Is Bushit full of Crap

Billion Dollar Cheney

BUSH WHACKED

AmeriKKKa's Torture School

Is George W Bushit full of Crap?

The Big Dick

BUSHIT &Co, Do Unto Others

24% of AmeriKKKa support Bushit

76% of American People have awaken to the truth of bushit's evil empire.

Sorry Everybody


Talk about gas, this administration is full of it.

In fact, it's all about oil and gas, always has been.
Bush and Cheney are covered in the sludge from oil with dollars from oil profiteering and oil company money wrapped around them.
Bush appointed himself head of the investigation into his Katrina failure. Now, he's going to probe as to why we have high gas prices. He was also going to find out who was responsible for the PlameGate leaking.
We could go on and on.
But all roads lead back to Bush -- and Cheney.
What a couple of con artists.

MUST READ: American Dream - American Disillusion

Is our democracy sleepwalking into a nightmare?

By Gene Lyons

We hear a lot about “madmen” taking power in far-off lands, most often lands with large oil reserves.

A few pertinent questions: Has the White House lost its collective mind ? Do the president and his minions believe that Americans can be stampeded into another needless war to save his party from the consequences of the catastrophe in Iraq ? Is the Bush administration seriously thinking of bombing Iran for political purposes ? Of a nuclear strike ? Is it actually possible, as has been said, that George W. Bush believes himself to be on a divine, messianic mission ? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then our democracy may be sleepwalking into its worst crisis since the Civil War. A pre-emptive strike on Iran, because it might hypothetically develop nuclear weapons five or 10 years hence, would be a naked act of aggression. Not to mention an offense against the U. S. Constitution. On what authority would Bush make war on a nation that played no role in 9 / 11, bears enmity toward al-Qa’ida and has never seriously threatened to attack the United States ? His own God’s ?

So far, Iran hasn’t even violated the non-proliferation treaty giving signatories the right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful use. It boasts of purifying a small amount of uranium ore to the standard needed to generate electricity. Experts say Iran would need roughly 100 times its present refining capacity over several years to accumulate enough weapons-grade uranium to make a bomb. Despite the absurd and offensive posturing of its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a demagogic politician playing to his own base, no immediate danger exists.

Yet many of the same keyboard commandoes who orchestrated the propaganda campaign that drove the U. S. into Iraq are beating war drums. Scary “intelligence” claims again proliferate. The same geniuses who claimed to know the precise location of Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction now warn us of Iran’s double-secret arms programs. Full-page ads have appeared in newspapers in the U. S. and Europe conjuring the prospect of Iranian nuclear attacks against Israel and the West, an entirely imaginary scenario.

The other day Bush, sounding like a Valley Girl, told a California audience he’d tried to avoid war with Iraq “diplomatically to the max,” a falsehood so brazen that it’s almost tempting to fear he believes it. Given that British government documents portray Bush discussing with Prime Minister Tony Blair how to justify an attack against Saddam Hussein in early 2003, it’s reasonable to wonder what schemes he’s conjuring now. He also credited “the Almighty” as the inspiration for his foreign policy.

At times like these, it’s worthwhile recalling George Orwell’s distinction between patriotism and nationalism. Orwell wrote the essay “Notes on Nationalism” in 1945, just as the most cataclysmic war in human history was ending in Europe.

“By patriotism,” he wrote, “I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world, but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally.”

Nationalism, as Orwell defined it, “is inseparable from the desire for power.... A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige.... His thoughts always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations.” To Orwell, it was “power hunger tempered by self-deception,” a kind of moral insanity.

Presaging his masterpiece “1984,” Orwell was most alarmed by the fervid nationalist’s indifference to reality: “Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage—torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians—which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side.”

An interesting list under present circumstances, don’t you think ?

More recently, the eminent Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld has cautioned that hysterical warnings about this or that country—Russia, China, Pakistan, India—developing nuclear weapons have occurred regularly since Hiroshima.

Yet the taboo against their actual use has held, partly because rational actors know that even the “tactical” weapons which Bush administration toughs fantasize about are upward of 10 times more powerful than the A-bombs dropped on Japan. Also because, van Creveld makes clear, deterrence works. Israel, he writes, “can quickly turn Tehran into a radioactive desert—a fact of which Iranians are fully aware.”

To violate that taboo would justifiably turn the U. S. into a pariah state.

It would all but guarantee eventual retaliation in kind. Even a conventional bombing campaign against Iran would, at minimum, send world oil prices skyrocketing, with disastrous economic consequences.

Real patriots must prevent this madness from happening.
The generals are speaking out.
Where are the Democrats and the sane Republicans ?

—–––––•–––––—
Posted on Wednesday, April 26, 2006
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/152892/
Free-lance columnist Gene Lyons is a Little Rock author and recipient of the National Magazine Award.

$$$$$$ OIL $$$$$$

President Richard Nixon removed U.S. currency from the gold standard in 1971. Since then, the world's supply of oil has been traded in U.S. fiat dollars, making the dollar the dominant world reserve currency. Countries must provide the United States with goods and services for dollars — which the United States can freely print. To purchase energy and pay off any IMF debts, countries must hold vast dollar reserves. The world is attached to a currency that one country can produce at will. This means that — in addition to controlling world trade – the United States is importing substantial quantities of goods and services for very low relative costs.

The Euro has begun to emerge as a serious threat to dollar hegemony and U.S. economic dominance. The dollar may prevail throughout the Western Hemisphere, but the Euro and dollar are clashing in the former Soviet Union, Central Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Middle East.

In November 2000, Iraq became the first OPEC nation to begin selling its oil for Euros. Since then, the value of the Euro has increased 17%, and the dollar has begun to decline. One important reason for the invasion and installation of a U.S. dominated government in Iraq was to force the country back to the dollar. Another reason for the invasion is to dissuade further OPEC momentum toward the Euro, especially from Iran- the second largest OPEC producer, who was actively discussing a switch to Euros for its oil exports.

It is estimated that the dollar is currently overvalued by at least 40%, burdening the United States with a huge trade deficit. Conversely, the euro-zone does not run huge deficits, uses higher interest rates, and has an increasingly larger share of world trade. As the euro establishes its durability and comes into wider use, the dollar will no longer be the world’s only option. At that point, it would be easier for other nations to exercise financial leverage against the United States without damaging themselves or the global financial system as a whole.

Faced with waning international economic power, military superiority is the United States’ only tool for world domination. Although, the expense of this military control is unsustainable, says William Clark, "one of the dirty little secrets of today's international order is that the rest of the globe could topple the United States from its hegemonic status whenever they so choose with a concerted abandonment of the dollar standard. This is America's preeminent, inescapable Achilles Heel." If American power is ever perceived globally as a greater liability than the dangers of toppling the international order, the U.S. systems of control can be eliminated and collapsed. When acting against world opinion – as in Iraq – an international consensus could brand the United States as a “rogue nation.”

BILLION DOLLAR CHENEY.COM

.