 |
Saturday, November 08, 2003 |
Quelling the Opposition
A second helicopter, this time a BlackHawk copter, was downed in Iraq, killing six more soldiers. This occurred within hours of the news that the military had changed their helicopter tactics after last weekends worst single military tragedy in the Iraqi war, a downing of a copter that killed 16 soldiers.
At home, debates raged about how silent Bush had been in regards to talking about this tragic incident, more pointedly what the Bush Administration policy is in regards to mourning the loss of soldiers in combat. One of the aspects of the debate centered on the fact that the media are no longer allowed to broadcast the caskets of our soldiers being removed from the military transport plane on American soil. The Administration’s argument for banning the broadcast is that the American public doesn’t have the stomach or nerves to view it. In actuality though, the American public is starting to see this phase of Iraqi democracy-building as another Vietnam. Even conservatives in my circle of friends are feeling that it is time to get out of Iraq; that this mission is not worth the cost in lives. The sight of soldiers returning in caskets would more swiftly change the national perspective, something the Administration is not willing to allow. Thus, the media ban.
This brings me once again to my topic of the Administrations dynasty of secrecy. Prior to the Iraqi war, there was a cartoon by Het Parool of Bertrams from Amsterdam, Netherlands, that is still so very relevant in today’s world. In the drawing, Bush, with his signature big ears, is dressed in work clothes that cling to his scrawnily_drawn frame because he's been hard at work with a shovel. With a smile on his face, Bush has propped himself up with the shovel, one foot planted on the shovel's blade; his arms are folded, resting on the top of its handle. Next to his feet is evidence of a freshly dug grave, heaped as high as his shins with dirt. The wooden cross-marker at the head of the grave gives the name of the victim: The Truth.
Yesterday, I quoted excerpts from Pizzo’s article "Need to Know," about the Administration’s actions to keep once public information controlled or hidden from view. Well, Atrios of Eschaton commented on yesterday’s unbelievable Washington Post article that revealed that the Bush White House is seeking to stop questions from the Democrats that pertain to how the Administration is using tax dollars.
The Bush White House, irritated by pesky questions from congressional Democrats about how the administration is using taxpayer money, has developed an efficient solution: It will not entertain any more questions from opposition lawmakers.
...
The director of the White House Office of Administration, Timothy A. Campen, sent an e-mail titled "congressional questions" to majority and minority staff on the House and Senate Appropriations panels. Expressing "the need to add a bit of structure to the Q&A process," he wrote: "Given the increase in the number and types of requests we are beginning to receive from the House and Senate, and in deference to the various committee chairmen and our desire to better coordinate these requests, I am asking that all requests for information and materials be coordinated through the committee chairmen and be put in writing from the committee."
...
It's saying we're not going to allow the opposition party to ask questions about the way we use tax money," said R. Scott Lilly, Democratic staff director for the House committee. "As far as I know, this is without modern precedent."
Norman Ornstein, a congressional specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, agreed. "I have not heard of anything like that happening before," he said. "This is obviously an excuse to avoid providing information about some of the things the Democrats are asking for."
I like what Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo wrote in response to this news: "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And if you're already pretty corrupt when you get the power ... well, then things can really get bad pretty quick, as we're seeing."
In a related CNN story, Activist Brett Bursey, 55, who was arrested October 2002 when he entered a restricted area during a presidential visit, has subpoenaed Attorney General John Ashcroft and Karl Rove to testify at his trial. Bursey’s attorney feels that their testimony would prove that he was unfairly prosecuted–he was carrying a sign that read ‘No War for Oil’ and was arrested; but others standing in the same area holding pro-Bush and pro-War signs were allowed to stay. Evidence that "the Bush administration tries to ‘sanitize’ areas of dissent around the president during visits across the country."
10:42:38 AM  | |
|
|
|
|
