Buencamino does foreign and political affairs analysis for Action for Economic Reforms. This piece was published in the newspaper Today, 11 August 2004, page 9.
I’m the commander—see, I don’t need to explain— I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president. – George Bush
In a recent speech, Bush said, “Our enemies are innovative andresourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways toharm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
Americans could not believe what they heard so they claimed Bush hasproblems with the English language and many of the things he says needto be “clarified.”
I think Americans “contextualize” and reinterpret Bush’s words because they are afraid to face the truth about him.
For example, immediately after the Democratic Party convention, the USDepartment of Homeland Security raised the color-coded US terror alertlevel to its highest color ever, orange. Homeland Security citedintelligence information about planned al-Qaeda attacks againstspecific targets in the US but conveniently forgot to tell Americansthat their “new” intelligence was stale, dating back at least threeyears to pre-911 days.
The eerie correlation between Bush’s poll ratings and the occasionswhen he pulls “terrorists” out of his ass led Americans to ask, didHomeland Security make an honest mistake or was it intentionallyterrorizing the people?
The question would not even arise if one simply took Bush at his word:“They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and ourpeople, and NEITHER DO WE.”
Here is another example. In an interview with Al Arabiya TV, Bush said,“Iraqis are sick of foreign people coming in their country and tryingto destabilize their country, and we will help them rid Iraq of thesekillers.”
And Americans wonder why so many of them are dying in Iraq? Bush meantit when he said, “we will help them get rid of these killers.”
Then there is the talk in Washington about how a group of pro-Israelneo-conservatives hijacked foreign policy. That kind of talk impliesthat Bush surrendered US foreign policy to Israel without knowing it.Is there a basis for thinking that Bush was snookered? None.
On the contrary, as early as September 2000, Bush announced his foreignpolicy as follows, “I will have a foreign-handed foreign policy.”
And, just in case we didn’t get it the first time, Bush spelled it outon another occasion two years later. He said, “There’s nothing moredeep than recognizing Israel’s right to exist. That’s the most deepthought of all… I can’t think of anything more deep than that right. ”
Then there’s the “lying.” The US Senate Intelligence Committee spent avast amount of money and time to prove that Bush did not lie; he waslied to by his own intelligence agencies.
Wouldn’t it have been much easier and cheaper if the senators hadsimply said, “Bush wasn’t lying. He had his dates wrong. He was lookingat receipts for gas and biological weapons which we delivered to Saddamduring the Iran-Iraq war.”
In order to understand Bush, one must take his words for what theymean, while keeping in mind the wise words of Woody Allen, “His lack ofeducation is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moralbankruptcy.”
Comments