Bush Has the Gall to Lecture Americans on Vietnam

Bush is in effect saying that Vietnam could have been won if only we’d stayed there longer — that winning would have only required a few tens of thousand more lives lost — other than his own, of course.

…….

When you hear the sound bites from George W. Bush’s speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars today in which he compares his botched war in Iraq to the Vietnam war, think about what he was doing while thousands of U.S. soldiers were wounded and killed in the jungles of Southeast Asia.

As is well known, Bush’s elite status entitled him to a cushy berth in a “champagne unit” of the Texas Air National Guard. Associates from that era remember young Bush as being preoccupied with doing drugs, driving drunk and chasing women. There are rumors he seriously damaged a fighter jet while taxiing it on a runway while hungover. And there is strong circumstantial evidence he was discharged less than honorably after failing to show up for a series of Pentagon-mandated drug tests.

With that in mind, here is Bush today, rewriting and politicizing the war he sat out:

Read the rest at the Pensito Review

Advertisements

  1. illa morales

    White House office that handles freedom of information requests is free no longer
    http://rawstory.com/news/2007/White_House_office_that_handles_freedom_0823.html

  2. illa morales

    Don’t let the new-age spirituality fool you—Dennis Kucinich is a man with a plan
    http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=6105

  3. illa morales

    Two Years After Katrina, Billions in Relief Funds Are Missing
    http://www.alternet.org/rights/60494/?cID=718164#c718164

  4. illa morales

    ‘The War on Democracy’ is John Pilger’s first major film for the cinema. Set in Latin America and the US, it explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile.
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1786986629131142113&q=war+on+democracy&total=2091&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=5

  5. illa morales

    Our entire political establishment is complicit
    http://www.unknownnews.org/070823-fd-20-RaymondR.html

  6. illa morales

    Giuliani: Building His Platform On the Graves of 3,000 Dead Americans
    http://www.progressivedailybeacon.com/more.php?page=opinion&id=1648

  7. illa morales

    Compare the most brutal dictators still in power to the most brutal dictators that ever lived. Each dictator’s rank is based on crimes against humanity and years in power.
    http://www.listbums.com/view_profile.php?uid=127&list_id=849

  8. illa morales

    Reporting on President Bush’s speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), in which, as The Washington Post noted, he argued “that withdrawing U.S. troops would lead to widespread death and suffering as it did in Southeast Asia” following the Vietnam War, numerous media outlets failed to note that Bush has attacked political opponents in the past for comparing the current conflict in Iraq to Vietnam. In an April 2004 prime-time press conference, Bush was asked how he “answer[s] the Vietnam comparison,” and responded, “I think the analogy is false. I also happen to think that analogy sends the wrong message to our troops, and sends the wrong message to the enemy.” And in a June 2006 press conference, Bush said of the Iraq-Vietnam analogy, “I don’t see the parallels.”

    From the April 13, 2004, press conference:

    QUESTION: Mr. President, April is turning into the deadliest month in Iraq since the fall of Baghdad, and some people are comparing Iraq to Vietnam and talking about a quagmire. Polls show that support for your policy is declining and that fewer than half Americans now support it. What does that say to you and how do you answer the Vietnam comparison?

    BUSH: I think the analogy is false. I also happen to think that analogy sends the wrong message to our troops and sends the wrong message to the enemy. Look, this is hard work. It’s hard to advance freedom in a country that has been strangled by tyranny. And, yet, we must stay the course, because the end result is in our nation’s interest.

    While he did not repeat his assertion that the Vietnam analogy “sends the wrong message to our troops … and to the enemy,” in a June 14, 2006, press conference, Bush claimed not to “see the parallels” between the two wars:

    QUESTION: Do you see, as some of your critics do, a parallel between what’s going on in Iraq now and Vietnam?

    BUSH: No.

    QUESTION: Why?

    BUSH: Because there’s a duly-elected government; 12 million people voted. They said, we want something different from tyranny, we want to live in a free society. And not only did they vote for a government, they voted for a constitution. Obviously, there is sectarian violence, but this is, in many ways, religious in nature, and I don’t see the parallels.

