Scott Spills the Scam

Scott McClellan, former White House Press Secretary, has accused the Bush Administration of "being mired in propaganda and political spin, and at times playing loose with the truth". He cites National Security advisers confusing propaganda with candor, and how he was deceived into passing along a falsehood which he didn't realize until reporters dug up the truth. How he lied about the leak of Valerie Plame's name to the media because the Bush Administration was twisting facts to justify the War in Iraq which, Valerie's husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson went public with. All these proved fatal to his ability to serve the President well, wrote McClelland in a 341 page book to be released on Monday.

The White House reacted in typical fashion. White House Spokeswoman Dana Perino says "We're puzzled. This is not the Scott we knew", as if to imply that Scott is being pressured to lie. Frances Townsend adds that the revelation is "self-serving, disingenuous, and unprofessional". Former White House Adviser Karl Rove gave his standard reply as something that sounds more like it "was written by a left wing blogger than a former colleague". None of these statements confirm or deny McClellan's accusations in the book. The reactions complete a pattern of: (a) expressing surprise, (b) moral indignation to cast aspersions on intent, (c) and labeling to dismiss any serious discussion or debate on the subject.

Scott's revelations doesn't come as a surprise. These were mentioned by people a few years back when it seemed unpatriotic to do so, that was how the propaganda went. Former White House Counterterrorism Chief Richard Clarke said the same things, that it was a disastrous war and was sold with deception; and they said to him the same things they are saying to McClellan now.

In a related development, three network anchors agreed that the Bush Administration put extraordinary pressure on the media during the run up to the Iraq war. Brian Williams (NBC), Katie Couric (CBS), and Charles Gibson (ABC). Williams cites media's inability to verify the administration's allegations independently and that they didn't have proximity with the weapons inspectors. As it turns out, allegations of weapons of mass destruction were fantasies of the Bush Government. He mentioned that reports on the war were asked to hew to the administration's scripted line which were relayed by the White House and the Pentagon to news organizations. Couric added that threats of being blocked access to information were also issued if they didn't comply.

As far as the information provided by Scott is concerned, most, if not all, of what he said have already been accepted and absorbed by those who oppose the war. It is only those who are fanatical about the party who continue to be in denial, and force themselves to consume the excrement being dished out by the Bush Administration. But this is beyond Bush. This will only hurt John McCain whose vow to continue with the war is weakened by the fact that it was based on a lie. Will McCain continue to spend money and risk lives for a lie? His political asset is now a liability.

As for Scott McClellan, the only reason he has made this expose is obvious, there is a market for it. And his timing is perfect too especially if he looks to get even with the Republicans. As far as swallowing the line that he was deceived, only fools would believe that. Unless he was too dumb to see the evidence of the truth since 2003, which is why he only resigned in 2006. And old sea adage says it all. "You know that the vessel is sinking when the rats start jumping ship". Scott McClellan is no hero, he's just one of the rats.

Harrrrrwwwwk...Twooooooph...Ting!

Unperturbed, Unsurprising, Unpopularity

George W. Bush can be credited with the highest rating among US Presidents - in disapproval. In the latest CNN Opinion Research poll, 71% of Americans disapprove of how he is performing his job as President, making him the most unpopular President in modern American history; more unpopular than the unlamented Richard Nixon who escalated and lost the Vietnam War and was on the verge of being removed as President before he voluntarily resigned.

Pessimism about the war in Iraq has grown, and support for this adventure has fallen to 39%; while those opposed to the war has risen to 68%. When the success of the "surge" was announced in January, almost 50% of Americans believed that the situation was going well for America, now it is merely regarded as an added statistic in the Bush Administration's penchant for false hopes, if not outright lies.

Five years after proclaiming that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended", amidst a large banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished" aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, American soldiers continue to lose their lives in the war with the cost running up to more than half a trillion dollars. Some argue that the mission supposed to have been accomplished was the "shock and awe" method of invading Iraq. Certainly American weaponry and technology can provide accurate and mesmerizing destructive force as well as killing and maiming capability that would shock civilization to revulsion, but it is only a piece of the larger objective - to destroy weapons of mass destruction.

