|
by Steven D
Everyday you can see them, if you look close enough, if you're willing to hunt for them.
It's not hard to do. Little signs that help us interpret the underlying narrative that our media won't talk about, either through inertia, incompetence or intimidation. Signs that point the close reader to reach conclusions about how the future will unfold, signals meant to get the attention of governments (even while the public is kept conveniently in the dark) and small details most people miss that, by painting between the lines, allow a true picture of our leaders to present itself. Everyday these signals are being sent. Here are three of the ones I discovered today:
First up, a big smoke signal from China that trouble is on the horizon if Bush sends the cavalry in to attack Iran:
SHANGHAI, Feb. 17 -- China is hastening to complete a deal worth as much as $100 billion that would allow a Chinese state-owned energy firm to take a leading role in developing a vast oil field in Iran, complicating the Bush administration's efforts to isolate the Middle Eastern nation and roll back its nuclear development plans, according to published reports. What does this tell us? Very simply, China will not comply with UN sanctions against Iran, even if they do not expressly veto any resolution presented in the Security Council calling for such sanctions. This is also a signal to the US, much like Russia's warning yesterday, that China will not tolerate military action against Iran, by making it clear that China's national interests are inextricably tied to further development of Iran's oil fields. Indeed, the close juxtaposition between the Russian announcement yesterday, and the public revelation of China's deal with Iran today, also demonstrates that our two former Cold War antagonists have reached an accord on at least one issue: opposing further adventurism by the Bush administration in the Middle East. Will these not so subtle messages from Russia and China have any effect on the Bush administration's war plans? Only time will tell. Second, is this story, a sign that Bush's poodle may have escaped the short leash our President has seemingly held him under:
Tony Blair today said the US detention camp at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba was an "anomaly" that would have to be "dealt with". Admittedly, it looks like Blair's Irish Secretary forced his hand in making these comments, but that in itself is significant. After the last election, in which the ruling Labour Party suffered significant losses, Blair has to be painfully aware that many in his own party have serious doubts about his unquestioned support for President Bush's policies in the Middle East after the Iraq fiasco. Hain's remarks about Guantanamo were either a clear shot across the Prime Minister's bow, telling him the dissenters in his own cabinet now feel emboldened to go off message when it comes to the US alliance, or they were part of a coordinated effort to give Blair cover as he seeks to gracefully disengage himself and his country from the Iraq disaster. I tend to believe the former, but it matters little which is the real reason for Hain's remarks. What is clear, is that Bush is close to losing the support of his only true ally internationally. Further evidence, if you need it, are Britain's well publicized plans for the removal of its troops from Iraq beginning in May of this year. How will this effect Bush's strategies for both Iraq and Iran in the coming months? Hopefully, it will temper any tendency to employ military might as the sole solution and force him to rely on diplomacy and negotiations. I suspect that Blair's party has no stomach for any US attack on Iran, and Blair may have already directly informed Bush of this. One can only hope. Finally, here's a signal that shows just how thoroughly the Bush administration holds the American public in its deep contempt: Whittington's voice was a bit raspy, but strong, as he gave his brief statement, and he had what appeared to be a line of cuts on his upper right eyelid and scrapes on his neck.Remember, this is a man who Cheney described yesterday as an "acquaintance." Does anyone believe that Whittington's statement was not thoroughly vetted by Karl Rive and staffers in Cheney's office before he was permitted to appear before the press? The very words he speaks are amzing to me. To paraphrase: "I'm sorry for any harm I, the victim of the Vice President's negligence, caused him." I don't know about you, but if I were shot by someone else, accidently or otherwise, the first words out of my mouth in a public forum would not be an apology for the pain I caused the person who shot me. That Whittington allowed himself to be put on display for such a nauseating exercise in sycophancy is very revealing.
That the Bush administration expects us to swallow, willingly, this load of bull puckey, tells you everything you need to know about their true feelings toward the American public. They will continue to treat us a rubes and easy marks and peons as long as they retain control of the reins of power.
Signals | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Signals | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
|
Login
We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris
|
|||||||||
Booman Tribune Homepage admin@boomantribune.com powered by Scoop
More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.
|
|||||||||||
© 2009 Booman Tribune