Is it just me? Or do others also share in my bewilderment? Or should I say terror? Here, in the year 2002, there are the strangest of affairs afoot. Of course I'm referring to the seeming insanity rampant in the doings of the so-called leader of the"free"world.
Don't ask me what the"free"world is. I don't know anything about it, if indeed there is such a place. Sadly, however, there is a proclaimed"leader"of this unknown place, and this leader is absolutely terrifying to the likes of me.
Perhaps I am alone in my bewildered state of amazement. I have wanted to speak about it, but I am in the same situation as a child who is confronted by a series of horrors, each one ever greater than the last. The poor little wretch longs to scream, but the horrors cascade down upon him faster than he can catch breath enough to release the mind withering screech steadily growing within.
Perhaps only one thing is more terrifying to me than the current leader, the President of the so-called"Land of the Free". This of course is the seeming oblivion of the masses to the insane policies of their great white father and commander-in-chief.
The President masquerades as a"good old boy,"salt of the Earth kind of guy who is so down to earth, he's like the"feller"with the hog farm just down the road. You can always depend on him to do the right thing. He'll stand up for you against evil and make the whole world a safer, better place for ladies and children. Why, he don't take nothin' from nobody when it comes to protecting the integrity of"Old Glory"!
My, my, my, is it any wonder the good Lord placed George W. Bush in the White House?
Frankly, I am very sure the Lord had nothing to do with it, unless of course, He is heavily invested in the oil industry and arms proliferation.
Even so, I am not here to merely exercise in verbal Bush bashing. I am here to ask why there is a gross lack of public outcry over his blatantly transparent actions? And to ask why the public does not demand that he loose the put-on Texas twang and speak like the rich, papered and privileged kid he is. And of course call him to task over his policies that slap the face of reason and set precedents that are the stuff of nightmares and chaos and bedlam beyond imagining.
Most of all, I am here to ask why the media continues to play deft, blind and dumb right along with the pitiful, seemingly unconscious populace of these United States of America?
For example, is anyone aware of the repeated repudiation of one international treaty after another by our fearful leader? What, you ask?
Though it doesn't get as much press as baseball or football or some other sport, our President is involved in a dangerous game that is far more ruthless and combative.
His latest nullification involves the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty signed by President Clinton. Prior to this the Bush administration backed out on or black-balled the Kyoto global warming treaty, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Biological and Chemical Weapons Treaty, the Land Mine Treaty and the Small Arms Treaty.
President Bush had the unmitigated audacity, backed by the urging of Donald Rumsfeld and others, to strike the signature of Bill Clinton from the ICC Treaty on May 6, 2002. In doing so, he took our nation and our people one step further away from the path of peace being followed by the rest of the civilized world.
Nevertheless, the ICC Treaty still went into effect on July 1, 2002, whether the Bush administration likes it or not.
In case you couldn't find it in the news, the ICC Treaty creates an international criminal court, the first permanent tribunal to try the worst crimes know to humankind. Over 100 million innocent civilians have been killed by such crimes during the past century.
The civilized world has been working to create such a court for over a century! Various European statesmen considered the idea as a multinational way of punishing aggressors and perpetrators of atrocities in 19th century wars. Further efforts were made after chemical weapons were widely used during World War I. But the idea really gained momentum following the atrocities of World War II.
There has always been mild opposition, mainly due to the working out of what proved to be rather complex mechanics and other daunting details. The recent push toward a Global community at last brushed aside the nay sayers and the ICC Treaty was finally hammered out and signed by 139 countries last year.
The court is based in The Hague. Unlike the World Court, however, the ICC will not deal with intergovernmental disputes, but rather with cases against individuals. So, in the future, heads of state such as Hitler, Pol Pot and Slobodan Milosevic will be held accountable before a permanent tribunal of 18 judges. Prior to this, such heads of state enjoyed impunity from prosecution simply because they as individuals were not held accountable.
Why you ask, would the administration not support such a court? Why indeed. That is the question of the hour. And for the answer, one can only look at the available evidence.
In this case, we have a man who has seized the day follow 9/11. With the help of his crony, John Ashcroft, the President presented congress with the so-called Patriot Act, giving him what amounts to dictatorial powers, should he deem such powers are needed to enforce homeland security.
He has methodically withdrawn from or nullified treaty after treaty after treaty, all put into place by previous administrations and governments who wished to help bring an end to war, to weapons of mass destruction and to weapons proliferation.
The President has declared war on terrorism and terrorists the world over. And armed with his new powers, he plans to invade and even destroy any nation he deems is a threat to world peace and especially homeland security.
It is ironic that he can and will use any weapons he sees fit to wage and win the war he has declared. It is somehow OK for us and our allies to have weapons of mass destruction, but not OK for almost any other nation to have them. Presumably this is because we perceive ourselves as the good guys and of course God is also on our side.
But in nullifying the ICC Treaty, we see how far this President is prepared to go to exercise his new found powers. Following the"unsigning"of this most excellent treaty, the House Appropriations Committee passed a resolution. This resolution authorizes the invasion of The Netherlands, and in fact threatens such an invasion, should any US official or soldier ever be held at The Hague by the ICC.
So here we are at the beginning of a new century, under the leadership of one who is apparently so out of touch with rational thinking, he sees no problem with threatening to invade of one of our best allies!
There is, however, the one other matter which is far more devastating to our image and our degree of intelligence.
In his arrogance as the"most powerful man on earth"Mr. Bush has perhaps overlooked the sad precedent he has now managed to establish. By unsigning the ICC Treaty he has set a precedent that could affect the future impact of all treaties and international laws in general. Now that Mr. Bush has led the way, what is to stop any other nation or nations from unilaterally unsigning any treaty they simply no long wish to honor? Such as the 12 anti-terrorism treaties that cover hijacking, kidnapping and the financing of international terrorism?
Surely the rest of the nations of the Earth are all might uncomfortable right about now. The most powerful country in the world is being led by a person who appears to think a pledge, a promise or a commitment merely depends on the whims of the day.
A treaty is something that you sign and abide by only so long as you like. The nation with the biggest stick can do whatever it pleases, and if a mere treaty stands in the way, well so what? It can be nullified or unsigned and easily as it was signed, can't it? Of course it can!
A lot of people think President Bush is a dummy. But to my mind he is far worse. He is a misguided fool who also happens to be in charge of the most powerful nation in the world today.
Joe Pitts, speaking on national public radio described President Bushes actions in nullifying treaties and withdrawing from ICC so well, I can only bow to his words. Mr. Pitts said the situation is"like all your neighbors are fighting a horrible fire; but the richest neighbor not only stays home, and not only turns off his spigot so others can't use his water, he sets fire to his own house."!
If we continue down the road Mr. Bush appears intent on traveling, one can easily see why we would need to withdraw from the ICC. And give ourselves the right to invade The Hague in order to free anyone being held for trial. Smart move Mr. President!
Heck, I knowed he weren't no dummy all along!
Enviroshop is maintained by dedicated NetSys Interactive Inc. owners & employees who generously contribute their time to maintenance & editing, web design, custom programming, & website hosting for Enviroshop.