It is troubling that George W. Bush's travel to Switzerland for a speaking appearance in front of the United Israel Appeal had to be canceled over security concerns. A combination of possible violence by the usual suspects and the ridiculous possibility that someone could actually file a criminal complaint against him in Switzerland made the trip "untenable" (my quotes).
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/02/05/president-bush-cancels-geneva-visit-amid-security-concerns/?test=latestnews
This, of course, is the tactic of the far left even in Europe. How some of these nations can claim extra-territorial jurisdiction is beyond me. This is the continent that is supposed to be America's ally. Who did the feckless European governments turn to when they wanted to fight Serbia? The US. Did they call for prosecution of Bill Clinton after we bombed Belgrade? Of course not.
George W Bush may be evil in some people's eyes, but he is the one who removed the Taliban from power in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. I'd take that on my resume anyday. He is also the one who led the fight against Al Qaida after 9-11.
You do remember 9-11, don't you?
What exactly is his great sin- Gitmo? Or perhaps that a handful of savages like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were waterboarded and gave up information that saved countless lives?
What exactly has been the Swiss contribution to the War on Terror? About the same as their contribution to the war against Hitler, I'd guess.
What those fools in Europe don't understand is what Bush understood. This is the signature issue of our generation and our children's generation. (That is the War on Terror-not Global Warming). The truth is that with a handful of abuses, such as Abu Ghraib, we have fought that war according to our principles-completely unlike the enemy.
Let me say this here and now; George W. Bush is a decent and honorable man who did all he could to prevent another 9-11. He deserved the full support of the Swiss government in giving that speech in Geneva. The Swiss should have provided whatever security was necessary, let it be known that there would be no fear of some dopey judge issuing an arrest warrant, and anyone who tried to violate Bush's right to speak and the right of his audience to hear him would be punished.
Oh, I forgot; he was supposed to speak in front of a pro-Israel Jewish group, wasn't he?
Silly me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I don't expect that the office responsible for ordering water boarding to label it or accept the label of torture. Equally, I don't expect the same office to admit these activities did not yield any usuable intelligence. As a normal citizen objectively weighing what information I do have leaves me to rely on actions over words (since both sides of the media equation are pushing an agenda.)
With that said, I focus on actions; Through executive order Mr. Bush prevented his prosecution in the United States. These actions, meant to prevent his prosecution and the prosecution of key cabinet officials, offer a better picture of Mr. Bushs faith either our legal system, the actions he ordered, or the advice he recieved while ordering them. For our President to not have faith in all or one of these areas shows the true incompetencey of his office, his leadership and by extension key decisions he made. As a citizen I found this action most telling and most disturbing. I do not wish to ignore the possibility that lives were saved, so I say this; When such mitigating factors exist for the common US resident during a trial these factors are not offered as a defense against the charges only as a consideration when a sentence is being decided. I think it weak and inappropriate to use the possibility of lives saved as a defense to the charge that waterboarding is tourture. Very weak indeed.
To close my comment I offer you this incite I hope you consider internally although you are sure to reject it externally;
The citing of two ongoing miltary campaigns where thousands of your brothers and sisters have died as credentials on a resume is too disgusting to fully address. Other then to say that the fact you portray them in a positive light for reasons of arguement or to defend a politician shows more of your personal character and morality then you probably intended. You should be more careful to not show your wickedness. Otherwise I fear it will be too hard for you to manage the image of someone intellectually and morally centered/balanced. You will be in my prayers.
Hey while you're at it, pray for the Cubs to win the World Series next year, will ya?
Yeah, Cubs to win the world series next year! Right on!
On other matters, I have no objection to trying Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld for crimes against humanity. Further, I would try Karl Rove for treason... I'm convinced he's the master mind of a Manchurian Candidate type scam, and is probably on the payroll of a Chinese secret commando charged with destroying the U.S. economy and leaving us in debt to the Bank of China.
But George W. Bush, I'm convinced, would get off as a clueless dupe who had decent and honorable intentions, and had no idea what all his cronies were doing in his administration. He gives new meaning to the term "useful idiots."
Post a Comment