Bush Chewing his Qud

BUSH CHEWING HIS QUD
2.14.06

BOTOM LINE: THE BETTER HIS DEFENSE OF THE US STRATEGIC WORLD POSITION, THE MORE SELF-DEFEATING IT BECOMES
Item 1: -The language of the Iraq situation is not square with reality
- The new "Baghdad security plan"-- "give it a chance to work"
...
Item 2. The Iran shenanigans - different Generals disagree over whether the recovered evidence of advanced weaponry found in Iraq directly implicates high level (read: Ahmanedijad) Iranian officials. Joint Chief of staff Pace, and Gen Casey, who have not been friendly to Bush's troop surge idea, balked. This could well be in consideration of the fact that if military action is undertaken, they will be the excutioners of his policy. Petreus, whom reporters fairly emphasize has inherited, not helped create, the new Baghdad security Plan policy, goes with the generals on the ground who made the link that got picked up and confabulated (down to calculations of numbers of actual horrendous American casualties caused by weapons supplied by Iran.

At his news conference, President Bush re-iterated: "We know two things: 1. The QUD force is in Iraq; 2. The QUD force gets its orders from Iran. We don't know whether the orders came from the top levels of government (Ahmadinejad), but it doesn't matter; what matters is it not happen." (words to this effect) When pressed, he denies wishing to provoke Iran, citing a "comprehensive strategy" focused on blocking its nuclear weapons ambitions. The diplomatic game is to forever posture as the reasonable, accessible, transparently benign presence in the room (TokenSpace)

Taken this far, one may perhaps skim past the General's disagreement to the use Bush made of it -- to put the matter in perspective as Commander in Chief -- makes sense, as part of the story of him being "The Decider", forced to choose after hearing different sides of the issue, as he did in ordering the troop surge. Here is where consistency in policy wrong to begin with takes over to defeat its defense. But that is (just) below the surface. On Page 1 of the America Show being acted out on/through group consciousness, it fits together decently. One might even be able to discern a certain coy political necessity scripted into this. Sneaky devils. Those who disagree with Bush can be referred to the military command, which it is seditious to incite.

There is a problem with that dog running, however.
It goes back to the question of the evidence. There is little question that it could have been faked. Just as many have argued that "Al Queda in Iraq" has been fake -- Al Zarqawi notwithstanding (or: confirming).
If it was, the question of the General's public disagreement becomes freshly challenging. Is it a repeat of the disagreement between regular Pentagon staff and the Rumsfeld-Cheney Office of Special Plans organ, under Douglas Fieth, who manufactured the case for invading Iraq? Are Pace and Casey the Wise Ones Out, again, among the multiple discards of this hard-line driven policy, now come 'round to ultimate disposal? Are we present at a second betrayal of America from within, under, and behind?


THE SIGN-USE FACTOR AND HATE

Problem: what about the evidence? What is behind the split between the General's accessment? Could there be suspicion that
it was rigged? -- by pretenders masked as QUD, planting a trail to incriminate Ahmadinejad and provoke retaliation?
If so, that would make G. W. Bush's claim that THEY are PROVOKING US an exact Reversal*: blaming the victim for what the blamer is doing.
***
Fox just announced he's going to go again today at 10.
****
Just caught a smattering. He was repeating the same lines as yesterday, pitching the "catastrophic consequences/must not fail/ /patience,needed to allow new Baghdad security plan to work, and the House debate is killing our troops...."

IN FRONT OF THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
Chief Lizard Lounge, where the Roots of the Libby Lobby Aspens suck soil, blood and treasure..

This positions the situation to where you cannot support Bush without supporting the Zionist Jews. He -- with his stage managers, have thrown the weight of The Jews*, in people's mind, against the Democrats and cross-over Republicans about to deliver a no-confidence vote to his policy.
This the worst catastrophe America could endure. When it was founded, Jews and Catholics couldn't even vote or own property in most places. Signers of the Constitution were Protestants by tradition, (the honorable, and honored, kind; not: like today's evalgellicuns) - 97%, you can look it up. I wonder what happened. (not really: Vietnam - Reagan - neo-cons, government-by-proxy for Mossad .. .a sickness pervading the face of earth ....)

Everything is two. What this two-thing is is tornado.