    In his August 22 speech to the VFW, however, Bush used the Vietnam analogy to argue against withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq:

    BUSH: There are many differences between the wars we fought in the Far East and the war on terror we’re fighting today. But one important similarity is at their core they’re ideological struggles. The militarists of Japan and the communists in Korea and Vietnam were driven by a merciless vision for the proper ordering of humanity. They killed Americans because we stood in the way of their attempt to force their ideology on others. Today, the names and places have changed, but the fundamental character of the struggle has not changed.

    […]

    We’re still in the early hours of the current ideological struggle, but we do know how the others ended — and that knowledge helps guide our efforts today.

    […]

    Finally, there’s Vietnam. This is a complex and painful subject for many Americans. The tragedy of Vietnam is too large to be contained in one speech. So I’m going to limit myself to one argument that has particular significance today. Then as now, people argued the real problem was America’s presence and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end.

    […]

    The world would learn just how costly these misimpressions would be. In Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge began a murderous rule in which hundreds of thousands of Cambodians died by starvation and torture and execution. In Vietnam, former allies of the United States and government workers and intellectuals and businessmen were sent off to prison camps, where tens of thousands perished. Hundreds of thousands more fled the country on rickety boats, many of them going to their graves in the South China Sea.

    Three decades later, there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam War and how we left. There’s no debate in my mind that the veterans from Vietnam deserve the high praise of the United States of America. Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like “boat people,” “re-education camps,” and “killing fields.”

    An August 23 Los Angeles Times article on the speech asserted that “Bush has been skittish in the past about analogies to the Vietnam War, largely because of the negative connotations it continues to hold for many Americans.” The article also extensively quoted an unnamed “former official who left the White House recently” defending Bush’s “new communications strategy”:

    The newest element in the president’s communications strategy was a willingness to discuss Vietnam, a conflict that critics of the Iraq war often cite to suggest that the United States should cut its losses in Iraq and begin withdrawing.

    Bush has been skittish in the past about analogies to the Vietnam War, largely because of the negative connotations it continues to hold for many Americans.

    […]

    A former official who left the White House recently said the new communications strategy was based on two arguments the administration has been making for a long time.

    “One, we can win. And in past cases, such as Korea or Japan, people who made confident predictions about the impossibility of succeeding were eventually proven wrong. Two, the consequences of failure are so bad we should be willing to pay a price to win,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he is no longer permitted to speak for the administration.

    What’s different, the official said, is that the president is taking a perceived weakness — historical comparisons to Vietnam — and turning it into a strength.

    “Vietnam has been wrung around the administration’s neck on Iraq for a long time,” he said. “There are many analogies or comparisons or connections that could cut against the administration’s position, but this is a connection that supports the administration’s position. . . . They want to say, the last time you took a drastic option like abandoning our allies it didn’t work well. Let’s take a more measured one. They’re setting that up.”

    But while the article asserted that Bush has simply “been skittish” about the Vietnam analogy, it did not note his previous statements explicitly rejecting it. Further, the article quoted the unnamed “former official” at length expressing his support for Bush’s use of the analogy, but included no criticism of the analogy, either by Democratic politicians or by historians.

    Several other news outlets reported criticism of Bush’s use of the analogy, but did not note that Bush had previously rejected the Vietnam comparison:

    CBS Evening News: Reporting on Bush’s analogy, White House correspondent Bill Plante quoted historian Douglas Brinkley asserting, “You’re not going to be able to sell the lessons of Vietnam being that we should have stayed a decade longer.”
    The Washington Post: An August 23 Post article included criticism of Bush’s analogy from Democratic Sens. John Kerry (MA) and Edward Kennedy (MA).
    The New York Times: An August 23 Times report on the speech also quoted Kerry’s criticism, but similarly failed to note the president’s conflicting statements about whether or not there is a legitimate comparison to be made between the war in Iraq and the Vietnam War.
    The Wall Street Journal: The August 23 Journal report (subscription required) on the speech noted criticism by Steve Simon of the Council on Foreign Relations, who asserted, “The president emphasized the violence in the wake of American withdrawal from Vietnam. But this happened because the United States left too late, not too early.” It also quoted Ret. Army Brig. Gen. John Johns, who asserted, “The longer we stay there, the worse it’s going to get,” but it did not note the president’s conflicting statements.
    USA Today: The August 23 USA Today report noted criticism by Johns and Kennedy.
    By contrast, both NBC and ABC noted that Bush had previously criticized the Iraq-Vietnam analogy:

