 |
Weblog Archives |
|
 |
« for the funmachine | Main | chicken soup for my soul »
January 12, 2004
a matter of priorities
Okay. Political stories and rants are officially back "on the table."
Last night on 60 Minutes, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill described George W. Bush as "a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during Cabinet meetings, and revealed that within days of his inauguration, Mr. Bush planned to use U.S. troops to invade Iraq.
Of course, this means that, three years after he was sworn in, when Mr. Bush told us that Iraq was "a grave and gathering danger" (either because of those non-existent WMDs, or the equally non-existent ties to terrorists) he was doing nothing more than trying to fool We, The People, into going along with his inauguration-day plans to have his war on Iraq.
That information should enrage all Americans. The fact is, the Bush administration played us for suckers. In the aftermath of 9/11, when he could have actually been "a uniter, not a divider," George W. Bush took our grief, outrage, and fear and exploited it.
And now, as the lies for war unravel, George W. Bush -- the "compassionate conservative" -- shows us where his priorities truly lie.
It took 74 days for the Bush Administration to begin an investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity to Robert Novak. It's very clear that the purpose of the leak was to intimidate former Ambassador Joe Wilson, and send a warning to anyone else who would dare speak the truth about the Bush Administration's lies.
For those readers who aren't familiar with her, Valerie Plame's extremely undercover work for the CIA focused on tracking down weapons of mass destruction, and ensuring that they didn't find their way into the hands of terrorists.
Gosh, that sure sounds familiar . . . isn't tracking down weapons of mass destruction, and ensuring that they don't find their way into the hands of terrorists the reason over 500 American soldiers and countless Iraqi civillians have lost their lives in the last 10 months? (They've changed the reason for invading Iraq so many times, I've lost track. If it's a different reason today, if we're back to "liberating the Iraqi people," or "He took a shot at my daddy," just wait. I'm sure they'll return to "WMDs and Terrorists!" soon enough.)
See, whoever blew Ms. Plame's cover actually increased the danger to Americans from terrorists with WMDs. Thank god we have that color-coded alert system to keep us distracted safe! Good thing we all know to watch out for dangerous people reading The Old Farmer's Almanac, and six year-old girls boarding airplanes!
But here's the thing that just boggles me, and actually moved me to write tonight: The Bush administration waited 74 days before they started an investigation into who blew Ms. Plame's cover, putting her, all her assets, and all of us at risk.
Seventy-four days. When National Security is at stake.
How many days did it take for the Bush administration to call for an investigation into Paul O'Neill?
One. One day after he was on 60 Minutes. One day is all it took for what can be called a punitive investigation, at best, when all that's really at stake is the rapidly vanishing ability of the Bush White house to lie to us and get away with it.
So the question sweeping the nation is: Does Mr. Bush care more about protecting Americans from terrorism and ensuring our safety, or protecting himself from criticism, and ensuring his reelection?
Well, I think that's asked and answered, and I'm counting down to November.
(We're still having some upgrade issues. Hopefully, comments will return by the end of the week)
UPDATE: Until comments are up and running again, I thought I would share some e-mails that I've read regarding this post:
N. writes:
I'm a long time reader, first time writer (LTRFTW). Your entry today so
well summed up so clearly the problems with the current administration. It
is truly abominable the way Americans are being treated by their own
government. It seems so transparent to me and yet so few people see it. If
you want more information on these plans to overthrow Iraq, read about the
Project for the New American Century, a conservative think tank with the
goal of remilitarizing the US against ideological opponents founded in '99
by Jeb Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and other cronies.
I was living in Italy during September 11 and lost a close friend in the
attack. The next day, it warmed my heart to see posters of "Solidarity with
the USA" all over Rome. I also saw in the next years how unilateral action
swayed all of those sentiments against us. We had an opportunity to turn
something bad into a movement for global unity and instead it was used for
warmongering. What a dissappointment.
Just wanted to express my agreement with you. Thanks.
P. writes:
I have to say. I like you, I like your site. I think you are funny and I get you. But if the political stuff is back "on the table". I'm out.
I seriously have to ask, when will you be holding an anti-terrorist rally? When will celebrity types stop bitching about what's wrong with this country? Look, I get that you don't like war. That's cool. I even get, in principal, that you aren't a political conservative. I respect that.
But the crap in your recent posts is alarmist at best. It is 3rd or 4th hand "reporting" of stories that most reasonable (pronounced ree-ZOHN-able ala homestarrunner) folks would agree lack factual foundation.
I'm not saying that we ought to ship ALL Canadians off to Syria to have the shit kicked out of them (Really, just the Quebecois). What I am saying is that you posted it as if you interviewed the guy first hand and that all the facts were to be accepted as verified and true when, really, they may not all be.
I don't think people should have their privacy violated, their families threatened, their mail read or anything of that nature. But I also think that the governments ability to defend of this nation was basically emasculated during the Clinton administration. Many people feel that leaving our country vulnerable and passive was just a blow to freedom as probable cause wire-taps and luggage searches.
I'm venting a bit now, so forgive me. All I'm saying is this. I tune in to your site for the humor, wit, geek culture, and light-hearted fun I have come to expect. If the political stuff keeps up, I'm moving on.
BTW, the fact that you can spew this garbage on your site and NOT have guys in black trenchcoats come beat the living tar out of you is proof that the Bill of Rights is alive and well in this country.
God Bless America.
