you read it here first
now playing: sarah mclachlan, "plenty"
OK, guys...for your reading pleasure, here's my maiden voyage...(this is pre-editing, obviously)
The Emperor’s Invisible Beret
Tom Hampton, Kutztown Patriot
As our forces descended on Baghdad over a year ago, we can all recall with a chuckle the antics of Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, the Iraqi Information Minister. Omnipresent in the news with his ubiquitous beret and his calm, collected manner – and those quotes. Ever the master of the soundbite, he became the trendy quote at the watercooler – what with all his talk of “stomachs roasting in hell” and all.
As he raged against the machine, declaring with authority that there were no American troops in Baghdad even as smoke from the shelling could be seen on camera behind him, we all had a hearty laugh – how could he expect to be taken seriously when every shred of credible evidence exposed him as a liar?
This month, as President George W. Bush addressed the United Nations with regard to the state of affairs in Iraq, it was hard not to recall the grim determination of the Iraqi Information Minister. You could almost picture the beret on Bush’s head as he spoke before the international community – “Freedom is finding a way in Iraq and Afghanistan”, he said. “The Afghan people…are reviving their economy. They’ve adopted a constitution..” He reiterated the long-debunked association that he used to build support for the war, saying that “a terrorists group associated with al Qaeda is now one of the main groups killing the innocent in Iraq today.”
One must assume that President Bush thinks that the member delegates of the United Nations gets their news from FOX.
A reasonable person, when confronted with the statistics from Iraq, would have a difficult time ignoring the facts and signing off on President Bush’s rosy synopsis of the Iraq situation. And it would appear that most of the President’s audience at the UN are reasonable people.
Reaction elsewhere ran the gamut from lukewarm to vindictive: the New York Times editorialized that “Mr. Bush seemed more interested in praising his own policies than in assuming the leadership of an international effort. The speech would have drawn cheers at an adoring Republican National Convention, but it seemed to fall flat in a room full of stony-faced world leaders.” Headlines around the country seemed to concur: the Roanoke, VA Times called him “A President in reality denial”, while the Salt Lake City Tribune wrote that “Bush was unwilling or, for practical political and diplomatic reasons, unable to admit that there is really anything wrong with the situation in Iraq, or even in Afghanistan.” The Chattanoogan went even further, in an editorial entitled “Bush Has No Shame”: “They must have been amazed that he had the gall to speak to them as if they were just a league of powerless states sitting at the foot of America, with Bush sitting on the throne, with complete enforcement power of any resolution he chose to enforce, regardless of what the UN thought about it.”
It probably goes without saying that world opinion hasn’t been any kinder to the President as he laid out his optimistic vision of the future of democracy in two nations that are struggling to keep their fingertips on the ledge above what appears to be the inevitable chaos below. Bush squandered an opportunity to level with the increasingly cynical international community, instead adopting a self-righteous stance that appeared to denigrate them for refusing to jump on the bandwagon in the first place. And, as he has done time and time again, he chose to completely ignore the escalating violence, the increases in casualty figures, the “no-go” zones where coalition troops are unable to operate…glossed over before the United Nations just as they are at home.
In fact, the more President Bush reiterates Iraq’s rosy democratic future, the more visible his Information Minister-esque beret becomes. Again, we have to ask - how could he expect to be taken seriously when every shred of credible evidence exposed him as a liar?
(end)
ok, ok, i know...the Baghdad Bush thing has been played already quite a bit on the internet, but i felt as though the comparison needed to be explored further in the face of the UN speech.
yougoddaproblemwiddat?
OK, guys...for your reading pleasure, here's my maiden voyage...(this is pre-editing, obviously)
The Emperor’s Invisible Beret
Tom Hampton, Kutztown Patriot
As our forces descended on Baghdad over a year ago, we can all recall with a chuckle the antics of Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, the Iraqi Information Minister. Omnipresent in the news with his ubiquitous beret and his calm, collected manner – and those quotes. Ever the master of the soundbite, he became the trendy quote at the watercooler – what with all his talk of “stomachs roasting in hell” and all.
As he raged against the machine, declaring with authority that there were no American troops in Baghdad even as smoke from the shelling could be seen on camera behind him, we all had a hearty laugh – how could he expect to be taken seriously when every shred of credible evidence exposed him as a liar?
This month, as President George W. Bush addressed the United Nations with regard to the state of affairs in Iraq, it was hard not to recall the grim determination of the Iraqi Information Minister. You could almost picture the beret on Bush’s head as he spoke before the international community – “Freedom is finding a way in Iraq and Afghanistan”, he said. “The Afghan people…are reviving their economy. They’ve adopted a constitution..” He reiterated the long-debunked association that he used to build support for the war, saying that “a terrorists group associated with al Qaeda is now one of the main groups killing the innocent in Iraq today.”
One must assume that President Bush thinks that the member delegates of the United Nations gets their news from FOX.
A reasonable person, when confronted with the statistics from Iraq, would have a difficult time ignoring the facts and signing off on President Bush’s rosy synopsis of the Iraq situation. And it would appear that most of the President’s audience at the UN are reasonable people.
Reaction elsewhere ran the gamut from lukewarm to vindictive: the New York Times editorialized that “Mr. Bush seemed more interested in praising his own policies than in assuming the leadership of an international effort. The speech would have drawn cheers at an adoring Republican National Convention, but it seemed to fall flat in a room full of stony-faced world leaders.” Headlines around the country seemed to concur: the Roanoke, VA Times called him “A President in reality denial”, while the Salt Lake City Tribune wrote that “Bush was unwilling or, for practical political and diplomatic reasons, unable to admit that there is really anything wrong with the situation in Iraq, or even in Afghanistan.” The Chattanoogan went even further, in an editorial entitled “Bush Has No Shame”: “They must have been amazed that he had the gall to speak to them as if they were just a league of powerless states sitting at the foot of America, with Bush sitting on the throne, with complete enforcement power of any resolution he chose to enforce, regardless of what the UN thought about it.”
It probably goes without saying that world opinion hasn’t been any kinder to the President as he laid out his optimistic vision of the future of democracy in two nations that are struggling to keep their fingertips on the ledge above what appears to be the inevitable chaos below. Bush squandered an opportunity to level with the increasingly cynical international community, instead adopting a self-righteous stance that appeared to denigrate them for refusing to jump on the bandwagon in the first place. And, as he has done time and time again, he chose to completely ignore the escalating violence, the increases in casualty figures, the “no-go” zones where coalition troops are unable to operate…glossed over before the United Nations just as they are at home.
In fact, the more President Bush reiterates Iraq’s rosy democratic future, the more visible his Information Minister-esque beret becomes. Again, we have to ask - how could he expect to be taken seriously when every shred of credible evidence exposed him as a liar?
(end)
ok, ok, i know...the Baghdad Bush thing has been played already quite a bit on the internet, but i felt as though the comparison needed to be explored further in the face of the UN speech.
yougoddaproblemwiddat?
posted by tom at 14:59
<< Home