    NBC’s Nightly News: Introducing a report on the speech, anchor Brian Williams asserted, “And after years of rejecting any comparisons to Vietnam, today President Bush invoked the Vietnam War as a way of saying the U.S. must stay the course and not pull out.” NBC White House correspondent Kelly O’Donnell began the report by asserting, “After years of pushback rejecting the Vietnam-Iraq comparison, today in Kansas City, before the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the president made a turn and embraced his own Vietnam analogy.” O’Donnell also noted that Bush’s comments “contrast what he said last year when asked if he saw a Vietnam-Iraq connection,” before quoting Bush asserting at the 2006 press conference, “I don’t see the parallels.”
    ABC’s World News: The August 22 broadcast began with chief White House correspondent Martha Raddatz asserting, “For years, administration critics have likened the war in Iraq, to the quagmire in Vietnam, a comparison President Bush has strongly rejected. But today, speaking before a supportive audience of veterans, Mr. Bush found a comparison to Vietnam he embraced.” The report also noted criticism of Bush’s speech by presidential historian Robert Dallek, who asserted that the analogy “just doesn’t make any historical sense to me,” as well as criticism by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE), who asserted, “If, in fact, the president does not change policy, we’re going to see a repeat of what we saw in Saigon at the end of that car, with helicopters lifting people desperately clinging to the ladder of a helicopter to get out of Iraq.”
    From the August 22 edition of the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric:

    PLANTE: In addition to supporting [Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki, the president also defended his own Iraq policy. Speaking today to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Mr. Bush offered a new rationale for staying the course: Don’t let Iraq become another Vietnam.

    BUSH [video clip]: One unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like “boat people,” “re-education camps,” and “killing fields.”

    PLANTE: Historian Douglas Brinkley says there’s no real parallel.

    BRINKLEY: You’re not going to be able to sell the lessons of Vietnam being that we should have stayed a decade longer.

    PLANTE: But if things don’t get better soon in Iraq, members of Congress aren’t going to care as much about past history as they are about future elections. Bill Plante, CBS News, the White House.

    From the August 22 edition of NBC’s Nightly News with Brian Williams:

    BRIAN WILLIAMS (host): And after years of rejecting any comparisons to Vietnam, today President Bush invoked the Vietnam War as a way of saying the U.S. must stay the course and not pull out. NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell is traveling with the president.

    O’DONNELL: After years of pushback rejecting the Vietnam-Iraq comparison, today in Kansas City, before the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the president made a turn and embraced his own Vietnam analogy.

    BUSH [video clip]: Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price for American credibility. But the terrorists see it differently.

    O’DONNELL: The president claimed America’s modern enemy, Al Qaeda, saw weakness, that if a war became unpopular enough, the U.S. would leave. A parallel campaign launched today involves new TV ads, fighting the PR battle.

    IRAQ WAR VETERAN [video clip from Freedom's Watch commercial]: I know what I lost. I also know that if we pull out now, everything I’ve given and sacrificed will mean nothing.

    O’DONNELL: Injured veterans and military families appear in these spots from a group backed by Bush donors, friends, and former press secretary Ari Fleischer. The spots target 20 congressional districts.

    IRAQ WAR VETERAN [video clip from Freedom's Watch commercial]: It’s no time to quit. It’s no time for politics.

    O’DONNELL: On the other side, a TV campaign from a group long critical of many Bush policies, targeting Republicans, like Maine Senator Susan Collins.

    COMMENTATOR [video clip from Americans United for Change commercial]: Tell Susan Collins it’s time to take a stand. End the war.

    O’DONNELL: Mr. Bush’s comments to the VFW today contrast what he said last year when asked if he saw a Vietnam-Iraq connection.

    BUSH [video clip from June 14, 2006]: I don’t see the parallels.

    O’DONNELL: Some historians claim today his use today of Vietnam was too simple and not accurate.

