Saturday, October 30, 2004

Picturing 750,000 Lbs of Explosives

Here's a simple visual aid for picturing how much explosive Bush allowed to get away:

http://protest.bmgbiz.net/377tons.html

Here's a printable PDF file. Time to print up some flyers to leave on people's windshields:
http://dfa.bmgbiz.net/377tons.pdf

Click for more...

Bin Laden Thumbs Nose at US

Here's what bin Laden said:
"Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Any nation that does not attack us will not be attacked," bin Laden said in the video.

Here's the Bush response:
"Americans will not be intimidated or influenced by an enemy of our country. ..."


The Frame

Bush isn't scared by Osama. Bush is a protector, he'll keep us safe from Osama.


Luckily the campaign clarified the truth behind the frame far better than I could:
"We want people to think 'terrorism' for the last four days," said a Bush-Cheney campaign official. "And anything that raises the issue in people's minds is good for us."

A senior GOP strategist added, "anything that makes people nervous about their personal safety helps Bush."

He called it "a little gift," saying it helps the President but doesn't guarantee his reelection.


Translation
President Bush wasn't concerned about Osama bin Laden because Bush wanted the American people to be scared. If Bush could manipulate us into being scared, it would help his chances of re-election. So leaving bin Laden free to do whatever he might choose, including potentially killing thousands more Americans, was an important part of Bush's campaign strategy.

Lucky for us, bin Laden chose only to shoot some video, instead attacking us with IEDs made from 760,000 lbs of missing HMX and RDX.

Thank goodness. Now go vote Bush out of office, quickly. We need a President who will catch bin Laden, recapture the stolen explosives, and clean up Bush's Iraq failure. Enough is enough!

Click for more...

Reality-Based World vs Bush

It's been an interesting week for the Bush campaign. First, there was this small problem of missing explosives, then there was Osama bin Laden, free, healthy and thumbing his nose at Bush for all the world to see.

The rhetoric has been hot and heavy.

Osama bin Laden needs his own post, so this one will focus on just the explosives:

Enough explosives to take down every airplane in the world were left unguarded by the Bush administration. These explosives happened to be in a convenient place for those who want to harm us and our troops. So, those people came along and took the explosives. Thank you GW!

What's the right wing response?
"No matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there," Mr. Giuliani said. "Did they search carefully enough or didn't they search carefully enough? We don't know."

The Frame
This frame doesn't just imply it's the troops fault, it says it point blank.

There you go. The terrorists have fresh boatloads of high-explosives to use against us because we have incompetent troops. That's just the kind of support we've all come to expect from this administration.

Now, in the reality-based world, troops follow orders, whatever those orders may be. It's highly unlikely for some wayward troops to sneak off someplace to stand guard over something whose significance they don't know. As a matter of fact, sneaking off to do something other than what you're told has a name: AWOL for "absent without leave," something the President might know something about.

Anyway, when something like leaving a massive munitions dump unguarded happens, it's NOT the troops' fault.
A U.S. military unit that reached a munitions storage installation after the invasion of Iraq had no orders to search or secure the site, where officials say nearly 400 tons of explosives have vanished.

It's the fault of their superiors, for not passing down the orders that such things are supposed to be guarded. Since the low-level commanders involved in the region of Al QaQaa were also not told that they should be looking for and securing such facilities, they are also not to blame. The blame rests squarely at the feet of the head honcho: George Bush, Commander-in-Chief.

If George bush is the leader of this country, he would have been informed about the IAEA report - before we invaded.
The United States Government has been informed of these observations, and clarifications are expected.

As leader, George Bush should have told his chain of command to make sure folks secured or destroyed such facilities when we invaded.

He didn't.

I can think of two possible reasons:

  1. He's not the kind of leader who cares enough to require that his subordinates inform him of significant threats, and thus he was uninformed. This is a sign of incompetence.
  2. He knew about the facilities and didn't give orders to ensure they were secured. This is also a sign of incompetence.


In either case, because of one type of failure or another in Bush's so-called "leadership," the troops never received orders, and thus never followed them. That's not the troops' fault.

It IS Bush's fault.

What would a real leader do now? A real leader would send people to find the missing explosives! A real leader would not spend time trying to shift the blame to his subordinates.

