[Winstonm]

The latest facts:

"The invasion of Iraq has cost 655,000 Iraqis their lives. That is the conclusion of a study financed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies and conducted by physicians under the direction of Johns Hopkins University epidemiologists. Violence accounted for 601,000 deaths and disease and destruction of civilian infrastructure accounted for 54,000 deaths. The violent deaths are attributed to gunshot wounds, coalition air strikes, and car bombs.


Johns Hopkins University epidemiologist Gilbert Burnham says, “We’re very confident with the results.” Columbia University epidemiologist Ronald Waldman says the survey method used is “tried and true” and that “this is the best estimate of mortality we have.”
The study is published by the distinguished British medical journal, The Lancet, and is available on the journal’s online site (October 11).

The latest delusion:

When asked about the report, President Bush stated: “I don’t consider it a credible report.”

How is it when credible facts conflict with this administration's self-rightesous and arrogant self-deception of the rightness of their cause, they either ignore it or discredit it. Iraq, according to all published reports, had nothing whatsoever to do with al-Quada - yet the U.S. invaded Iraq as part of its "War of Terror". The war has caused an increase in terrorism recruiting. The Pentagon says Iraq is crumbling into civil war.

What does Bush say" I don't consider it a credible report."

One must after a while begin to wonder at what point political spin, party rhetoric, and patriotic determination slip steadily into the realm of lies to protect agenda, misinformation to increase fear, and self-delusion at the the absolute rightness of actions.

Although a stretch, this comment from Hitler bears an eerie resemblance to the words and actions of Bush:

Hitler told the Reichstag on February 20, 1938: “(1) A man who feels it his duty at such an hour to assume the leadership of his people is not responsible to the laws of parliamentary usage or to a particular democratic conception, but solely to the mission placed upon him. (2) And anyone who interferes with this mission is an enemy of the people.”

(1) Though the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) generally forbids wiretapping without warrants, the White House has contended that Bush is not bound by the limitations of that law. Rather than veto laws passed by Congress, Bush is using his signing statements to effectively nullify them as they relate to the executive branch. (2) "You are either with us or with the terrorists."

I do not claim that the U.S. is in the grips of another Hitler; however, the parralels of thinking, reasoning, and justifications makes one wonder how far into self-deception this administration will allow itself to fall before it asks, "Could we be wrong?".

[Al_U_Card]

Until they are stopped.

I have observed the American political scene since Kennedy. Only Milhous was as arrogant as the Bush administration. Delusional is insufficient. Psychotic is more like it. Why they continue to allow the militarists to decimate the decency of their society is beyond me. They are the real terrorists.

[Winstonm]

Al_U_Card, on Oct 17 2006, 10:48 AM, said:

Until they are stopped.

I have observed the American political scene since Kennedy.  Only Milhous was as arrogant as the Bush administration.  Delusional is insufficient.  Psychotic is more like it.  Why they continue to allow the militarists to decimate the decency of their society is beyond me.  They are the real terrorists.

As I see it, we Americans have a basic trust in the inherent "goodness" of our self view - we consider ourselves to be "good people" at heart. We therefore transfer these "good intentions" feelings onto others without consideration of the consequences.

Points: We quietly accepted the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security - because we wish to believe that these things were done as "good intentioned" acts. Even if flawed, no one is willing to believe that a U.S. executive branch would use these powers against the population. The same holds true for the "Detainee bill", creating military tribunals and "enemy combatants". Surely these, too, are good-intentioned but flawed laws.

However, I challenge this thinking as I remember the Gulf of Tonkin, lived through Watergate, and nearly choked daily on the pronouncements that "Peace is at hand" in Vietnam.

We are too far removed from the political strife that created the nation to begin with, and so do not have the fearful respect of power that motivated the framers of our constitution.

Bush has just signed into law (the detainee bill, purportedly to be signed today) that would allow him to organize a hand-picked tribunal who would rubber stamp his claims and allow him to put anyone he feels to be an enemy (political or otherwise) into purgatory - jailed with no charges filed - no charges filed, no habeus coprus. We, as Americans, do not accept that could ever happen - the press would find out, etc. But who of us old enough would have ever recognized the name of Daniel Ellsberg if he had simply disappeared?

I think it wise if we keep in mind the words of this great German patriot:

Quote

But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a parliament or a communist dictatorship ... That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

- Nazi Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering