Tuesday, August 23

If only I thought he would read it...

Dear mr Bush:
You disgust me. You have lied to me, yet you persist in talking about honesty and integrity. You have conducted yourself (in my humble opinion) like a cheap two bit thief. It is as if you think that you can take from me on Sunday and try to sell me my own goods back on Wednesday. You told me openly that "the war in Iraq had been won". Now you keep saying that we (American tax payers) will be there in Iraq untill we have completed our mission.
Mr president, are you coming or going ?
You told me there was conclusive, factual proof that there were weapons of mass destruction being harbored in Iraq. None were found !
You told me that Saddam Hussein was directly implicated as being a supporter and involved with Osama bin Laden. Neither here nor there, but did not the CIA train Osama bin laden as an ally in the fighting in northern Afgahnastan ? Never mind that was simply a rhetorical question.
Mr president you talk about supporting our troops in this (oh so lucrative) time of war yet.. did you or did you not go "absent without leave" from the military during your time served ? it is rather difficult to read the print underneath the black magic marker on the reports held by the military.
Mr president you often talk about preserving the American way of life and the exercising of patriotism. I freely admit that I am a poorly educated person. However It is my understanding that one of the things that sets America apart from even other democratic nations is our Justice system. A system where a person is guaranteed certain rights. It was my understanding that shy of the relatively minor incidence of a person being held for 24 hours under protective custody, that a person could not be held unless arrested, could not be arrested unless charges were pressed. That if a person was charged, apprehended and taken into custody, that they are granted what I was taught in Junior high school something that was called "due process of law". That meant that they had a right to legal representation and if they could not afford a legal representative that the state would provide one. Once at trial the defendant would be "innocent until proven guilty" (beyond a shadow of a doubt) by a jury of his/her peers. Mr. president is this incorrect, was I taught incorrectly in junior high school or do you suppose that I was "left behind"?
I have asked this question of people around me. I have listened for answers to it in the media, yet none have come anywhere close to satisfying my ponder. I have been told that, for example, the more than 500 people that you have held captive at Guantanamo bay Cuba are very very mean, nasty, ugly people. That they are so nasty in fact that they not only don't deserve to be tried as Americans (by Americans) under American judicial system rights and protocol, but that they are such a threat that they don't even deserve to get treatment garrunteed under the "Geneva convention".
Mr president since you figure I am not so bright, maybe you could explain to me in very simplistic terms why. Why do they not get to be treated in a patriotic American way ? Why do they get held/incarcerated with no "due process of law"? Why do they, if not civil detainees but rather military detainees, not get treated under Geneva convention guidelines ? I have been told that to try them openly/publicly that it would mean a threat to national security. I have a theory Mr. president that is that if instead of torturing them (for over two years now) if we treated them nicely that if indeed they had any information on Osama Bin Laden, that maybe they would slip up, and well you know "loose lips sink ships". It is Possible you know ! I mean hey look the US military, early on in the war in Iraq, had Osama bin Laden cornered. Along with Gads of other really bad bad men, but they were so sneaky that they evaded satellite surveillance, night vision, infrared detection and who knows what other high technologies. Isn't that correct sir?
Well any way let's get back to Guantanamo bay shall we? I am really unclear on what is going on there. Now Isn't Guantanamo in Cuba? Isn't Cuba under the ruthless rule of that other really, really bad guy Fidel Castro? If he is so mean, and we have been penalizing him with embargoes and other political pressures for thirty plus years, isn't that funny that we torture those Iraqi's right in his front yard ? Why do we give him the business? Certainly the US military spreads some of our money around in Cuba contracting for certain odds and ends needed to support the guys that we have there torturing the other really, really bad guys, don't we? Well any way it suddenly occurred to me Mr president that maybe treating certain really bad guys nicely untill they slip up and "spill some beans" as it were, just might work. And since I, we the American people, seem to be to lame to tell the truth too, and since any "supposed" terrorist if he did talk openly, let's say in the case of testifying in a bona fide court of law, could pose a serious threat to National security... hey am I on to something here ? Hey you guys aren't perhaps harboring and treating quite nicely that guy Osama are yah ? that would be brilliant ! I get it now. You let him hang out somewhere cozy, feed him Angus steaks and imported beer and low and behold, one of these days he'll slip up and say something stupid huh? like tell you where some other bigger badder, meaner nastier guys are staying? Man if that is the case.. that is just a brilliant plan, like reverse psychology at it's best.