    STANLEY KARNOW (Vietnam historian): He’s evoking Vietnam for political purposes. What he says about Vietnam is not entirely true.

    O’DONNELL: Democrat and Vietnam veteran John Kerry calls the president’s comparison irresponsible, while presidential candidate [Sen.] Hillary Clinton [D-NY] reacted, saying the U.S. needs to stop refereeing the war and begin getting out now. Kelly O’Donnell, NBC News, Kansas City.

    From the August 22 edition of ABC’s World News with Charles Gibson:

    RADDATZ: For years, administration critics have likened the war in Iraq, to the quagmire in Vietnam, a comparison president Bush has strongly rejected. But today, speaking before a supportive audience of veterans, Mr. Bush found a comparison to Vietnam he embraced.

    BUSH [video clip]: Then as now, people argued the real problem was America’s presence and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end.

    RADDATZ: The president asserted that it was the American retreat from Southeast Asia that led directly to the carnage and displacement that followed.

    BUSH [video clip]: The price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms, like “boat people,” “re-education camps,” and “killing fields.”

    RADDATZ: Historians quickly seized on the president’s remarks.

    ROBERT DALLEK: What is Mr. Bush suggesting? We should have stayed there forever? We should have invaded North Vietnam? It just doesn’t make any historical sense to me.

    RADDATZ: Reaction from Democrats was swift, as well, with some making their own comparisons.

    BIDEN [video clip]: If, in fact, the president does not change policy, we’re going to see a repeat of what we saw in Saigon at the end of that war, with helicopters lifting people desperately clinging to the ladder of a helicopter to get out of Iraq.

  9. illa morales

    Historian: Bush use of quote ‘perverse’
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/5499.html

  10. illa morales

    Bush proposal would ease rules on surface mining
    http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/24/surface.mining.ap/index.html

  11. illa morales

    The more the White House hides, obstructs, and obfuscates the truth about the U.S. Attorney scandal, the clearer it is that Congress must take a stand for constitutional checks and balances and the principle that in America no one, not even the …
    https://www.kintera.org/site/apps/ka/ct/contactcustom.asp?c=feIJKQMEF&b=3002055&sid=116278023&kntaw3935=8BEEBA1B8EE344B59106EA2D2F654B76

  12. illa morales

    Among Kucinich’s charges: he was “deliberately cropped out” of photos; after he took a “commanding lead” in ABC’s online survey, the survey was mysteriously “dropped from prominence on the web site”; and “as every viewer of the nationally televised Sunday presidential forum is aware” Kucinich was not asked a question until 28 minutes into the program.
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/08/post_2.html

  13. illa morales

    It is, sadly, wholly predictable the wind-up cathy-chatty doll, albeit broken and dysfunctional, George Bush, is able to repeat debunked lies and few take him to task. “US President George Bush has drawn heavy flak from the Democrats with his (lies)….”
    http://www.adereview.com/blog/?p=13

  14. illa morales

    Sean Penn’s Open Letter to President Bush
    Published in the Washington Post on October 19, 2002

