Expats Against Bush

Holiday time

Hello all,

I'd just like to forewarn you that I'm off to South Carolina tomorrow for about 10 days for a bit of a break, and I'll likely be pretty sparse with the posting during that time. I hope nothing too untoward happens while I'm back that will force me into blogging action, but I'm sure discussions here will continue unabated.

Before I leave, I want to ask something: As of now, end of May 2004, what do you see happening in the November election? Will Bush's ratings continue to slide? Will Kerry ever capitalize on the tide turning in his favor? Will the election bear out the 1% theory (i.e. extreme polarization)?

A worthy (and wordy) diatribe from Al Gore

There was then, there is now and there would have been regardless of what Bush did, a threat of terrorism that we would have to deal with. But instead of making it better, he has made it infinitely worse. We are less safe because of his policies. He has created more anger and righteous indignation against us as Americans than any leader of our country in the 228 years of our existence as a nation -- because of his attitude of contempt for any person, institution or nation who disagrees with him.

He has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town and city to a greater danger of attack by terrorists because of his arrogance, willfulness, and bungling at stirring up hornet's nests that pose no threat whatsoever to us. And by then insulting the religion and culture and tradition of people in other countries. And by pursuing policies that have resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent men, women and children, all of it done in our name.

Go here and read the full text.

What's new? Nothing.

For a speech that was meant to reassure us that Bush was still calling the shots, last night's address was lacking anything concrete that would convince any skeptics. Of his five point plans, how many actually indicated that he had learned anything from the mistakes already made?

• Hand over authority to a sovereign Iraqi government; OK, you're still insisting on this June 30th silliness. No surprise. Hey, if you can say you've handed over power to the Iraqis in time for the election, it's got to be good right? I mean, nothing could happen between June and November in Iraq to put that "sovereign" government in jeopardy, could it? Nah, that won't happen.
• Help establish the stability and security in Iraq that democracy requires; And you know how to do that, don'tcha George? It's a very simple equation. Establishing security = eradicating terrorism = overwhelming force. Bingo, hearts and minds are won. It's only a matter of time before our troops are welcomed again with garlands of roses.
• Continue rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure; Which will be even easier in the next year as contractors are literally inundated with applications from eager young competent citizens who wish to create a better world.
• Encourage more international support; Read: Because we need y'all to come clean up our mess.
• Move toward free, national elections that will bring forward new leaders empowered by the Iraqi people. Because Iraq has all the hallmarks of a nascent democracy. Obviously.

Not very convincing, is it? Apparently not:

Bush's overall job approval rating declined to 47 percent, the lowest the Post-ABC News polls have recorded since he took office, with 50 percent saying they disapprove. Just four in 10 Americans gave the president positive marks for his handling of Iraq, the lowest since he launched the conflict in March 2003.

At least he's doing well in the war on terror, right? Right?

You know, these days I openly defy any Bushite to tell me that Clinton was a worse president than Bush is. Go on. I dare you. I double dare you. I would give my left arm to have Clinton back in office right about now.

(Almost) No good news

I'm sure I will elicit protests from our conservative visitors that I am trumpeting doom and gloom with today's post, but since I last posted (I know, I've been slack) there hasn't been a surfeit of good news, has there?

Iraq. Where to start?

It would be better if we had not been played like patsies by an Iranian-backed stooge.

It would be better if we had not bombed a wedding.

It would be better if confidence was not eroding in Washington faster than any time in living memory. Especially among senior military folks.

It would be better if we had a President that was able to take control of the situation instead of going on holiday. Again.

Any good news? Only a bit: Apparently America's college students are incontrovertibly changing as a result of Bush's ineptitude: The number of students identifying themselves as liberal has increased from 36% to 44% in the last year. Maybe there's hope for us yet. I don't mean I want everyone to be liberal; that would be boring. I think we could use a bit more balance, a correcting influence on my country's collective lurch to the right over the past few years.

