'Personal' Responsibility - What does that mean?
Mon Aug 11 14:12:26 2003
By Marc Ash
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 04 August 2003
Headline, front and center, Wednesday July 30 2003:
"Bush takes 'Personal' Responsibility for State of the Union Remarks."
What does that mean?
Does that mean that George Tenet was lying when he said he was responsible? Or
does it mean that George W. Bush was personally responsible for deciding that
Tenet would lie? Apply the same standard to statements made by Condoleezza Rice
and Donald Rumsfeld. Does it mean that Bush now admits what is clearly obvious,
that he knew the Niger reports had no merit but insisted on using them anyway,
over the objections of the intelligence community and his senior staff? Or is
that a touch more personal responsibility than he had in mind?
We started a war; in fact, we launched the first "pre-emptive" full scale
military action in U.S. history. The very intent of the statements Mr. Bush is
now taking personal responsibility for, was to mislead. Those statements were
delivered to the nation before a fully assembled Congress for the purpose of
justifying war. The State of the Union Address is a constitutionally-mandated
duty. An invasion of a sovereign nation on these terms is clearly a violation of
international and U.S. law. Does "personal responsibility" mean that Mr. Bush is
personally responsible for the slaughter of thousands of innocent Iraqi
civilians? Or is Mr. Bush personally responsible for the deaths of 285 U.S.
American and British soldiers? Both?
Responsible for profits?
I think we can find a higher degree of personal responsibility if we shift our
focus. Let's have a look at the war profits. Is Mr. Bush personally responsible
for making his associates in the defense industry wealthier than our ability to
comprehend? His father is a principal in the largest, most profitable defense
industry investment firm the world has ever known, The Carlyle Group. Is Mr.
Bush personally responsible for lining Carlyle's pockets with billions in U.S.
tax dollars? Is Mr. Bush personally responsible for the Halliburton
Corporation's exclusive contract to pump Iraq's oil? Is Mr. Bush now taking
personal responsibility for the jail-break, free-for-all,
get-rich-quick-bonanza, mega-money-laundering-swindle that is the Development
Fund for Iraq?
Is personal responsibility a public relations slogan, or are there ramifications
for those who are personally responsible? What is the downside for Mr. Bush if
he is really held responsible? 285 men and women of the US. and British armed
forces have given their lives so far for this wanton military profiteering. You
can bet that they were personally responsible. The Iraqi people are personally
responsible; their suffering is unimaginable. Does any of this really matter as
long as a Republican-controlled Congress refuses to take any action to challenge
Mr. Bush, no matter what the charge is?
Is Mr. Bush today effectively beyond the reach of U.S. law?
When Mr. Bush says he is personally responsible, does he really mean that
ultimately you and I will be?
"If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists."
- G.W. Bush after 9/11
"Whoa" to Patriot Act?
Sun Aug 10 20:22:45 2003
This problems and abuse from the USA Patriot Act started long before 9/11, but
the act has made them "legal" for the authorities to get away with most
anything, in the name of "national security" and citing the "Patriot" Act to
allow them to get away with whatever they want. This is bush's America, and John
Ashcroft's fanaticism, most of which is hidden under the cover of omission by
the mainstream media. It is no wonder few react to the Patriot Act. Congress
failed to do its job, the media failed to do its job, and the fanatics are at
LISTEN - ALEX JONES
THIS IS WAR
Main Page -
Message Board by American
Patriot Friends Network [APFN]