Click for more...

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Why Pigs Fly


Hard to Believe

Click for more...

Monday, October 25, 2004

We're Safer with Saddam Hussein Gone

You've heard it said many times "The world is safer with Saddam Hussein behind bars." Here's an excerpt from a Bush speech:
We are safer -- we are safer and the world is better off because Saddam is sitting in a prison cell. ... And when you put your troops in harm's way, you better have the best -- the best equipment, the best support, and the best possible pay.


Well, today's New York Times has some very bad news. We're in much, much greater danger.

You see, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had been inspecting things in Iraq, for a long time. They had a pretty good handle on exactly what Iraq did and did not have. One of the things Iraq did have were substances known as RDX and HMX. They're some pretty nasty explosives, often used for mining and building demolition, they can also be used as triggers for nuclear weapons. The IAEA had sealed the cache of this material in a facility called Al Qaqaa.

They thought, before we invaded, that it would be good to make sure that the facility was going to be guarded, so bad guys couldn't get to the material, so they warned the administration. From the NYT article:
The International Atomic Energy Agency publicly warned about the danger of these explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told United States officials about the need to keep the explosives secured, European diplomats said in interviews last week. Administration officials say they cannot explain why the explosives were not safeguarded...

These explosives are not WMDs, but they're much more powerful than regular dynamite, relatively easy and safe to transport, and easy to turn into "improvised explosive devices" also called IEDs.

When you hear about one of our troops running over an IED, guess what's in it? That's right - exactly the kind of explosive material Bush failed to secure.
In May, an internal I.A.E.A. memorandum warned that terrorists might be helping "themselves to the greatest explosives bonanza in history."

...

I.A.E.A. experts say they assume that just before the invasion the Iraqis followed their standard practice of moving crucial explosives out of buildings, so they would not be tempting targets. If so, the experts say, the Iraqi must have broken seals from the arms agency on bunker doors and moved most of the HMX to nearby fields, where it would have been lightly camouflaged - and ripe for looting.


The administration's response to the IAEA warnings?

But the Bush administration would not allow the agency back into the country to verify the status of the stockpile. In May 2004, Iraqi officials say in interviews, they warned L. Paul Bremer III, the American head of the occupation authority, that Al Qaqaa had probably been looted. It is unclear if that warning was passed anywhere. Efforts to reach Mr. Bremer by telephone were unsuccessful.

But by the spring of 2004, the Americans were preoccupied with the transfer of authority to Iraq, and the insurgency was gaining strength. "It's not an excuse," said one senior administration official. "But a lot of things went by the boards."


No one knows where this particular stuff went, but it's a good bet that a few ounces here and there are finding their way into the IEDs killing and maiming our soldiers.

So how big a problem is it to have this much explosive in the hands of terrorists? Well, some folks did some calculations. With the amount that's missing from this ONE facility, you could bring down 760,000 passenger jets, or 1,200 skyscrapers, or create 1 car bomb a day for 200 years.

In the excerpt above, Bush said we needed to have the best protection, the best support, and the best pay for our troops. He didn't provide those things, but worse than that, he sent our troops to fight his pet war against a weak, harmless country only to face a new enemy he armed through his own failure. His incompetence has betrayed the men and women who are being maimed by insurgents armed with explosives he couldn't bother to safeguard.

With friends like George, who needs enemies?

Click for more...

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Answer to Bush Wolf Ad

This isn't so much a deconstruction of the Bush campaign's rhetoric, but I have to post it. This is how I'd answer the campaign's "wolf" ad:

[scene] Wolves in a forest, similar to those in the Bush ad.
[voice over] Bush thinks he's making us safer by fighting in Iraq.

Fade

[scene]Cut to laughing hyenas laughing, with more hyenas running into the shot.
[voice over] But the real threat isn't in Iraq. While George Bush plays games in Iraq, Al Qaeda is growing stronger. And they don't plan to fight us "over there," they're coming here, where Bush has left our borders unprotected.
[end scene with hyena looking straight into the camera]

Click for more...

Progressive Women's Blog Ring

Join | List | Prev | Next | Random | Prev 5 | Next 5 | Skip Prev | Skip Next

Powered by RingSurf