The weapons of mass destruction in Iraq do not exist, as suggested by UN inspectors and declared by Saddam Hussein. The main objective therefore is pointless, and all other sub-missions that make up this miserable misadventure are senseless. And all the lies that were woven out of this misery are breaking out at the seams. There are so many that it ceases to "shock and awe" even the Republicans. If Nixon was forced into a retreat, at least he had the sense to do so. If he was pressured to resign, he recognized the need to preserve the institutions and the systems of government. But Bush, with all his lies, bumbling statements and dopey facial expression is beyond embarrassing. It is painfully humiliating. His unpopularity does not elicit surprise, it evokes a desire to erase this memory from any form of collective or individual recollection.

American superiority in war and weaponry is built along conventional warfare, but they are no match for guerilla or urban warfare. They avoid casualties while the enemy is willing to die.That difference will make the war endless, and that's exactly what John McCain proposes, up to 100 years. For a man with questionable citizenship, he is willing to commit America and its resources for a war with no objective - save perhaps the profit motives of Halliburton and allied partners who are friends of George Bush.

Haaarrrwwwwk...Twooooooph...Ting!

Bye Bye to the Beleagured Boar

In about 22 hours, we will be saying goodbye to the Year of the Boar. Like other years, there were events that were positive as well as events that remained a bitter memory; the effects of which were felt in specific regions of the world. This particular year of the Boar however, has left major unresolved issues that would impact on the entire planet and its growing population.

Foremost among this is the unresolved issue of reductions in toxic emissions that closed the year with only an agreement to hold more talks. The United States refuses to commit to specific target reductions as well as to provide the technology for the developing nations to reduce their respective CO2 emissions. The State of California was denied by the US Environmental Protection Agency of its request for a waiver, normally an automatic grant, for the state to set its own standards of toxic emissions for cars and trucks. The State's standards are even greater than those set in Bali, since California's air quality is at dangerous levels. The EPA cited a national strategy of reductions rather than a patchwork of standards set by individual states as a better alternative. California will sue the government for its refusal.

The other unresolved issue is the War in Iraq, a war with no end in sight and no clear victory to claim. Soldiers fighting in that country are increasingly anxious about home. Some were even mandated to extend their tour of duty. This puts the future of these young men in harms way physically and mentally, as in Vietnam. George Bernard Shaw once said "We learn from history that men never learn from history".

The continuous rise in the price of oil, affecting all nations, remains a hurdle for many economies that find difficulty in coping with its inflationary impact and reduces its capability to support social programs. The price increases, logically, should spur development of alternatives; but this is too slow in coming as it gets inadequate support.

Poverty, disease, and hunger that stalk the regions in Asia, Africa, even parts of Europe and the Americas remain unresolved. Eight (8) years into the new Millennium and the world still fails to provide adequate food for its population. Science and technology offer genetically modified substitutes from bio-engineered products, but its safety and fitness for human consumption remains questionable amidst contradicting claims.

The death of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan has placed that region in chaos, impacting on America's war on terror. The tattered foreign policy of the US here would affect its operations in Afghanistan as well. America could find itself fighting in 3 fronts, including Pakistan.

Security of all nations against terrorism cannot be contained since the acquisition of fake documents, or, authentic documents with different names and faces, is still beyond control. Terrorism is an effect, the cause is oppression and inequality. Religious beliefs are merely the medium by which the act of terrorism is carried out. A way of life cannot be destroyed by terrorism, neither can obliteration of the terrorists prevent the rise of new warriors. A global system of equitable distribution of the world's wealth and the right of people to live free and exercise their choice of religion, without suppressing individual choices of faith, is a means of ending terrorism. My only question is why is it called War on Terror? Just like War on Corruption, War on Drugs, War Against Illegals, or War on Environmental Destruction, why is it that nations are so enamored with war. Its good if those that make these declarations are the actual people who go to battle, but its always the young men that get maimed, killed or go nuts that fight. Is it because the economy is dependent on war. The classic military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower asked America to guard against decades ago, has it grown more pervasively? Don't they realize that the words of Benjamin Franklin "There never was a good war, or a bad peace", ring true to this day?

Its good that the Boar goes tonight. If he remains a minute longer, I'm going to roast that fat pig and serve the resulting dish among neighbors and friends for New Year. That will definitely resolve a major issue.

Haaarrrrrwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!