Bush's Way or the Highway
By Robert Parry
Consortium News Monday 18 September 2006
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091806R.shtml
George W. Bush's Sept. 15 outburst - threatening to stop
interrogating terror suspects if Congress doesn't let him
revise the Geneva Conventions to permit coercive techniques
- is part of a pattern of petulance that dates back to even
before the 9/11 attacks but has resurfaced as Bush faces new
challenges to his authority.
In summer 2001, less than six months into his presidency
while confronting congressional obstacles to his domestic
program, Bush told followers that he was ready to "go back
to Crawford" if he didn't get his way on legislation.
That threat came after Sen. Jim Jeffords, a Vermont
Republican, joined with the Democrats to give them narrow
control of the Senate in mid-2001. Bush also was facing
defeat on a patients' bill of rights.
In a meeting with congressional allies, "Bush appeared to
draw a line in the sand when he indicated he always could
return to Crawford, Texas, if the liberal health juggernaut
grinds him down," wrote right-wing columnist Robert D.
Novak. [Washington Post, July 5, 2001]
Besides the patients' bill of rights, Bush found himself
battling congressional momentum in favor of new
campaign-finance restrictions.
In the context of Bush fighting those two popular bills, Los
Angeles Times political writer Ronald Brownstein also picked
up word of Bush issuing a "back to Crawford" threat, this
one recounted by a GOP lobbyist close to the administration.
Bush "continues to send a signal that, 'I'm going to do what
I want to do, and if nobody likes it, I'm going to go back
to Crawford'," Brownstein wrote, quoting the lobbyist. [Los
Angeles Times, July 5, 2001]
Back then, Republicans framed Bush's "back to Crawford"
threats as a sign of his principled leadership as well as a
new self-confidence in asserting his authority.
"Gone is the tentativeness of 20 months ago, of the lost man
of the early Republican debates," wrote Ronald Reagan's
speechwriter Peggy Noonan in an article for the Wall Street
Journal's editorial page. "In its place seems an even-keeled
confidence, even a robust faith in his own perceptions and
judgments." [WSJ, June 25, 2001]
However, Bush's critics saw something else: a troubling
self-centeredness more benefiting an autocrat than a leader
of a democratic Republic. To them, Bush was a callow,
ill-prepared politician who seemed oblivious to the fact
that he had risen to his exalted status because of family
connections and tough political tactics, not through hard
work and talent.
The critics noted that Bush's sense of entitlement sometimes
would spill out in his humor, when he'd put down people in
his presence or he'd joked about his preference for
autocracy. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," he quipped on
Dec. 18, 2000.
Though Bush never did quit his job, he did seek comfort back
at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he retreated for a
month-long vacation in August 2001.
The course of Bush's presidency changed dramatically on
Sept. 11, 2001, however, when al-Qaeda terrorists attacked
targets in New York and Washington. The 9/11 attacks gave
Bush a new mantle as "war president" and he exploited that
opening to assert "plenary" - or unlimited - powers as
Commander in Chief.
With Republicans reclaiming the Senate in 2002 - and the
federal courts initially giving Bush wide latitude - Bush
got pretty much whatever he wanted and his petulance was
subsumed by his new presidential swagger.
Mystical Leader
Now, five years later, Bush's supporters see an almost
mystical leader who exudes manly powers and possesses a
farsighted vision for saving the world. In one of those
paeans to Bush, conservative New York Times wrote on Sept.
14, 2006:
"A leader's first job is to project authority, and George
Bush certainly does that. In a 90-minute interview with a
few columnists in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Bush swallowed
up the room, crouching forward to energetically make a point
or spreading his arms wide to illustrate the scope of his
ideas - always projecting confidence and intensity.
"He opened the session by declaring, 'Let me just first tell
you that I've never been more convinced that the decisions I
made are the right decisions,' and he grew more self-assured
from there. I interview politicians for a living, and every
time I brush against Bush I'm reminded that this guy is
different. There's none of that hunger for approval that is
common in the breed. This is the most inner-directed man on
the globe.
"The other striking feature of his conversation is that he
possesses an unusual perception of time. Washington, and
modern life in general, encourages people to think in the
short term. But Bush, who stands aloof, thinks in long
durations."
Brooks's example of Bush's visionary quality was the
President's assertion that he had gotten into politics
because of his "campaign against the instant gratifications
of the 1960s counterculture," which somehow helped qualify
him "to think about the war on terror as a generations-long
struggle."
Brooks made no mention of Bush's own extensive dabbling in
"instant gratifications" from his playboy life-style that
included evading military service in Vietnam, heavy drinking
(at least until his 40th birthday), and illicit drug use
(which he implicitly acknowledged during Campaign 2000).
Like other Bush enthusiasts, Brooks also failed to consider
the dangers from an autocratic leader who is both
"inner-directed" and possesses a messianic view of the
world. "Inner-directed" could be defined as impervious to
outside criticism, advice or even reality. Many of the
history's most dangerous dictators also were
"inner-directed."
But the only criticism of Bush that Brooks could muster was
that Bush didn't act aggressively enough in implementing his
visionary programs.
"The sad truth is, there has been a gap between Bush's
visions and the means his administration has devoted to
realize them. And when tactics do not adjust to fit the
strategy, then the strategy gets diminished to fit the
tactics," Brooks wrote. [NYT, Sept. 14, 2006]
But another way of looking at Bush's presidency is that he
and his neoconservative advisers have operated in an
ideological reality of their own making, that they have too
little respect for the opinions of others, that they are
hubristic and anti-democratic.
Return to Petulance
Now, with a slim majority of the US Supreme Court rejecting
Bush's claims of unlimited power and with several senior
Republicans resisting Bush's demands that he be allowed to
redefine the Geneva Conventions, Bush's petulance is
returning.
At the Sept. 15 news conference, Bush suggested that
senators - such as John Warner and John McCain - were
endangering US security by opposing his legislation to
rewrite Geneva's Common Article III to allow harsh
interrogation of detainees.
"We must also provide our military and intelligence
professionals with the tools they need to protect our
country from another attack," Bush said. "And the reason
they need those tools is because the enemy wants to attack
us again."
Bush did not spell out his desired interrogation techniques,
since he insists that his administration does not condone
torture. But the known practices include simulating drowning
by "waterboarding," keeping prisoners naked in excessive
heat and cold, sleep deprivation, and forcing them into
painful "stress positions" for extended periods of time.
Bush's former Secretary of State Colin Powell joined in
opposing Bush's legislation, warning that "the world is
beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against
terrorism." Powell, a retired general, also cautioned that
allowing abusive interrogations of prisoners of war would
open captured US soldiers to similar abuse
Asked about Powell's comments on Sept. 15, the petulant Bush
reappeared.
"If there's any comparison between the compassion and
decency of the American people and the terrorist tactics of
extremists, it's flawed logic," Bush snapped. "I simply
can't accept that. It's unacceptable to think that there's
any kind of comparison between the behavior of the United
States of America and the action of Islamic extremists who
kill innocent women and children to achieve an objective."
Though the Washington press corps sat mute before Bush's
assertions, there was cause to challenge Bush on his
hypocrisy. The Bush administration is responsible for
slaughtering thousands of women and children in Afghanistan
and Iraq "to achieve an objective."
For instance, early in the Iraq War, Bush authorized the
bombing of a residential Baghdad restaurant because of
faulty intelligence that Saddam Hussein might be having
dinner there. The attack killed 14 civilians, including
seven children. One mother collapsed when her decapitated
daughter was pulled from the rubble.
Hundreds of other civilian deaths were equally horrific.
Saad Abbas, 34, was wounded in an American bombing raid, but
his family sought to shield him from the greater horror. The
bombing had killed his three daughters - Marwa, 11; Tabarek,
8; and Safia, 5 - who had been the center of his life.
"It wasn't just ordinary love," his wife said. "He was crazy
about them. It wasn't like other fathers." [NYT, April 14,
2003]
The horror of the war was captured, too, in the fate of
12-year-old Ali Ismaeel Abbas, who lost his two arms when a
US missile struck his Baghdad home. Ali's father, his
pregnant mother and his siblings were all killed. As he was
evacuated to a Kuwaiti hospital, becoming a symbol of US
compassion for injured Iraqi civilians, Ali said he would
rather die than live without his hands.
For its part, the Bush administration has refused to tally
the Iraqi civilians killed in the war, a number now
estimated in the tens of thousands.
New Threats
At the Sept. 15 news conference, Bush also threatened to
stop all interrogation of terrorism suspects if his demands
on the Geneva Conventions weren't met.
"We can debate this issue all we want, but the practical
matter is, if our professionals don't have clear standards
in the law, the program is not going to go forward," Bush
said. "The bottom line is - and the American people have got
to understand this - that this program won't go forward; if
there is vague standards applied, like those in Common
Article III from the Geneva Convention, it's just not going
to go forward."
Common Article III doesn't prohibit interrogating prisoners,
but it does bar coercive tactics to elicit information. POWs
are required to supply only their name, rank and serial
number or comparable information.
The United States played a prominent role in establishing
these standards, along with other rules of war. In addition,
the US Constitution bars cruel and unusual punishment and US
law prohibits torture and other degrading treatment of
detainees, though Bush has stipulated that he does not feel
legally bound by those constraints.
Bush has argued that the "war on terror" is a new kind of
war, justifying these extraordinary tactics. But military
historians say the conflict is actually similar to many
irregular wars fought over the centuries, including the
anti-colonial wars in the 1950s and 1960s and Latin American
"dirty wars" against leftist "terrorists" in the 1970s and
1980s.
In those conflicts, too, government security forces resorted
to extensive use of torture, "disappearances" and detentions
without trial.
The "inner-directed" Bush now is charting a similar future
for the United States - and getting increasingly petulant
with those Americans who won't follow him.
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the
1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest
book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty From
Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com.
It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost
History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'
==================
Judge Rejects Mercy Plea in Sentencing Ex-Enron Exec
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091806S.shtml
A US federal judge rejected a plea for mercy from
prosecutors and sentenced a former Enron executive who
testified against Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling to 30 months in
prison.
Continuing Iraq Violence Kills More Than 40
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091806T.shtml
Bombers and gunmen killed more than 40 people and injured
dozens across Iraq as the government prepared to further
tighten security ahead of the holy month of Ramadan, when
violence traditionally spikes in the country.
Warming Expert: Only Decade Left to Act in Time
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806EA.shtml
Leading US climate researcher says the world has a 10-year
window of opportunity to take decisive action on global
warming and avert catastrophe.
World Bank Says Illegal Logging Costing Nations Billions
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806EB.shtml
Illegal logging is threatening the livelihoods of millions
of the world's poor, robbing governments of billions of
dollars in revenue and undermining legitimate logging
businesses, the World Bank said.
Rachel Gotbaum and Bruce Gellerman | 9/11 and Katrina Five
Years Later
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806HA.shtml
Rachel Gotbaum and Bruce Gellerman of NPR's "Living on
Earth" interview guests Dr. Phillip Landrigan, Dr. Gina
Solomon and Dale Kemery about the health costs and the
consequences of 9/11 and Katrina.
Jerry Avorn | The Sting of Ignorance
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806HB.shtml
Jerry Avorn, a professor at Harvard Medical School, writes
about the information gap in health care, and the most
useful medicines he knows: "aspirin, acetaminophen (Tylenol)
and the Internet."
Illegal Immigrants Frequently Denied Compensation
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806LA.shtml
Thousands of illegal workers are hurt on the job every year
in America, but don't get the compensation that's promised
by law in every state. As a result, injured workers often go
without medical care or go to emergency rooms for treatment
- and taxpayers get stuck with the bills.... "It's a toxic
cocktail," said insurance analyst Rousmaniere. "You have
employers who have great incentive to cheat workers, and you
have large numbers of illegal workers who will accept lower
labor standards. It's causing our safety standards to erode
- and that hurts legal workers, too."
Feminist Movements Hold Key to Democracy in Iran
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806WA.shtml
Iranian human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, winner of the
Nobel Peace Prize in 2003, says, "Instead of bringing
democracy with cluster bombs, we should support women
fighting for democracy."
Moms Mean Business
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/091806WB.shtml
Inspired by the dot-com boom, a growing number of women are
dreaming up new ventures while the kids are napping.
VIDEO | Princeton Scientists Create Vote-Stealing Program
for Diebold AccuVote-TS
http://www.truthout.org/multimedia.htm
A paper (and accompanying video) published by a group of
Princeton computer scientists said that they created
demonstration vote-stealing software that can be installed
within a minute on a common electronic voting machine. The
software can fraudulently change vote counts without being
detected.
VIDEO | Keith Olbermann: This Hole in the Ground
http://www.truthout.org/multimedia.htm
Keith Olbermann: "How dare you, Mr. President, after taking
cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting
it into fraudulent war and needless death, after monstrously
transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that
fear into the campaign slogan of three elections? How dare
you - or those around you - ever 'spin' 9/11? Just as the
terrorists have succeeded - are still succeeding - a