Car bomb in Kirkuk kills 23 and leaves 16 injured
More violence. It is unrelentless. It goes on and on and on day after day after day. In Tikrit. In Basra. In Baghdad. In Kirkuk. In Falluja. In the north, in the centre, in the south. The legacy of George W. Bush, who has the audacity to claim he stands for security. Vote for Bush.
Richard Cheney might insinuate that unless Bush is elected, the USA is at danger. Without any evidence of course, but then again, this regime never based anything it did on evidence. It simply fabricated it, told lies and handed out billionaire contracts to the corporate elite which has grown
fatter by the day while squandering two hundred thousand million dollars, which someone, some time, will have to pay. Guess who? The US citizens. Vote for Bush.
Richard Cheney might make childish and inane comments without any substantiation, but the raw truth is crystal clear: it is George W. Bush who has taken his country to the brink, who has broken international agreements, such as the UN Charter and even the Geneva Convention, something expected of tin-pot dictatorships, who has divorced Washington from the international
community, creating a perfect scenario for hostility. Vote for Bush.
Moreover, it is the regime of George Bush which has committed massacres in Afghanistan and Iraq. How are people supposed to feel when their fathers, brothers, sisters, wives, daughters, mothers or sons have had their arms and legs blown off, their eyes blown out, their faces and futures blown away? What are they supposed to do, sing God Bless America with their right hand over their heart and thank Bush for his Freedom and Democracy? Vote for Bush.
It is George Bush who has set the mechanisms in motion for international terrorism to seethe and to thrive, in giving it the fuel it needs to feed its ugly flames: hatred. How could a man who didn't even know how to read the map, who was clueless about the most simple and basic notions of geography, be given the responsibility to command his armed forces in such a blatant example of a hideous failure of an operation? Vote for Bush.
The point is, it was not Bush and never has been. Bush is the stooge, the front man, the fall guy if necessary. He is much happier in the fresh air of his ranch, while Cheney and Rumsfeld and their clique of supporters, orchestrated also by Daddy Bush, spin their webs. Making a mockery of the US political system and making clowns out of its people. Vote for Bush.
But this is not an excuse. Voting for Bush is voting for a continuation of these illegal wars which make America a far, far more dangerous place. If the USA had to retaliate for 9/11, they did so in Afghanistan (still in chaos). But to attack Iraq? Why?
No, it had nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. The terrorists flooded in only after Bush destabilized the country by removing its delicate point of equilibrium.
This criminal negligence and incompetence of George Bush and his allies must not go unnoticed. They were warned by special reports months before the invasion that to launch an attack on Iraq and destroy the State would have serious and long-lasting consequences. "No-one has satisfactorily answered how there can be any certainty that the replacement regime will be any better (than Saddam Hussein's). Iraq has no history of democracy so no-one has this habit or experience."
So wrote Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary to Tony Blair a year before Colin Powell was lying through his teeth at the UN building in New York with his infamous photographs of plastic maquettes, complete with labels and arrows, pointing towards where Iraq's WMD were stored. In the event, they were milk powder factories, trying to escape bombardment by US warplanes.
The legacy of George W. Bush. Death, murder, chaos. The USA involved in two long-drawn out fights in two countries alien to its culture and way of being. This is what happens when the cowboy leaves his ranch. Time for regime change. This man stiffed the world. Consider very seriously the long-term consequences of voting for Bush. How much more money do the US citizens want to see squandered in creating long-term problems which are ever more complex to solve?
Or would it not be better to vote for someone who has a more low-key, more sensible approach towards crisis management based on dialogue and debate and diplomacy, bringing Washington simultaneously back in line with the international family of communities? This is indeed the way to make America and the world a far safer place.