Any way, I was getting way off on a tangent, let me get back to the simple things. I was asking about things regarding our protecting our American way of life. A way of life exemplified by a remarkable justice system. Could you tell me Mr. president why the Italian government have warrants out for the arrest of thirteen CIA agents who illegally broke into an Italian jail and dragged off some already incarcerated terrorist suspects? Was that something to do with a foreign relations policy? Did you think that the Italians might botch things up and give them a fair trial under due process of law. In which case they may have said things way over there in Italy during their respectable/legal trial, that would lead to an American security threat ?
Mr President, I am sorry and I apologize, because the more questions I ask, the more confused I get. I began this letter quite angry, however know I understand better just how immense and confusing it must be for you trying to juggle all these factors. Well at least your doing some things right. I mean to say you have hired some really smart men. Men like your self that can juggle a lot of seemingly difficult things all at the same time. That was a great choice getting Mr. Dick Cheney to be your vice president. Why I just don't understand how he can do it, you know, be the head of Haliburton corporation (remember them the huge mega corp. that gets huge defence contracts uncontested).
Hey I just found this interesting little thing that I didn't know about, I read this on the internet it was right there at the White house web site. it says there that
"Mr. Cheney also served a crucial role when America needed him most. As Secretary of Defense from March 1989 to January 1993, Mr. Cheney directed two of the largest military campaigns in recent history - Operation "Just Cause" in Panama and Operation Desert Storm in the Middle East. He was responsible for shaping the future of the U.S. military in an age of profound and rapid change as the Cold War ended. For his leadership in the Gulf War, Secretary Cheney was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George Bush on July 3, 1991"
Mr. president right there on the last line it says that Mr. Cheney, as secretary of the defense, "was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George Bush" But you weren't in office then. So Obviously they are talking about your father George Sr. Did he come up with the idea and teach you, that if you hire a guy to be the secretary of defence, and also the head of a huge defence contractor at the same time, that he will know how to save us lots and lots of money because he plays, er ah excuse me I meant to say, sees both sides of the story?
I noticed that just last week you appointed Mr. England to be Secretary of the Navy. Same thing I guess huh? Hire a guy that has virtually no real experience in Navel command. England however, has been the head of a huge defence contractor for years. That makes sense who better then to know where "the money flows"?
Mr. President I could go one and on, but I will leave that for other posts. I am just glad that you are so brilliant and find this private sector mega millionaire business men to run these departments and agencies. The must be saving us the american tax payers loads of money with their powerful business accumen.
Well I have to get going now Mr. President. But I know I will plenty more questions for you. Ever day that I read the news papers you have done something witty and smart, like appointing these frien... er ah, assciates to head up these agencies.
So I will keep you posted Mr. President.
(of my questions as they come along).
ps: this guy you appointed to head up the airforce, he seems really solid as well. I am sorry I called you a liar and compared you to a two bit thief, obviously I was wrong.

The following is a quote from the 1997 movie "Good Will Hunting". I know this it's just a movie, but the sentiment is real, and it most certainly applies to the current political/military quandaries the Bush Administration has imposed. (Pay particular attention to the last 2 sentences):

"Why shouldn't I work for the N.S.A.? That's a tough one, but I'll give it a shot. Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. So I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never had a problem with get killed. Now the politicians are sayin', "Send in the marines to secure the area" 'cause they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number was called, 'cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some guy from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass. And he comes home to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile my buddy from Southie realizes the only reason he was over there was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the skirmish to scare up oil prices so they could turn a quick buck. A cute little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And naturally they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back, and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and play slalom with the icebergs, and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive, so he's got to walk to the job interviews, which sucks 'cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin' 'cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what do I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. Why not just shoot my buddy, take his job and give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected president."
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?