Maybe you’ve heard of the rather edgy marketing that Johnny Walker is doing in Beirut; mind you, marketing whiskey in Beirut is always an edgy business, and I speak as the progeny of a woman who lived with a guy who made a moderate fortune importing Johnny Walker Black into Saudi Arabia. And taking blackmail photos of the Saudis in his casino for the CIA, but that’s neither here nor there.
Although it’s not as edgy as marketing it in Salt Lake City, come to think of it.
Their actual sign:
And the suggested new, rather more specific design, from Animal New York, via Gawker:
Thanks to Desert Beacon, whom I found because s/he linked to me in this very post.
Does that make me a self-abusing wanker?
Not as much as Bush is.
Bush: A totally political 9/11 mission creep address to the nation
I’ve lost count of the number of reasons the Bush Administration’s set forth for why it is we’re bogged down in Iraq. Whatever the number, tonight’s address emphasized another one: “The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad,” Mr. Bush said. [NYT] So, now we have yet another reason to be bogged down in Iraq? What happened to the previous ones?
There was no connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda in 2001. [Reuters]
Hussein considered AQ followers in Iraq to be outlaws. [WT]
There were no weapons of mass destruction. [BBC]
There was no viable nuclear weapons program. [ST]
There was no “45 minute” attack possible. [GPF]
There was no connection between Baghdad and yellowcake from Nigeria. [WFE]
There was no Atta/Iraqi meeting in Prague. [T-UK]
“If we do not defeat these enemies now,” Mr. Bush said, “we will leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons.” [NYT] Nothing like a little fear-mongering reminiscent of Condoleezza Rice’s comment about seeing Mushroom Shaped Clouds? Same old Bush White House election year song — “Vote Republican or Die?” Support my occupation of Iraq or bin Laden’s boyz will strike you in suburbia? For someone who said he wanted to take “politics” out of 9/11 he certainly did a good job of inserting it front and center.
Who, Mr. President, are these “enemies?” First, wasn’t this chaos just what advisers from the GHW Bush Administration said would happen if we foolishly decided to invade Iraq in 1991? [RCstr]
Secondly, if we were going to defeat “these enemies,” wouldn’t it have been a good thing to have put enough troops on the ground in the first place? [WaPo] To have developed a solid plan for the occupation? [KCS] To have clearly understood the complex dynamic between the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shi’a? [Dossier UK]
So, now Mr. President, you are telling me it’s my patriotic duty to buckle down and bail your administration out of this global blunder lest our children have to bear the brunt of your imperious foolishness? In our family, when we got into trouble of our own creation, and then had the temerity to ask for someone to clean up the mess, the adult answer was simplicity itself: “You got yourself into it, so now you can get yourself out of it.”
And lastly tonight a Special Comment on why we are here. Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space.
And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again, trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter.
And all the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people, including four of my friends, two in the planes and — as I discovered from those “missing posters” seared still into my soul — two more in the Towers.
And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors.
I belabor this to emphasize that, for me… this was, and is, and always shall be, personal.
And anyone who claims that I and others like me are “soft”, or have “forgotten” the lessons of what happened here — is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante — and at worst, an idiot — whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President.
However. Of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast — of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds… none of us could have predicted… this.
Five years later this space… is still empty.
Five years later there is no Memorial to the dead.
Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.
Five years later this country’s wound is still open.
Five years… later this country’s mass grave is still unmarked.
Five years later… this is still… just a background for a photo-op.
It is beyond shameful.
—
At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial — barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field, Mr. Lincoln said “we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract.”
Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice.
Today our leaders could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. “We can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground.” So we won’t.
Instead they bicker and buck-pass. They thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists to write how good a job they’re doing — instead of doing any job at all.
Five years later, Mr. Bush… we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir — on these 16 empty acres, the terrorists… are clearly, still winning.
And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it.
—
And there is something worse still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation.
There is its symbolism — of the promise unfulfilled, the urgent oath, reduced to lazy execution.
The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it… was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support.
Those who did not belong to his party — tabled that.
Those who doubted the mechanics of his election — ignored that.
Those who wondered of his qualifications — forgot that.
History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government, by its critics.
It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation’s wounds, but to take political advantage.
Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.
The President — and those around him — did that.
They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, “bi-partisanship” meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused; as appeasers; as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, “validate the strategy of the terrorists.”
They promised protection, and then showed that to them “protection” meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken… a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated Al-Qaeda as much as we did.
The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had ’something to do’ with 9/11, is “lying by implication.”
The impolite phrase, is “impeachable offense.”
Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space… and to this, the current, curdled, version of our beloved country.
Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11.
Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated, that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible — for anything — in his own administration.
Yet what is happening this very night?
A mini-series, created, influenced — possibly financed by — the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes.
The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option.
How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death… after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections… how dare you or those around you… ever “spin” 9/11.
—
Just as the terrorists have succeeded — are still succeeding — as long as there is no memorial and no construction here at Ground Zero…
So too have they succeeded, and are still succeeding — as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans.
This is an odd point to cite a television program, especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney’s continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things.
And long ago, a series called “The Twilight Zone” broadcast a riveting episode entitled “The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street.”
In brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm.
Suddenly his car — and only his car — starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man’s lights go on.
As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced.
An “alien” is shot — but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help.
The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials areseen, manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there’s no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, “they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it’s themselves.”
And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing, Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight.
“The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices – to be found only in the minds of men.
“For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own — for the children, and the children yet unborn.”
—
When those who dissent are told time and time again — as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus — that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American…
When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have “forgotten the lessons of 9/11″… look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:
Are you celebrating by watching ABC made-for-tv-and-edited-in-a-blind-panic-so-we-don’t-get-sued movies? Here are some alternative credits from Jesus’ General. Carville‘s not the only one who’s gone Hollywood, it seems.
Afghanistan Needs Food, Not Bombs:
Send Zucchinis to War Minister Gordon O’Connor Today!
Please forward far and wide
Afghanistan Needs Food, not Bombs: Send a Zucchini today to Canada’s War Minister
(no postage required–details below, including sample letter and address)
This message includes:
1. FOOD CRISIS IN AFGHANISTAN
2. CANADA SHOULD SEND FOOD, NOT BOMBS, TO AFGHANISTAN
3. WHY ZUCCHINIS, WHY NOW?
4. FEED THE AFGHAN PEOPLE, STOP SQUASHING THEIR HOPES FOR PEACE (includes address of War Minister Gordon O’Connor and sample letter)
5. SENLIS COUNCIL NEWS RELEASE ON HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN AFGHANISTAN
1. FOOD CRISIS IN AFGHANISTAN
This week, in a much under-reported story, the European-based Senlis Council released a report that stated children are starving in Afghanistan.
Foreign military expenditures in that country outpace development and reconstruction spending by 900% (much as the Canadian military budget outpaces the housing budget by over 900%!)
Indeed, $82.5 billion (U.S. funds) have been spent on military operations in Afghanistan since 2002 compared with just $7.3 billion on development.
The report states that “five years after the 2001 US-led invasion, a humanitarian crisis of starvation and poverty has gripped the south of the country and the US- and UK-led failed counter-narcotics and military policies are responsible…makeshift, unregistered refugee camps of starving children, civilians displaced by counter-narcotics eradication and bombing campaigns can be found on the doorstep of new US and UK multi-million dollar military camps.” (see full Senlis press release below)
The United Nations World Food Programme has been forced to cancel plans to provide more than 2.5 million Afghans with urgent food aid. Unless these needs are met, this will have dire consequences for millions of Afghans.
2. CANADA SHOULD SEND FOOD, NOT BOMBS, TO AFGHANISTAN
We are most often told that the main reason the Canadian military is in Afghanistan is to help the Afghan people. Many Afghan people are starving. It is time to send massive amounts of food aid, not massive amounts of bullets and bombs.
3. WHY ZUCCHINIS, WHY NOW?
The Power of A Symbol
Politicians are often unable to grasp the meaning of words, and require symbols to help them out. We have seen in the past few years stunning examples of Homes not Bombs campaigns that have succeeded in employing the noble zucchini in the cause of peace. We have argued that successive war ministers’ confused sexual desires to launch phallic-shaped missiles would be more safely directed if phallic-shaped zucchinis were sent instead.
