In the orchestrated show on the USS Abraham Licoln, Bush misused military infrastructure to serve its political agenda. Both military officials and the White House are delighted by the great media coverage. The main looser is democracy. But who cares about democracy?

Sorry this post comes too late. After a speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln praising the military for their tremendous success in Iraq, Bush visits Santa Clara this morning. If you've got a car and some free time, you can go tell him that you don't support his hostile lifestyle... Had i known...

Read this: Putin snubs Blair by refusing to lift sanctions
(We live in troubled times...)

Pursuing my monologue from the previous posting, Pope Colin Powell dismissed the France-Belgium-Luxembourg-Germany plan for joint military headquarters in Brussels: "What we [NATO] need is more capability and fleshing out the structure and the forces that are there with the equipment that they need."
Pope Powell hasn't had enough of harassing poor nondemocratic countries, he now tries to dictate what the military command structure of rich democratic nations should be.
Yesterday Cardinal Bush warned France not to use its position in Europe "to create alliances against the United States, or Britain or Spain or any of the new countries that are the new democracies in Europe."
Clearly, the White House is freaked out by the idea that there might be a second military power emerging besides the US.
And it's certainly pure delusion to think of Britain, Spain or Eastern Europeans countries, in view of their support for the war on Iraq, as founding members of a new military alliance.
But to repeat the same Old/New Europe diplomatic fuckup caused last month by infamous preacher Donald Rumsfeld is beyond intellectual poverty. It's political terrorism and it's meant. The Bush cartel warns us against the unpredictable consequences of a "fractured" Europe while actively digging the divide between the countries that support the US policies, and those that reject it.
See article in New York Times

In reply to Jacques Chirac's call for a multipolar world , Tony Blair has finally admitted why he supported the US-led war on Iraq: "the quickest way to push America toward solitary action is to set up a rival center of power." Well, that's what I call leadership! And it's actually the kind of arguments that the neurasthenic European political establishment crave for: "Just sit down, lay back and shut up otherwise it WILL get worst." The underlying assumption is that the current US policies are so fucked up that there is no space for a rational debate. So, for the sake of a peaceful world, let's act like wimps that passively support the selfish policies of a power hungry nation.

From starvation to occupation, not salvation:
- Iraqis Say U.S. Troops Kill at Least 13 Protesters
- US accused of blocking medical relief plane
- "US more keen on oil than Iraqi people", says Amnesty International
- US bars access to oil ministry, power plant
- Iraqis reject US explanations about blasts in Hai al-Muallimin

Look who's talking! Israeli envoy urges regime change in Syria and Iran. The regime that made the Middle-East one of the most militarized zone on the planet, the regime that slowly exterminates the palestinians, the very same regime that shot dead three members of human rights organizations in the last month has the guts to ask for a regime change from their neighbors. Where is this arrogance from? How did it come to life? Not long ago the possiblity of economic sanctions against Israel were considered seriously by the international community. Today Israel officials feel so boosted by the unconditional political and military support they received from the US that they dare calling for economic sanctions against their enemies. This is exactly the most perverted aspect of the war on Iraq: it gives to questionnable regimes such as that of Israel and the US the international legitimacy necessary for maintaining their policies of oppression.