    An Open Letter to the President of the United States of America
    Mr. Bush:
    Good morning sir.
    Like you, I am a father and an American. Like you, I consider myself a patriot. Like you, I was horrified by the events of this past year, concerned for my family and my country.
    However, I do not believe in a simplistic and inflammatory view of good and evil. I believe this is a big world full of men, women, and children who struggle to eat, to love, to work, to protect their families, their beliefs, and their dreams.
    My father, like yours, was decorated for service in World War II. He raised me with a deep belief in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as they should apply to all Americans who would sacrifice to maintain them and to all human beings as a matter of principle. Many of your actions to date and those proposed seem to violate every defining principle of this country over which you preside: intolerance of debate (“with us or against us”), marginalization of your critics, the promoting of fear through unsubstantiated rhetoric, manipulation of a quick comfort media, and position of your administration’s deconstruction of civil liberties all contradict the very core of the patriotism you claim. You lead, it seems, through a blood-lined sense of entitlement.
    Take a close look at your most vehement media supporters. See the fear in their eyes as their loud voices of support ring out with that historically disastrous undercurrent of rage and panic masked as “straight tough talk.” How far have we come from understanding what it is to kill one man, one woman, or one child, much less the “collateral damage” of many hundreds of thousands.
    Your use of the words, “this is a new kind of war” is often accompanied by an odd smile. It concerns me that what you are asking of us is to abandon all previous lessons of history in favor of following you blindly into the future. It worries me because with all your best intentions, an enormous economic surplus has been squandered. Your administration has virtually dismissed the most fundamental environmental concerns and therefore, by implication, one gets the message that, as you seem to be willing to sacrifice the children of the world, would you also be willing to sacrifice ours.
    I know this cannot be your aim so, I beg you Mr. President, listen to Gershwin, read chapters of Stegner, of Saroyan, the speeches of Martin Luther King. Remind yourself of America. Remember the Iraqi children, our children, and your own. There can be no justification for the actions of Al Qaeda. Nor acceptance of the criminal viciousness of the tyrant, Saddam Hussein. Yet, that bombing is answered by bombing, mutilation by mutilation, killing by killing, is a pattern that only a great country like ours can stop.
    However, principles cannot be recklessly or greedily abandoned in the guise of preserving them. Avoiding war while accomplishing national security is no simple task. But you will recall that we Americans had a little missile problem down in Cuba once. Mr. Kennedy’s restraint (and that of the nuclear submarine captain, Arkhipov) is to be aspired to.
    Weapons of mass destruction are clearly a threat to the entire world in any hands. But as Americans, we must ask ourselves, since the potential for Mr. Hussein to possess them threatens not only our country, (and in fact, his technology to launch is likely not yet at that high a level of sophistication) therefore, many in his own region would have the greatest cause for concern.
    Why then, is the United States, as led by your administration, in the small minority of the world nations predisposed toward a preemptive military assault on Iraq?
    Simply put, sir, let us re-introduce inspection teams, inhibiting offensive capability. We buy time, maintain our principles here and abroad and demand of ourselves the ingenuity to be the strongest diplomatic muscle on the planet, perhaps in the history of the planet. The answers will come. You are a man of faith, but your saber is rattling the faith of many Americans in you.
    I do understand what a tremendously daunting task it must be to stand in your shoes at this moment. As a father of two young children who will live their lives in the world as it will be affected by critical choices today, I have no choice but to believe that you can ultimately stand as a great president. History has offered you such a destiny. So again, sir, I beg you, help save America before yours is a legacy of shame and horror. Don’t destroy our children’s future. We will support you.
    You must support us, your fellow Americans, and indeed, mankind. Defend us from fundamentalism abroad but don’t turn a blind eye to the fundamentalism of a diminished citizenry through loss of civil liberties, of dangerously heightened presidential autonomy through acts of Congress, and of this country’s mistaken and pervasive belief that its “manifest destiny” is to police the world.
    We know that Americans are frightened and angry. However, sacrificing American soldiers or innocent civilians in an unprecedented preemptive attack on a separate sovereign nation, may well prove itself a most temporary medicine.
    On the other hand, should you mine and have faith in the best of this country to support your leadership in representing a strong, thoughtful, and educated United States, you may well triumph for the long haul.
    Lead us there, Mr. President, and we will stand with you.
    Sincerely,
    Sean Penn
    San Francisco, California

    ——————————————————————————–

    Actor Sean Penn Visits Baghdad
    By The Associated Press

    Sunday, 15 December, 2002

    BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Actor Sean Penn visited a Baghdad children’s hospital Friday, saying he came to Iraq for a better understanding of the crisis with the United States.

    Penn said only that he was “very glad I’m here” when he arrived at the Al-Mansour Children’s Hospital. He refused to talk further with reporters or allow them to join his tour of the hospital, saying he needed privacy with the sick children.

    In a statement issued here and in Washington. D.C., Penn said that “as a father, an actor, a filmmaker and a patriot” his visit to Iraq “is for me a natural extension of my obligation … to find my own voice on matters of conscience.”

    Penn said he was happy that he had a chance “to pursue a deeper understanding of the conflict” and hoped that “all Americans will embrace information available to them outside conventional channel.”

    Penn’s three-day visit to Iraq was organized by the Institute for Public Accuracy, which has offices in Washington and San Francisco.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Sunday, December 15, 2002

    Text of Statement by Sean Penn At News Conference in Baghdad

    The actor and director Sean Penn made the following statement at a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday afternoon:

    “I am a citizen of the United States of America. I believe in the Constitution of the United States, and the American people. Ours is a government designed to function “of”-“by”-and-“for” the people. I am one of those people, and a privileged one.

    I am privileged in particular to raise my children in a country of high standards in health, welfare, and safety. I am also privileged to have lived a life under our Constitution that has allowed me to dream and prosper. In response to these privileges I feel, both as an American and as a human being, the obligation to accept some level of personal accountability for the policies of my government, both those I support and any that I may not. Simply put, if there is a war or continued sanctions against Iraq, the blood of Americans and Iraqis alike will be on our hands.

    My trip here is to personally record the human face of the Iraqi people so that their blood — along with that of American soldiers — would not be invisible on my own hands. I sit with you here today in the hopes that any of us present may contribute in any way to a peaceful resolution to the conflict at hand.

    I thank Norman Solomon and the Institute for Public Accuracy for facilitating my visit.”

    Sean Penn
    December 15, 2002

  15. illa morales

    It turns out that President Bush’s encounters with ordinary Americans have been micromanaged and laboriously controlled for the past five years to weed out the merest whiff of protest. …“rally squads” of zealots are prompted to pounce on anyone…
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/opinion/25sat4.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

  16. illa morales

    With no sign of torture on a prisoner, then it didn’t happen, right? “The absence of physical evidence should not be construed to suggest that torture did not occur, since such acts of violence against persons frequently leave no marks or permanent …
    http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0734,hentoff,77589,2.html

  17. illa morales

    In 2000, when the Bush-Cheney administration was put in office as the result of a Supreme Court decision, we were respected throughout most of the world and also enjoying the fruits of the largest budget surplus of our nation’s history.
    http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/everybodyscolumn/story/147623.html?imw=Y

  18. illa morales

    In the Examiner, I could not help but notice the report which chronicles the release of a new film “on the life and faith of President Bush.” The film is entitled “George W. Bush: FAITH in the White House.”
    http://www.vdare.com/baldwin/070824_president.htm

  19. illa morales

    Will Durst on Bush Adminstration: “Irony Deprived, Depraved, Erectile Dysfunctional…” [VIDEO]
    http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/60552/

  20. illa morales

    Bush and Napoleon Both Believed Their Own Propaganda About a “Greater Middle East”
    http://www.alternet.org/story/60652/

  21. You can read Sean Penn’s letter as well as what Lee Iacocca wrote about W at http://www.say-when.org. Click on the “Read and Watch” tab.

  22. illa morales

    Impeachment groups plan protest against Bush as he plans travel to the West coast
    http://www.connietalk.com/impeachprotest123.html

  23. illa morales

    In almost every measure, the United States is past its zenith. A look at the challenges that are bringing the heyday to a halt. Citizens of the USA need to be aware of what is happening in the world around us.
    http://www.alternet.org/audits/60489/?page=1

  24. illa morales

    It’s time to think about American conduct in the world after Iraq. The policies of the Bush administration have failed, dramatically, and in doing so they have pointed up weaknesses and fallacies in the American approach to foreign affairs
    http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed.us26aug26002635,0,1831467.story

  25. illa morales

    For the Pentagon, getting out Iraq information will now include a 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week Iraq Communications Desk that will pump out data from Baghdad — serving as what could be considered a campaign war room.

    According to a memo circulated Thursday and obtained by The Associated Press, Dorrance Smith, assistant defense secretary for public affairs, is looking for personnel for what he called the high-priority effort to distribute Defense Department information on Iraq.
    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Selling-the-War.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

  26. illa morales

    “We’re one terrorist attack away from a police state,” he said.
    http://www.citypages.com/databank/28/1394/article15776.asp

  27. illa morales

    Here are the facts: The killing fields were real. The genocide against their own people was committed by the Khmer Rouge. The Vietnamese — the Communist Vietnamese — were the people who went in and put a stop to it.
    http://www.alternet.org/audits/60764/




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: