all that. A life is a life, be it American, Afghani, Iraqi or anything else. None has more value than any other and at the end of all this, nothing will have been accomplished except your selfish assertion that the good old US of A has been kept safe from the bogeyman for a while. Well GOLLY!!!!

Oh, and there was an attack under George's watch.

Gigi from BC, now that you have determined that all of us in the west are evil and that we all support Bush, now that you have clearly stated that your choice will always be Islam, will you now show your sincerity and leave Canada and go live in a country that lives by Islamic law? Will you emigrate to Iran or maybe Algeria?

When you get to your chosen destination, please let us know how much fun you're having there. Good luck Gigi.

So much anger and passion in these posts. Nearly all of it aimed at president Bush. I certainly do not want to throw gasoline on the fire or meat to the lions but I will run the risk of your abuse to point one thing to you. It is the primary job of government (in the US constitution anyway) to protect it's citizens. Police at the local level and military at the national level. Since 9/11 there have been no successful attacks on this country by anyone. Whether you want to credit George Bush with this does not matter. It is his watch and he gets credit just as he would get blame if there were an attack.

It's like playing Duck Hunt. You shoot everything you can. thinking you're making a difference; then you miss. You get laughed at and shoot more. It never amounts to anything and people still think your aim sucks.

In this case? George Bush's "aim" was to go after Osama, guns blazing... then he went after Saddam and his WoMD. Saddam's been taken out (albeit the US put him there in the first place) and now they're after Osama again. Will they ever get him? Who knows.

Many, many people are tired of this war and a few of my friends are tired of living inside of "the box tied shut with a big chain" they call America.

We can only hope when Bush is finally ousted that things don't get worse.

Never have the US people been so ill-served by a leader during wartime. Yeah, their "war" has been completely botched. Al Qaida's leaders are still there in the mountains of Pakistan because the PNAC / AIPAC gang that runs Bush's administration (not to mention Blair's & Howard's) decided it would rather go after Iraq inststead of actually taking the fight relentlessly to the real enemies that unleashed 9/11. Al Qaida and the Taliban are safe in Pakistan (a country with real nukes, by the way), and destabilizing that place because somehow Pakistan's sovereignty and borders were considered sacred by this cabal whereas Iraq's were not - much to the peril of Canadian and other NATO troops, who have to fight a war knowing their enemy has a safe haven to attack from.
Meanwhile, the Al Qaida branch in Chechnya is still waging war against Russia, and governments like the UK are sheltering them while constantly antagonizing Russia (a potential strong ally against terrorism) instead. The US and UK also seem determined to advance the PNAC / AIPAC obsession with attacking Iran too - never mind that their Shiite connections made them the perfect foil to the influence of Saudi and Pakistani-based terror groups in the two war theaters. But the Decider decided that he'd rather make enemies of both Sunnis *and* Shiites. This is not to mention how the illegal (and pointless) war on Iraq evaporated any sympathies the moderates of Muslim world had for the US after 9/11 - and much of the non-muslim world as well.
For the US position in the world, this is a downward spiral - all the excuses, phony diplomacy dead, halfhearted exit plans, and attempts to shift blame just make it more obvious how weak their position is getting. Bush's regime has made gigantic moral mistakes, but worse for the US, it has made terrible strategic mistakes too. It's a wonder his own military does not get fed up waiting for January 2009 to come, and oust him now.

NIE
cost: the finest distillate of a multi-billion-dollar intelligence network.

Penguin paperback by Sallust
cost: ninety-five cents.

I rest my case.

Anyone with an IQ over 10 can see that Iraq is a complete disaster, and US actions maybe even war crimes. But why are we even discussing it? The real discussion should be Afghanistan. Every objective voice has stated that the country and our efforts are lost. The only secure area is Kabul. Yet our gov't appears to live in the same fantasy world as George Bush. We are hearing the exact same propaganda from Stephen Harper as we heard from George Bush in the early days of the Iraq occupation. So the question is why are our troops being sacrificed for American incompetance.
The constant "support our troops" dribble from our gov't and uninformed citizens worries me that we are falling in the same trap Americans fell into after the invasion of Iraq. Have we learned nothing? My concept of supporting our troops is to force our gov't to bring them home, or replace the gov't with one that does not live in a fantasy world.

Right on, as usual. I have only a few comments to add.

1. Eisenhower said it years ago - 'Beware the Industrial-Military Complex' - and he should know, being both a General and a President. Somehow that unholy alliance has gotten both stronger and dumber in the interim, and we see its ultimate influence now in waging a war that can't be won, with weapons (scatter bombs, enriched uranium steel shell casings, etc.) that leave a lingering death around them, friend or enemy. Weapons that require 'testing' under war conditions. Weapons that force the enemy to use IEDs and suicide bombers.

2. Subversion of the English language. Since when did the USA become freedom's 'Homeland?' Since when did 'for us or against us' become the only choices for the rest of the world? Since when did 'hanging chads' determine the outcome of an election?

3. Profit - from lying and cheating, from weaponry, from greed (the Iraq oil ministry office was the only government department which was not targeted by US air strikes in the beginning of that war though the irreplaceable Museum there was blown apart) has been the only constant in the efforts to subjugate the entire mid-east to the desires of the Industrial-Military complex.

Allow me to ask Harold Hatham to clarify a few things. Harold, indulge me for a moment. You absolve the President and the White House, even go as far as to suggest they're "puppets" to business.

You suggest "good business meant wealth for all but that is changing". When did this change take place? You mention oil and energy but cite "business at large" as the greater evil. Who else is in this circle of evil? Did oil and energy spontaneously decide to become evil a while back, or are you suggesting there's a culprit behind the evil?

You acknowledge and lay blame, on "those who are benefitting most" and suggest these entities are the ones writing the policy that the White House abides by. Wow, they must be powerful.

So I ask you Harold, how does Canada protect itself from such insidious trechery? Do we even get a hint as to who is behind this masquerade? Perhaps you can clue us in...

So wonderfully Orwellian, isn't it? Could just as easily been titled "Playing the Emmanuel Goldstein Card". It's been fascinating to observe this utter nonsense, especially since 9/11, while standing in total awe at the prescience of George Orwell and "1984". A most remarkable man, needless to say.
Upon reading the book, as a teenager some 45 years ago, I naively surmised that it was somewhat "off the wall" and that a rational, educated and developed society founded in democratic traditions and values would somehow be immune to this nightmare. Who'd a thunk it? (Insert picture of hitting myself in the forehead with an ice-cream cone, here).
The majority of posters on this topic have apparently managed to escape the media driven decognition processes. "Dumbing down", in other words. This is encouraging to a certain extent, but only as the exception. Think of Harper, Stockboy and O'Goner as the rule. Rex Murphy too, come to think of it. Yet, as erudite and intelligent as they appear to be, all have adroitly managed to overlook the "elephant in the room" which provided the impetus for this entire farce. Noteworthy, as understood, in context and on theme. The minority of posters seem to think that Emmanu---Osama and 19 Arabs had something to do with 9/11. Hilarious.
I hope it never ends. Just hilarious, as I said.

Don, I could not have said it better!!!.

I wish to take umbrage with some of the comments made by Gigi from BC. To suggest that you are "against most of the western world" for the actions of idiot Bush and his cronies is to engage in the same sort of chauvinistic and possibly zenophobic thinking of the Bush regime. Many countries and individuals in the West were against these actions, and yet you would tar us all with the same brush?
It also occurs to me that a lot of the violence against Muslims that you are witnessing in the Middle East is actually being committed by other Muslims. The conflict in Iraq is not strictly "The West vs. Muslim" or "Christian vs. Muslim".
One could argue that the U.S decision to invade Iraq may have been guided, to a certain degree, by evangelical Christianity. Please remember that the vast majority of people in both the western and third world, from all religions, did oppose these actions.

I have to agree with Jane's comments about racism against Muslims by the Bush administration. I just finished reading the book The Deserter's Tale by Joshua Key. He says that in the U. S. Army's basic training, they are required to refer to Arabs as sand niggers. They are also taught that all Muslims deserve to die. When they are in Iraq, they have the authority to kill anybody they want. The civilians don't have any way to defend themselves so it's just a kill zone. Anyone who thinks the Americans are benign and misunderstood should read the book.

Its time like these that make me wish the US had a federal structure similar to that of our neighbors to the north. Instead we have to rely on impeachment based entirely on proving charges 100%. If only it took a majority no confidence vote...if only...

As a western, moderate, Muslim and female, I had always abhorred the interpretation of Islam by conservative and fundamental Muslims. However, when Bush's told us "that you're either with us or against us", I had to seriously think: am I against him or for him? Looking at his policies and the actions of his administration (too many to mention here) that has caused untold misery on fellow Muslims, I can say equivalently that I am against him. Even worse than that, I am against most of the western world, for allowing Bush and Blair to continue to reign such misery on fellow Muslims.

As a support for other Muslims and as solidarity towards those Muslims that have been needlessly impacted against the "War on Terror", I, and the women in my family wear a hajib, and seek fellow Muslims rather than non-Muslims.

The legacy of Bush and Blair? They have caused moderate and 'soft' Muslims to make a choice. Either western values or Islam (when did and why must the 2 be exclusive?). But the answer is simple: always, the choice will be Islam.

The withdrawal or Iraq will no doubt be a calculated move, balancing the pros and cons
of the military, political and economical interests. And most likely the lives of Iraqi civilians caught in the crossfire will not weight in too heavily in the balance.

How disturbingly pragmatic are the war games played by US officials to measure the consequences of a withdrawal from Iraq? One has to wonder if going to war in the first place was also viewed as a game, deploying all their soldiers and toys of destruction on the map and rolling the dice. But now that they are losing the game, they want to take their toys back with them and go home, regardless of the consequences for the local population.

The American public is not stupid, but it has been purposefully bombarded at home by war propaganda and kept in fear for so many years that any normal person would be confused. Nevertheless, I still have hope that the people's voice will be heard sooner or later.

Henry, I enjoy reading your articles and viewing your “on air” reporting. Your knowledgeable and thoughtful analysis helps untwist the chaotic jumble of Washington stories.

In the Osama article you mention that President Bush has managed to corral the Senate Republicans one more time to await General Petraeus’ September report before putting conditions on Bush’s management of the war. But we have just had the July interim report card that states that the Iraqi government has failed to reach its political benchmarks. Petraeus himself before he took over in Iraq stated before congress that there was no military solution. His job was to quell the violence to give breathing room for the political process to progress.

In 45 days time what possible answer can Petraeus bring forward, other than to expect more of the same problems that we are seeing now. He is obviously in daily touch with the President so why the optimism. Will the President hang this whole phase of the war on Petraeus? Will the President cave in come September saying Petraeus gave it his best shot but the Iraqi politicians let him down? Then will the President say he offered everything the military asked for, he can do no more, and will cooperate with Congress on a ‘go forward” solution?

This Petraeus deadline is a disingenuous chimera. The general’s role is to allow the President to share the blame for failure in Iraq.

When I become Prime Minister I'm going to create a Ministry of Awareness whose job it will be to encourage people to understand how far-reaching their actions are in time and geographical distance. The developments in Irag are a clear example of people looking through a very narrow and selected viewport and having very little understanding of the long-term repercussions of their voting (and their not-voting). The thing is, we in Canada voted in a government that has consistently supported this George Bush world view and it's sad to think that we are in many ways now complicit - less in Iraq, perhaps, but certainly in other equally damaging areas.

The real measure of any human institution, I think, is its ability to recognize mistakes and make corrections. I don't know if that will happen with our cousins to the south - I hope we can make it happen here. That would show an improved awareness and be a much better contribution to the world.

"Be the change you want to see in the world" - Ghandi

Remember, fellow Canadians, that only 51% of Americans who WENT TO VOTE actually voted for Bush. Since the U.S. has such a low voter turn out, that doesn't come close to a majority of Americans. Bush's approval rating is the lowest of any American president since people started taking political polls. Thus, the majority of Americans, too, see him as the worst President in their history. (Sean Wilentz, an excellent US labour historian, wrote an essay on this topic for Rolling Stone Magazine.)

In all of our hurry to simply blame "Americans," we in Canada and the rest of the world do a disservice to those in the United States who are as horrified by the abuses of this administration and who work every day to try and take back their country. Are these left-leaning US activists a minority? Yes. And they face a tremendous task of fighting a culture that is anti-intellectual, ridiculously conservative, anti-reason, and hyper-patriotic. But the Good American's exist and they need the support, recognition, and encouragement of left-leaning people the world over. We're disgusted with the Bush administration and the culture that put him there. Imagine how much worse that must be for lefty Americans who have to live in George Bush's America.

For those wishing to dismiss Americans entirely, or who think those outside of the US are the lone voice of reason, pick up Al Gore's The Assault on Reason.

I cannot lay the direct blame for the current world situation on George W Bush. Please be aware that this is not just a middle east situation but world wide. President Bush is a puppet of business, not just oil and energy but business at large. Consider the attempts to hijack the World Bank as well as foreign banking practices in general, energy sector activities in foreign companies (Canada included), a shrinking manufacturing sector due to off loading to off shore developing countries, US “Diplomatic” activities used to garner “favourable” conditions for US interests abroad at the expense of the host countries. The list could go on. Yes I have ignored the wars because they are only fuelling a domestic military industrial complex. When the war is over it too shrinks. Can we consider this as cause for the USA being the most bellicose nation in history?

The faith of the American public in business has a price that has yet to be paid. That price is the USA becoming a third world economy due to the economics of trade deficit and GDP. What is happening is a shift in the paradigm between the rich and the poor creating a shrinking middle class. In short, all the money is going to the few. If one considers Pareto’s Law as a guide, 20% of the economy will control 80% of the money.

The American people have allowed this to happen because in the past good business meant wealth for all but that is changing. Couple that with a national debt that will have to be paid by a shrinking tax base and the conditions are right for depression. Forget avian flu, the pandemic will be a global economy in crisis.

Who orchestrated all of this? Not the public so look at those who are benefiting most. We can blame the President but that is erroneous. Blame the policy makers who have convinced the White House to play along. The causes are much deeper than we are willing to admit. The question is how will Canada protect itself?

I was raised in Windsor ON in the sixties. This city is sandwiched between Detroit and Cleveland and was (and probably still is) inundated with American news. Back in the '60s, the big American bogeyman was communism. The underprivileged class who weren't dying in the ghettos were being sent overseas to shoot, or be shot at by, the bogey men.
Almost 50 years later, there are no communists but now we've got terrorists. Coincidentally, the underprivileged classes who aren't dying in the ghetto are being sent overseas to blow up, or be blown up by, the bogey men.
What happened in New York and Washington in September 2001 was horrible and evil, but whether there are masterminds or not, the root cause of those attacks has only gotten stronger thanks to a US foreign policy that assumes everyone in the world would love to see the stars and stripes waving overhead. Kind of like in the '60s.
I am reluctant to look in the dictionary and see what other words can be fitted with the suffixes -ism and -ist, so I can see who the next great American enemy will be. Too bad nobody there has the vision of Pogo ("I've seen the enemy, and the enemy is us.")

Prior to finding religion, bin Laden was merely one of the Beirut playboy set. What focussed his change of direction was witnessing the struggles of the Afghan mujahideen against the Russian Bear. That epoch provided ideal growth conditions: US supplied weapons (some anyhow),a laboratory to perfect technique, and an air of being on continuous convention.
Fast forward to the present. Add the ability and willingness of Iran to play sponsor and you again get ideal conditions for growth. The US is right this minute field training its very own enemies. The Iraq boondoggle represents the height of insanity.

I also want to join the others in congratulating Don on a great post. You really nailed it, Don.

Growing up, I always wondered how the German people could follow Hitler during WWII and accept his crimes against humanity. It's so sad that I've actually been shown how something like this can happen in my time. The Americans have fallen into the same trap that Germany did... crazy leader + radical patriotism + propaganda + concentration camps and war crimes = Nazi Germany = The United States of America in the 21st century. Too bad we can't haul anchor and float Canada down to the southern hemisphere and be rid of these maniacs.

Instead of blaming President Musharraf for al Qaeda's survival and resurgence, it would be more honest to blame the failure of the American military to capture or kill Osama bin Laden when they were pursuing him in 2001--from the Washington Post in April 2002: "The Bush administration has concluded that Osama bin Laden was present during the battle for Tora Bora ... and that failure to commit U.S. ground troops to hunt him was its gravest error in the war against al Qaeda."

The U.S. then compounded that error (excruciatingly detailed in "Reaping the Whirlwind" by Michael Griffin) by diverting almost all of its resources to attacking Iraq, in what has turned out to be the most ill-conceived military adventure in recent history, eclipsing even Vietnam in its folly.

Not only did the gratuitous invasion and occupation of Iraq remove the focus on al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, it created a perfect incubator for al Qaeda to train its operatives and leaders, and perfect its guerrilla tactics; most important of all, it raised al Qaeda's profile among disaffected Muslims worldwide as a champion able to thwart and humiliate the U.S. on the battlefield.

Whether it was intended or not, al Qaeda's 9/11 attack goaded a failing and desperate Bush administration to blunder into a trap infinitely more damaging to U.S. interests than the original attack. If al Qaeda is even stronger than before, the Intelligence Estimate should identify the Bush administration as the primary cause.

How many times can Americans be duped is the real question?
Every time the Republicans need to rattle sabres the specific stories are exact, detailed and horrifically colorful for compliant media to consume, editorialize and promote fear around the Western world.
How convenient we get acts of terror, video clips and web page declarations whenever the fear factor bar is raised.
I for one am not appeased that some US media have just now begun to question whether they are guilty of NOT asking tougher questions before their country went to war. Why does the US government have so little respect for its own citizens it continues to insult their intelligence with such flakey fiction, repeatedly.
More important is the facts.
No government official is challenging the propaganda. Why?
No significant convictions have been achieved on either side of the border to date.
No serious pursuit of genuine factual information is taking place like the anthrax incidents for example.
If our democratically elected officials don't challenge the offered "press releases" somebody should tell me again why our soldiers are dying for democracy.

Regardless of who is going to be the next U.S. President, and whatever may be said about the policies of the current one, the mess in Iraq remains. The Iranians have been waiting for their chance since the Iraquis started the first Gulf War in 1980. The Sunnis and the Shi'ites in Iraq are already killing each other. The Saudis, Kuwaitis and Gulf states are all interested in what happens next. The U.S. may choose to withdraw, but that does not mean that the issue will go away. Would Al-Quaeda, regardless of it's involvement, claim a U.S. withdrawal as a victory, and use that to gain more recruits? Would Iran intervene? What will that do to the region? What would Israel do - a particularly important question since they have nuclear weapons, and are seen in some parts of the Arab world as U.S. proxies. Damning Bush and the Americans tends to obscure the fact that the chaos in Iraq is an urgent problem and the world cannot avoid confronting it.

A very good discourse, presented fairly and logically. Up until the use of the word "bogeyman" that is. Cynicism and derisiveness are better suited for dinner parties. There is nothing fictional about the current state of world relations, regardless of whether you agree with the decisons that have brought us to this point or not.

The public apparently remains gullible though. The Senate pulls an “all nighter” to talk about the Iraq vote complete with pictures of beds where the cream of intellectual thought can rest during the debate on a vote that had zero chance of being passed. I mean come on, what a complete farce. The democrats appear absolutely spineless and powerless. This long war being fought supposedly for the freedom of us all has made the whole world a powder keg.

The real sad fact is that the murderers and war criminals, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Perle, Wolfowitz, Blair, Howard and every last one of the souls who engineered the war will never be held accountable. 50,000 plus Americans killed in Vietnam, 4,000,000 plus Vietnamese. 3,600 plus Americans so far in Iraq, 700,000 plus Iraqis. 1.25% vs .51%…they’re getting better at it.

Don and DonB pretty much summed it up for all of us that are of normal intelligence and still have our humanity. Only a below average intelligence person could be stupid enough to defend such a man as Bush in this day and age! In fact, it would be easier to defend Hitler than it would this man.

I believe that there was no "master mind" behind sept 11th since the act only consists of a very large plane flying into a building. A monkey could do it! The biggest event of that day was not the plane or even the collapse of the buildings, all though it made a historic news story, it was G.W. Bush that made such idiotic moves, that he would rather read "my pet goat" than to protect the American people by avoiding that tragedy years before!

To "hide" his embarrassment he has played the Osama card time and time again when it is convenient to him with no such proof that the man even exists during the time of 9/11 till now. Yet because of his rhetoric, millions have suffered or even died by his establishment of pro racism via the blaming of "Muslims" or any one who even looks or has a last name that appears to be "middle eastern." This is on top of the many Americans that have died for his illegal war!

It is truly sad that we cannot force a regime change where it is truly needed, not only for the world but for the American people that are suffering by the hands of a dictator named Bush!

Don's comments are mine exactly. The only thing I might add is, one has to wonder how many years it will take for America to regain its trust and respect throughout the world after these eight of total self destruction by a man in charge the most powerfull nation on earth.
Patrick

Unfortunately what the Don above states is only too true. Unfortunate also that our minority government idolizes these characters. I suppose we can't expect much more when they reach out to the same religious crack pots that the Bush regime identifies with. I, for one do not trust Harper and his gang mainly for this. Sorry to digress. However the pending doom we all face is directly related to all of this. I don't believe that Bush is the engineer of this grab for oil in the middle east. He is just an ignorant and willing accomplice. It looks like the Cheney crew and companies are the real designers, complete with rigged elections. That the US is in such dire straights brings me often to think of a study that Harvard University did in 1996. This study determined that 27.8 of US citizens were mentally ill. I think that they must be the actual support base of the Republicans. No normal people can be so stupid as to elect a dunce such as Bush. He is barely able to speak English. One can only hope that the good people of the US wake up and put these characters in jail and charge them with war crimes asp. The damage they have caused due to their ignorance and greed will be with the world for hundreds of years. It is truly unfortunate, very dangerous and unforgivable.
Let us hope our border remains intact. Well, I suppose as long as we keep giving them our oil gas and lumber for just about nothing we will be OK.

Well said, Don!

Is there time to mount a pre-emptive strike in Pakistan?

The current administration only has one card to play politically. National Security. To a worried US electorate, the Republican's have always been seen to be a less risky choice to protect National Security than the Democrats. GW's election in 2004 was principally a reflection of Republican ability to address National Security....at the time ...Iraq.

Today, with the fall of Republican support the administration is playing the old standby....a threat to National Security card. The timing of this report is part of the plan to fan the flames of security risk. It's they're only gambit left. Awful to say, but the best hope for the Republicans is another attack on US soil.

Don, you get a rousing chorus of "YOU WIN!" from myself and others around my workplace for that one.

That's all folks the end is near, the homeland? WOW sounds like the brown shirts have finally arrived with the great decider who now sadly runs America, democracy is dead.

I have said many times since 2000 that this president is a complete and utter failure; a person of limited intelligence, even lees experience, incapable of rational thought, strategic planning, and in very specific terms, an utter incompetent. Uniting the country after a divisive election = F. Handling of the economy = F. Foreign policy = F. Protecting and defending the constitution of the United States of America = less than F: the man is a traitor. Safe guarding American interests abroad = F.

The Bush regime has failed in all respects and worse, has yet to be RIGHT about a single thing since infesting the White House. Their record of being wrong on everything is the gloomiest 100% perfect record I've ever seen. Let's face it, when Saddam Hussein's record on telling the straight truth is better than a US president's then we're all in a world of trouble.

I could go on but what's the point: George W Bush is the single worst president in the history of the Unites States, a national embarrassment domestically, an international war criminal who not only condones the use of torture but actually celebrates torture in defiance of the all known morality and ethics. Americans made an historic mistake when they allowed this creature access to government, then topped that horrific error by actually VOTING for the lunatic when they had the chance to rectify their previous mistake. I used to give Americans the benefit of the doubt for making the effort despite some less than successful results, but no longer: their appalling stupidity has doomed us all to unending years of strife and violence thanks to their debilitative ignorance at the ballot box.