 sahara says: This was reported in June... According to Cockburn's reporting, "President Bush wants to push [the security pact] through by the end of [July 2008] so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated." (Note 13) A prime beneficiary of the acceptance of a military agreement that the Iraqi people do not believe respects their rights or serves their interests would probably be the vast, privatized U.S. military/intelligence complex, positioned to profit from repressing the resistance sure to follow. If the Bush administration's goal is achieved through secret deals and pressure tactics it would only confirm the widespread view that its commitment to democracy is primarily self-serving. In Iraq as elsewhere there are many who would welcome a genuine American commitment to liberty and human rights but believe that U.S. actions contradict its rhetoric. So much to decipher here! Democracy? The word has never been so misrepresented as it is today. It scarcely exists ANYWHERE in the world. The U.S. is a 'Democracy? Think about it for more than thirty seconds. 1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. 2. A political or social unit that has such a government. 3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power. 4. Majority rule. 5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community. Like some kind of bitter placebo. Who benefits by what is falsely labeled as democracy? It sure doesn't seem to be voters. Land of the free? It's been said that the only... As all conquering armies do. |
View the Top Clips from August 7, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
