FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Bush at the UN

by BRIAN J. FOLEY

The UN General Assembly’s reaction to George Bush’s speech last Tuesday was begrudgingly polite. Unlike past years, no one clapped during the speech. At the end, applause was subdued. His talk was treated as irrelevant.

What is the sound of no hands clapping? Laughter — a laughter that rolled around the world. The world laughed when Bush began by extolling ‘the equal value and dignity of every human life,’ a dignity that is ‘dishonored Öby all violence against the innocent.’ The world asked, ‘Whose dignity? The dignity of the innocents the US killed and maimed in Afghanistan and Iraq? Of the human beings caged in Guantanamo Bay?’

Did you hear the world laugh when Bush tried to distinguish himself from dictators? ‘We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.’ Yes, we know. That’s why the US rejected world opinion and abandoned the UN weapons inspections process to bomb and smash its way into Iraq, only to find there had never been any reason for the war in the first place.

Did you hear the world laugh when Bush tried to distinguish American violence from terrorist violence? ‘Terrorists,’ Bush said, ‘believe that suicide and torture and murder are fully justified to serve any goal they declare. And they act on their beliefs.’ Yes, we know. The Bush Administration believes it may wage preemptive war against threats that might never materialize, and its lawyers look for loopholes to justify torture. In less than three years the US has invaded two countries. It has tortured and murdered prisoners, some of whom were arrested by careless mistake.

The world gaped when Bush had the gall to continue: ‘The Russian children [recently massacred in Beslan ] did nothing to deserve such awful suffering, and fright, and death. The people of Madrid, and Jerusalem, and Istanbul, and Baghdad have done nothing to deserve sudden and random murder. These acts violate the standards of justice in all cultures, and the principles of all religions.’ But does ‘sudden and random’ death differ whether it comes from a truck bomb built in a basement or a smart bomb made in the US? Didn’t the US bombing and invasion of Iraq violate ‘the standards of justice in all cultures, and the principles of all religions?’ The war was patently illegal, and most of the world opposed it on moral and religious grounds. The world has imagined not only the ‘awful suffering, and fright, and death’ of children in Beslan, but the horror of children bombed by the US.

The world rolled its eyes when Bush warned, ‘a terrorist group associated with al-Qaida is now one of the main groups killing the innocent in Iraq today — conducting a campaign of bombings against civilians, and the beheadings of bound men.’ The world knows that THE main group killing people in Iraq is the US, which has killed more people than all the car bombs combined.

What isn’t funny is that President Bush, and many Americans who support him, fail to see that violence, when the smoke clears, is just Ö violence. When a mother cries at one of the ‘little graves’ Bush mentioned, it’s doubtful she cares whether her child was killed deliberately by someone who seeks independence for Chechnya or Iraq, or accidentally by a US soldier. It’s all the same whether the bomb was detonated by someone believing he was freeing people from an illegal occupier that has killed thousands or by someone who believed he was freeing people from an ‘outlaw dictator.’

And let’s look at this sole, remaining justification for America’s Unnecessary War, that the US freed Iraq from ‘an outlaw dictator.’ Are the dead free? Did the maimed AGREE to lose an arm, a leg, their eyes, so that they might have a leader other than Saddam? Did the orphaned and widowed and those who lost children AGREE to trade their parents and spouses and kids for the possibility of democracy?

The Iraqi insurgents are not the only ones who use violence to kill their enemies and scare the survivors into submission. That is precisely what the US is doing.

That’s terrorism.

Bush ended his speech by avowing, ‘I have faith in the transforming power of freedom.’ The world laughed, because Bush’s actions show otherwise: He believes in the transforming power of VIOLENCE — just like the rest of the terrorists and bomb throwers who’ve soaked the pages of history with other people’s blood.

BRIAN J. FOLEY is a professor at Florida Coastal School of Law. He can be reached at bfoley@fcsl.edu.

 

Brian J. Foley is a lawyer and the author of A New Financial You in 28 Days! A 37-Day Plan (Gegensatz Press). Contact him at brian_j_foley@yahoo.com.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

April 26, 2017
Richard Moser
Empire Abroad, Empire At Home
Stan Cox
For Climate Justice, It’s the 33 Percent Who’ll Have to Pick Up the Tab
Paul Craig Roberts
The Looting Machine Called Capitalism
Lawrence Davidson
The Dilemma for Intelligence Agencies
Christy Rodgers
Remaining Animal
Joseph Natoli
Facts, Opinions, Tweets, Words
Mel Gurtov
No Exit? The NY Times and North Korea
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Women on the Move: Can Three Women and a Truck Quell the Tide of Sexual Violence and Domestic Abuse?
Michael J. Sainato
Trump’s Wikileaks Flip-Flop
Manuel E. Yepe
North Korea’s Antidote to the US
Kim C. Domenico
‘Courting Failure:’ the Key to Resistance is Ending Animacide
Barbara Nimri Aziz
The Legacy of Lynne Stewart, the People’s Lawyer
Andrew Stewart
The People vs. Bernie Sanders
Daniel Warner
“Vive La France, Vive La République” vs. “God Bless America”
April 25, 2017
Russell Mokhiber
It’s Impossible to Support Single-Payer and Defend Obamacare
Nozomi Hayase
Prosecution of Assange is Persecution of Free Speech
Robert Fisk
The Madder Trump Gets, the More Seriously the World Takes Him
Giles Longley-Cook
Trump the Gardener
Bill Quigley
Major Challenges of New Orleans Charter Schools Exposed at NAACP Hearing
Jack Random
Little Fingers and Big Egos
Stanley L. Cohen
Dissent on the Lower East Side: the Post-Political Condition
Stephen Cooper
Conscientious Justice-Loving Alabamians, Speak Up!
Michael J. Sainato
Did the NRA Play a Role in the Forcing the Resignation of Surgeon General?
David Swanson
The F-35 and the Incinerating Ski Slope
Binoy Kampmark
Mike Pence in Oz
Peter Paul Catterall
Green Nationalism? How the Far Right Could Learn to Love the Environment
George Wuerthner
Range Riders: Making Tom Sawyer Proud
Clancy Sigal
It’s the Pits: the Miner’s Blues
Robert K. Tan
Abe is Taking Japan Back to the Bad Old Fascism
April 24, 2017
Mike Whitney
Is Mad Dog Planning to Invade East Syria?    
John Steppling
Puritan Jackals
Robert Hunziker
America’s Tale of Two Cities, Redux
David Jaffe
The Republican Party and the ‘Lunatic Right’
John Davis
No Tomorrow or Fashion-Forward
Patrick Cockburn
Treating Mental Health Patients as Criminals
Jack Dresser
An Accelerating Palestine Rights Movement Faces Uncertain Direction
George Wuerthner
Diet for a Warming Planet
Lawrence Wittner
Why Is There So Little Popular Protest Against Today’s Threats of Nuclear War?
Colin Todhunter
From Earth Day to the Monsanto Tribunal, Capitalism on Trial
Paul Bentley
Teacher’s Out in Front
Franklin Lamb
A Post-Christian Middle East With or Without ISIS?
Kevin Martin
We Just Paid our Taxes — are They Making the U.S. and the World Safer?
Erik Mears
Education Reformers Lowered Teachers’ Salaries, While Promising to Raise Them
Binoy Kampmark
Fleeing the Ratpac: James Packer, Gambling and Hollywood
Weekend Edition
April 21, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Diana Johnstone
The Main Issue in the French Presidential Election: National Sovereignty
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail