A House United, So It Seems
The one political claim to fame we have in Australia is a sycophantic Prime Minister who enjoys strutting the world stage. He has had a make-over on his eyebrows and his teeth but his hubris has remained intact. He is George's "best friend," but standing all alone as the same cannot be stated for the remainder of the population who currently list at 70% against any war in Iraq. That means that the people do not agree with the Bush cabal of militarists, criminals, fascists and fellow-travellers.
There are a lot of them, I'm afraid, some of whom could be classified as Democrats, silent and compliant.
The picture on the news broadcasts yesterday showed Democratic Party leaders being lectured by Bush in his inimitable style when there is no prepared speech from which to quote. The same old words, we have heard them all before, ad nauseum, and so have the Democratic leaders.
Don't think because we are a long way away from Washington that sideshows like yesterday do not make us feel totally helpless. One relies on an opposition party to question deeply the requests from the government of the day and to independently develop a stance. I can't help feeling that the circus in the White House was designed to humiliate the Democrats once again by making them feel that if they do not agree with the directions Bush has chosen, then "you are against us", unpatriotic and un-American. It just seemed like such a compliant little group, afraid to offer any opinion that would run contrary to the US administration.
Tell me I'm wrong. I want to be wrong.
How can it be that with some of the mainstream press now awakening from a long and extended slumber and reporting some of the frightening facts that are happening daily in the US, the people are still completely in awe of the current incumbent and his team of fascists. It seems to me in Australia, a long way away, but well read in news and politics, thanks to the "alternative press," there should be a case for arresting many of the current heirarchy for things they have said and have done over the years. Names such as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Ashcroft, Perle, Reich, Abrams, Kissinger, Poindexter and many others whose claim to fame has been engaging in illegal, machiavellian acts and acts against the long-term interests of the US. It's all there, published and re-stated time and again, for all to see. But people see this as acceptable. Until the great majority of US citizens see the administration's actions as against the overall interests of the country, bad government will continue to survive and flourish.
In Australia we have been through the humiliating sight of a Defence Minister going gung-ho at every possibility; a Foreign Affairs Minister who found that it was of some value perhaps to his future career to become macho and beat the war drum and a Prime Minister who, when asked to jump by George, asks, "How high mate?"
We also have an Attorney-General who has heard about Guatanamo Bay but doesn't want to think about it even though we have an Australian citizen languishing there without any legal rights.
You can see how this daily dose of chest-thumping was influencing the populace, normally peaceful, sports-loving people, little interested in the daily machinations resulting from the media's liberal doses of Bushtalk. Then, the opposition got a policy on our involvement in Iraq ( pre-emptive strike out ), and all of a sudden there was an alternative to the lap-dog approach of our current government. People started to question what the hell was happening.
Then a respected organisation carried out a survey and found that 70% of Australians were against any pre-emptive strike on Iraq. The macho images disappeared and we found to our amazement, that we were making statements that showed some degree of independence from the muddled thinking of Bush. Sadly, on cue, Bush commenced his campaign to frighten the UN, with some success. The next day, out come the mimicry that follows when Bush appears to be on a roll again. The whole performance is like bad theatre with the whole world helpless in the audience.
Historically, Australia has had more than our share of investigative journalists. But all of our overseas journalists must be aware of the real news. It's out there on the streets, everywhere. How then does one view the recent speech by Cheney, knowing all we do about that man and his past, and, at the conclusion of the spin, not question any aspect of the speech , the lies, the twisted facts and it's long term benefits to him and his associates. How does a man like Cheney maintain any credibility. Are we in awe of his position? Does that make us unable to identify what the man has done and his obvious war-like intentions? How can anyone believe a man like that? Where is the investigative press?
Finally, I am now firmly convinced that there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq; that the war motivations are for empire, power and oil. I am also convinced that if the US attacks Iraq, the world will be told that they have discovered an absolute arsenal of chemical and nuclear weapons and that the attack was just in time. I am also convinced that the majority of US citizens will increase the Republican members in November. Why? Because no one is speaking out against the happenings in the White House. No one appears to have questioned the large build up of armaments and troops even since the UN statement on inspections. Where is the opposition to these activities?
Where are the Democrats?
Rex Williams is a business consultant with considerable experience in the aircraft and IT
industries, and in management and marketing. He can be contacted at: firstname.lastname@example.org