Surely it can be no coincidence that:
1. Homes not Bombs repeatedly presented Peace Zucchinis to then War Minister Art Eggleton in an effort to get Canada out of star wars; his government rejected overt participation in the Bush space warfare scheme.
2. Homes not Bombs presented Peace Zucchinis to then War Minister John McCallum in late January, 2003, with the demand that Canada not join the war against Iraq. His government did not formally join that invasion, and McCallum enjoyed a good stir-fry.
3. Homes not Bombs spearheaded the campaign to send empty pens to then “Public Safety” Minister Anne McLellan, the idea being her desk would fill up with so many ink-less pens that when CSIS came knocking for her to sign a secret trial security certificate, she wouldn’t be able to find a pen that actually worked. Needless to say, McLellan never signed a security certificate!
4. Homes not Bombs precursor Banana Republics United, a 1980s open conspiracy, played a major role in a campaign to send bananas to then-U.S. Ambassador Paul Robinson, who treated Canada much like said banana republic. Needless to say, he eventually split.
There is clearly a pattern here that cannot be ignored.
Perhaps the most famous example of a culinary symbol in the cause of peace is described by David Albert in People Power: Applying Non-violence Theory:
“In the mid 1950s, the pacifist Fellowship of Reconciliation, learning of famine in the Chinese mainland, launched a “Feed Thine Enemy” campaign.
Members and friends mailed thousands of little bags of rice to the White House with a tag quoting the Bible, “If thine enemy hunger, feed him.” As far as anyone knew for more than ten years, the campaign was an abject failure. The President did not acknowledge receipt of the bags publicly; certainly no rice was ever sent to China.
“What non-violent activists only learned a decade later was that the campaign played a significant, perhaps even determining role in preventing nuclear war. Twice while the campaign was on, President Eisenhower met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to consider US options in the conflict with China over two islands, Quemoy and Matsu. The generals twice recommended the use of nuclear weapons. President Eisenhower each time turned to his aide and asked how many little bags of rice had come in. When told they numbered in the tens of thousands, Eisenhower told the generals that as long as so many Americans were expressing active interest in having the US feed the Chinese, he certainly wasn’t going to consider using nuclear weapons against them.
4. FEED THE AFGHAN PEOPLE, STOP SQUASHING THEIR HOPES FOR PEACE
So now it is time to make sure War Minister Gordon O’Connor gets the picture. Postage free, you can mail a zucchini and a note urging that O’Connor feed, not bomb, the people of Afghanistan (sample letter follows). Can you imagine the War Minister’s office deluged with zucchinis? He can’t help but charter a plane and start loading them personally!)
We would like to keep a running tally, so please email tasc@web.ca when you have lovingly wrapped your zucchini in an envelope and sent it postage-free to the following address:
Gordon O’Connor, MP, War Minister
157 East Block
House of Commons
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6
Dear Mr. O’Connor,
Please forward the enclosed zucchini to the people of Afghanistan with the next plane headed that way. It would be far better to send this phallic symbol than the phallic symbols – missiles and mortar rounds – that you are currently sending.
As you must be aware, there is a humanitarian crisis, especially in the southern region of Afghanistan, where thousands of Canadian troops are deployed. That crisis is one of extreme poverty and hunger, and cannot be alleviated with guns, aerial bombardment, house raids, arbitrary detention, and mistreatment of detainees.
The respected Senlis Council recently noted that 900% more has been spent on the military build-up than on development in Afghanistan.
The United Nations World Food Programme has been forced to cancel plans to provide more than 2.5 million Afghans with urgent food aid. Unless these needs are met, this will have dire consequences for millions of Afghans.
I urge you to bring Canada’s troops home and to seek dialogue and peaceful solutions to the crisis in Afghanistan. The billions you are spending to fight there would be far better spent on peaceful conflict resolution and meeting the pressing social needs of the Afghan people.
You often refer to those you are fighting as your enemy. While “enemy thinking” is an unacceptable world view that inevitably leads to violence, I remind you of the Biblical reference in Romans 12:20, “If thine enemy hunger, feed him.”
The Afghan people are not our enemy. But they are hungry. It’s time for food, not bombs.