Finally, K writes:
Consider:
In the early days of this whole "invade Iraq" campaign, the reasons given were violations of United Nations mandates. These resolutions included UNSCR 1154 which threatened the "severest consequences for Iraq" if it did not comply and allow unrestricted access to U.N. weapons inspectors. Other resolutions also promised a similar fate: UNSCR 1137, UNSCR 1194, UNSCR 1205, UNSCR 1284, and so on.
So, in other words, the original complaint by the United States was that Iraq was in flagrant violation of the will of the United Nations and that, by the nature of the various resolutions, was punishable. The United States demanded that the United Nations uphold its obligations and begin the process of organizing the forces needed to invade Iraq and force it into compliance immediately.
Then, something happened. The United Nations gathered, deliberated, listened to the evidence and came to the conclusion that Iraq was actually _not_ in violation of the mandates of the United Nations (or at least that any violations were minor enough as to not warrant military action). So what does George W. Bush do? He VIOLATES THE WILL OF THE UNITED NATIONS and invades anyway!
This, Mr. Wheaton, enraged me. With deliberate and calculated action, our president turned the United States into a rogue nation. Without provocation or cause, we invaded a sovereign nation. This, I am sure I do not have to remind you, is the same act that caused the previous Gulf War -- only that time, it was Iraq doing the invading. One of the largest multi-national forces in history punished Iraq back in the 90s for doing what we just did in the earliest years of the 21st century.
Personally, it would be very difficult for me to blame the United Nations, were they to declare the Unites States a rogue nation, and gather the forces needed to invade us, pacify us, and occupy us -- establishing no fly zones and the like -- much as we have done to Iraq for the last decade. After all, it would be for the same crime, would it not?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.wilwheaton.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/411
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference a matter of priorities:
» Look Out, Politically Activated Geek Alert. from Rook's Rant
Wil Wheaton Okay. Political stories and rants are officially back "on the table." All I can say is: About damn time! I could tell he was fuming about the current state of politics in this country. He would let slip... [Read More]
» Who\'s Biased? from Morydd Rants
From WWDN:
Last night on 60 Minutes, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill described George W. Bush as "a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during Cabinet meetings, and revealed that within days of his inauguration, Mr. Bush planned to ... [Read More]
» http://feralboy.com/log/links/archives/2004_01_13.html#000794 from FeralBlog Link Sideblog
WIL WHEATON DOT NET: a matter of priorities... [Read More]
» Tuesday blog roundup from Writer. Bowler. Revolutionary.
I wanted to write a "real" entry today. There's been a lot of big news in the last couple days, basically with conservatives confirming what leftists and progressives already knew - that Bush is a lying murderous scumbag who had... [Read More]
» You tell em Wil from graphikjunkie
It's official, geeks can be political - we're not all plugged into i-pods and playing 'Half-Life' all day. Wil... [Read More]
» Okay, Back to Reading Wil Again from In Search of Utopia
Mushy Chicken Soup Blog aside, the Man continues to impress when he decides to stick his feet into the political pool.
An excerpt of his latest political post:
[Read More]
» Something about Something from Bri@.now
Oh, I think something a little politcal is called for today, kids. I'm typing this slowly, on account of a sprained and sore wrist (to0 much coding lately), but something caught my eye while catching up at WWdN. While I find Wil and his site a gre... [Read More]
» Something about Something from Bri@.now
Oh, I think something a little politcal is called for today, kids. I'm typing this slowly, on account of a sprained and sore wrist (to0 much coding lately), but something caught my eye while catching up at WWdN. While I find Wil and his site a gre... [Read More]
» More Cowardly Administration Stuff from James Landrith - Taking The Gloves Off
Wil Wheaton points out that: It took 74 days for the Bush Administration to begin an investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity to Robert Novak. and then asks How many days did it take for the Bush administration... [Read More]
» LIES! heh, I almost made a funny title in manner of Al Franken from upsoclose
Wil Wheaton, well, he rocks, and he's been writing some good stuff about politics as of late.
First, he wrote about the Bill of Rights, and referred his readers to this editorial about "free speech zones" that Bush uses when he travels to ... [Read More]
» WIL'S POLITICAL SCREEDS from DiscountBlogger
I like Wil Wheaton's site. I go there on a daily basis because I find Wil to be refreshing and entertaining. Wil is also an excellent writer. Until he starts writing about politics. For example, stories like the Paul O'Neill... [Read More]
» A Matter Of Getting The Facts Straight from shanjon
Wil Wheaton pontificated:
Last night on 60 Minutes, former Treasury Secretary Paul O\'Neill [...] revealed that within days of his inauguration, Mr. Bush planned to use U.S. troops to invade Iraq.
Of course, this means that, three years after he ... [Read More]
» cortina household pets from WIL WHEATON DOT NET: Where is my mind?
[Read More]
» Bush-bashing from Boston Confidential
Wil Wheaton wrote a nicely cross-referenced post on former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill's plight at the hands of the Bush administration, along with other fed up remarks concerning the four-year slow motion car crash that has been the... [Read More]
» more political ranting from upsoclose
This has probably been asked before, but why does it personally offend so many people that celebrities have stong political opinions? Are they not citizens too?
I know there are an awful lot of people out there ready to fling names at people the mom... [Read More]
» Wil Wheaton against the MAN. from Somebody was here, you just missed him.
I don't care what anybody says about "Hollywood types". Wil is so not a "Hollywood type". "Hollywood types" care very little about anything but their next paycheck. They are shallow and only give their time and money when it suits... [Read More]
| Read |
|
| Listen |
|
Watch |
|
| WWdN Sponsor |
| Act |
|
|Electronic Frontier Foundation| |
| Fear |
| Look |
|