Update

Ach, of course, I forgot the other piece of good news from the weekend, which of course is the winning of the Palme d'Or at Cannes by Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9-11. Not because I think the film is going to be the be-all and end-all of documentary attacks on the Bush administration, but because this will force the American distribution companies to actually show the damned thing, and at least give people the opportunities to make their own minds up.

Yesterday's protest

Thanks to everyone that came out yesterday and braved the very heavy handed (and arrest-happy) police cordon to picket Bush Senior's fundraising dinner for Dubya. I know it was an inconvenient time to have to come show support, but it was very much appreciated - and worth it.

Thanks also to everyone that chimed in with the press, as we got some good coverage from the AP, The Guardian, and, bizarrely, I believe I'm going to be on Iranian television news tonight. We also got namechecked by the Stop the War folks and by, er, George Galloway MP (is that a good or a bad thing?).

I was unimpressed by the fact that we got herded into a "free speech zone" - I'm sure it was partly to keep order as it was right outside the entrance to Marylebone Station, but you can't help but get the impression that this is business as usual where visiting (and controversial) US presidents are concerned. A man was arrested right in front of me for "breach of the peace" for refusing to protest inside the barricades, which was outright unnecessary and can only fan the flames of anger from the other protesters.

I've put up some pictures from the event here.

Tuesday anti-Bush protest details

Tomorrow's protest is taking place a little earlier than I had realised, due to the schedule of the pre-fundraising dinner cocktail reception.

The easiest thing to do is head for Marylebone Station's front entrance, which happens to be very close to the back entrance of the Landmark Hotel where this dinner is being held. Once there it should become immediately obvious where to go - you will see the crowds and a heavy police presence.

Once there, you should be able to pick out our "Proud of my country, Shamed by my president" placards fairly easily.

The general schedule should go something like this:

4:30PM - Gather for a picket of the event as the guests arrive.
5:30PM - Speeches from group leaders
6:30PM - Protest finishes

I hope all of you can still make it out despite the obvious inconvenience of the time. But we need to show these people that we don't appreciate this event happening here in the slightest.

As before, I think staying out of any trouble that might brew up and generally being respectful would serve all our interests best in the long run.

Mothers and Republicans Against Bush

Two newish anti-Bush websites have pinged up to say hello to Expats Against Bush lately, and I thought you'd like to know about them.

The first one is Mothers Opposing Bush (MOB for short) which has an interesting take on exactly why old Dubya is not cutting the mustard for them. Their gripe list has some very cogent and universally-applicable issues that affect not only mothers and children but every American. Check it out.

Secondly, we have Republicans Against Bush, a grassroots organization which does what it says on the tin: gets Republicans together who have had to admit to themselves that George Bush is not the man they thought they were voting for back in 2000. I've heard a great deal of people from that side of the fold come forward because they just couldn't toe the party line anymore. Welcome aboard! (they also have a pretty extensive Meetup profile here)

Reminder: Next Tuesday's Anti-Bush Protest

I'd just like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that next Tuesday the 18th is your opportunity to protest outside the Bush fundraising dinner compered by none other than Dubya's father, George Senior. The Stop the War Coalition are happy to have us join, and they've specially requested that we come out with our placards flying high - so make sure and bring yours! (more details here)

The Stop the War Coalition have also asked me to pass along word of their emergency protest on May 22nd in response to the Iraq prison abuse stories that have been coming out the last couple of weeks:

Emergency Demonstration - Saturday 22nd May 2004, 11am - Central London

End The Torture - Bring The Troops Home Now

The whole world is horrified at the terrible pictures of torture of Iraqi prisoners now emerging. They are the tip of an iceberg of abuse - dozens of civilians have died in custody of British and American troops in occupied Iraq.

The Stop The War Coalition correctly has responded to calls from groups and individuals, for a emergency demonstration to respond to the atrocities being committed in Iraq.

We are demanding the withdrawal of all troops from Iraq and for the Iraqi people to be allowed to govern themselves.

Leaflets for the demonstration are available from the office. More details regarding the start of the demonstration will be circulated.

For further information please call 0207 053 2153/4/5/6 or e-mail [email protected]

Now I'm not sure where I stand on the whole "get the troops out now" demand - I'm not sure whether that would hurt or hinder the situation there - but you may well feel so inclined, and if so this is your opportunity to express your displeasure with the way things are unfolding.

Oklahoman folk wisdom

Compare and contrast this:

A Red Cross report disclosed Monday said coalition intelligence officers estimated that 70-90 percent of Iraqi detainees were arrested by mistake and said Red Cross observers witnessed U.S. officers mistreating Abu Ghraib prisoners by keeping them naked in total darkness in empty cells.

With this:

"I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment," the Oklahoma Republican [U.S. Sen. James Inhofe] said at a U.S. Senate hearing probing the scandal.

"These prisoners, you know they're not there for traffic violations," Inhofe said. If they're in cellblock 1-A or 1-B, these prisoners, they're murderers, "they're terrorists, they're insurgents. Many of them probably have American blood on their hands and here we're so concerned about the treatment of those individuals."

Who let this knuckle-dragging moron into the Senate?

And doesn't this just prove that our leadership, or lack thereof, is part of the whole problem?

Of course, it ain't a story till Rush chimes in is it? Speaking of knuckle draggers...

RUSH: We just have a couple more sound bites from Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe this morning. Really rocked this committee and he's a former member of the House. I think that matters. He's what I will call a "real guy." This is a man who is in touch with the people he represents.

Really? All you Oklahomans out there OK with this cretin speaking on your behalf?

Circling the wagons

The Bushies came out strongly in Rummie's defense over the weekend, but that didn't stop even the Army Times from calling for his head on a plate in an editorial today, and senior ranks in the services expressing serious concern elsewhere over the wider conduct of the war, never mind the abuse scandal:

Army Col. Paul Hughes, who last year was the first director of strategic planning for the U.S. occupation authority in Baghdad, said he agrees with that view and noted that a pattern of winning battles while losing a war characterized the U.S. failure in Vietnam. "Unless we ensure that we have coherency in our policy, we will lose strategically," he said in an interview Friday.

"I lost my brother in Vietnam," added Hughes, a veteran Army strategist who is involved in formulating Iraq policy. "I promised myself, when I came on active duty, that I would do everything in my power to prevent that [sort of strategic loss] from happening again. Here I am, 30 years later, thinking we will win every fight and lose the war, because we don't understand the war we're in."

Even Fareed Zakaria, who was a bit hawkish following 9/11 and is always a tough one to read, has turned his full ire against the mismanagement of the war and the general incompetence and arrogance this administration shows in everything it does:

Leave process aside: the results are plain. On almost every issue involving postwar Iraq—troop strength, international support, the credibility of exiles, de-Baathification, handling Ayatollah Ali Sistani—Washington's assumptions and policies have been wrong. By now most have been reversed, often too late to have much effect. This strange combination of arrogance and incompetence has not only destroyed the hopes for a new Iraq. It has had the much broader effect of turning the United States into an international outlaw in the eyes of much of the world.

Whether he wins or loses in November, George W. Bush's legacy is now clear: the creation of a poisonous atmosphere of anti-Americanism around the globe. I'm sure he takes full responsibility.

With more abuse photos emerging daily, we have well and truly shot away all of our credibility. When did we turn into the bad guys?

More importantly, where is major gesture necessary to reassure the world that we take this seriously? Bush, for Pete's sake man, take the wheel of this country and at least start to steer it back on course! If I look at things from an election campaign perspective, then I would happily see Bush falter and flail as normal - but we're to the point now that he's inflicting lasting damage on our national security and standing in the world, and I'd rather he repaired some of that and came off looking good than damage our country even more than he has done.