s skippy the bush kangaroo

skippy the bush kangaroo

Sunday, July 20, 2003

the tide is turning

we've always wondered how the "tide" can "turn," seeing as how it only goes back and forth on a single straight line of direction..."in" and out."

wouldn't the tide "reverse," or "go back," or at the very least "turn around," or "do a 180"? ah, the futility of trying to make sense out of the english language!

be that as it may (and it may not for all we know), public opinion, if not the tide, is definately turning, slowly but surely, and not in awol's favor. from the daytona beach news-journal, local parents rethink 'facts' behind war with iraq:

six months ago cathy vann and vida jones sat in a living room and watched president bush make his case for going to war with iraq in his state of the union address.

now, as reports of erroneous information being included in the speech come to light, these mothers of soldiers fighting in the gulf feel like they may have been duped.

"i have changed my opinion," jones said. "i feel the country was mislead to gain support for the war."

from the pharos-tribune (indiana), most callers say president misled nation:

based on what respondents to the pharos-tribune sound off line have either seen, heard or read, most say the president lied to the american people in his state of the union address this year when he emphasized the reasons for invading iraq. some even said bush's speech misled the country so much, he should be impeached.

cbs news is reporting cia workers outraged:

[former cia analyst raymond] mcgovern says many in the intelligence community feel they're taking the heat for the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in iraq and for the uproar over the president's state of the union speech -- despite warnings from intelligence officials to some in the administration that the case against saddam hussein's weapons programs was far from air-tight.

and an interesting note from that cbs report:

this is not the first time the united states has gone to war based on facts that later turned out to be questionable. almost 40 years ago, president johnson pointed to unconfirmed reports of attacks on american ships in the gulf of tonkin to convince the congress to widen the war in vietnam

coincidence? you be the judge.

but mainly, we agree with this editorial from the portsmouth, nh, herald: claim that dissent hurts our troops is disingenuous at best.

their [republican political organizations] underlying message, however, is that questioning the president is somehow unpatriotic because it puts our brave fighting men and women at risk.

we don’t see it that way. the right to question and the right to object are the very rights our troops are fighting for, and if the exercise of those rights troubles our soldiers, they’ve missed the point. democracy, whether on the streets of portsmouth or baghdad, depends on the right to dissent.

amen to that!
posted by skippy at 5:34 PM |


Add a comment