Local Matters

Community Sponsors

December 3, 2018 - 12:20pm

Today's Poll: How do you grade George H.W. Bush as a president?

posted by Howard B. Owens in polls.
Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

george hw bush was the consummate lowlife oligarch who currently is crying and writhing in the heat of his forever recurring moment. Along with john mccain. His lies to get us into the 1st "gulf war" was the beginning of his most egregious, murderous, genocidal life accomplishment, but far from the only one. Check here:
https://theintercept.com/2018/12/01/the-ignored-legacy-of-george-h-w-bus...
I was a student at GCC as the "desert storm" fiasco unfolded. I was taking a class on ancient history and the professor was whipping up the war horses for the kids in the class just as the media was. I stopped him in the middle of one of his rants regarding us kicking that saddam hussein's ass to inquire whether or not he knew the history of Iraq. To which he hesitatingly replied in the affirmative. I asked him if he would explain to the class just how Kuwait came to exist. Being in an awkward moment I volunteered what I knew as it was clear that he didn't. Kuwait has been, for all of history that we know (around 5000 years) part of Iraq. The imperialist british as they were being finally run out of the area (in I think 1960) created Kuwait as a homeland for those treasonous Iraqis who were facilitators and capitulators for the murderous, occupiers of Iraq. The british general in command literally drew a free hand line on a map with a pencil to "create" Kuwait. The new country just happened to be the most oil rich area known to the world at the time. It also took more than 90% of Iraq's access to the Persian gulf and its very, very important shipping lanes. Consequently the Iraqis had to either pay the treasonous Kuwaitis for access to the gulf or build ridiculously long pipelines.
I'm not sure if it is still the same setup now but at the time bp (british petroleum) was the sole broker for Kuwaiti oil. So, when bush the terrible sr. came out of his meeting with margaret thatcher a couple of days after the Iraq invasion of their own stolen land, ghw bush stuck his finger in the air and said "this will not stand."
Considering the thieving sons he has begotten with little georgie jr playing games with the University of Texas endowment fund as Texas governor, and the connection with his minority interest in the Texas Rangers, and his own gulf war genocides. As well as the prodigal neal bush, and his systematic bloodletting of the Silverado savings and loan in Colorado, I'm of the educated opinion that bush sr made a very tidy deal with the equally genocidal maggot thatcher.
You see Iraq's invasion was a setup. The Iraqis basically asked permission from the US. Asking April Glaspie, the US ambassador to Iraq if it would be a problem with Washington if they went ahead. To which she (after consulting bush no doubt) replied that “W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” A lot of very important information that the vast, vast majority of Americans are totally unaware. And there are plenty of reputable sources to back these, as well as his many other murderous endeavors.

Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

I love it. No disputing facts, just "thumbs down." Like the condemnation of Jesus Christ, a fellow purveyor of truth. LOL, Merry Christmas.

John Roach
John Roach's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 days ago
Joined: May 29 2008 - 5:22am

Daniel, just as a historical note, you do know that Iraq (and Jordan) were also created by the same people who you claim created Kuwait, the British. And of course, the British did not create Kuwait, that is just not true. Kuwait has been around for hundreds of years and never part of Iraq, which itself did not even exist until after WW I . The British did interfere with Kuwait, but that was to give Saudi Arabia most of that country.

Jason Crater
Jason Crater's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Aug 25 2009 - 10:01am

So I read all of that and it's not even true? Typical internet...

Jason Crater
Jason Crater's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Aug 25 2009 - 10:01am
Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

I can appreciate your attention to detail John. However we're talking about basically nomadic people, and while "Kuwait" has technically been around for a few hundred years, it was only a trading port on the gulf. It wasn't until the british occupation and the discovery of oil that the value of the inland areas made it worth fighting to wrest control. The important thing is, as you point out, the british did interfere. And that interference resulted in the country of Kuwait as it is today. Which is for all intents and purposes, still a "protectorate" of the last vestiges of the imperialist brits. And any haggling over details doesn't change the fact that the now BURNING bush allowed the invasion by Iraq in order to create a false premise for us to perpetrate war. A war that Americans would not have backed without what was sold to them as good cause. Like so many others.

Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

The timeline you cite Jason is created by the BBC. And while I won't dispute most of their information, you have to understand that the area in question was areas of oasis that became cities on trade routes. The British East India company was actively politicizing the area for England for at least one hundred years before Kuwait became a "protectorate." As they do today, I'm sure that they propped up those who would serve their own goals. PROFITS. At the expense of the indigenous people. So what do you find "not true?" I'll try to explain further. Here's a link to a timeline that probably has less skin in the game than the bbc:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcrip...
And as far as John's assertions that Iraq did not exist etc. The whole area was know as Mesopotamia for the previous millennia. So this article will help to understand my claims:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/16/story-cities-day-3-baghda...

Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

BUSHWHACKERS!
So I ask you think twice --- three times or more --- before jumping bandwagons that take us to war --- those war wagons driven by little war whores ~ creating false stories so we'll settle false scores. Making each one a hero if they'll just join the hoards ~ who are already covered in blood. Those who refuse to pump and applaud are painted dragging Old Glory through mud. Defending our freedom couldn't be further from the truth, it's stealing ours and theirs. The insurgents are us! It's MOST of our "leaders" we can't trust. It's they who should be in the cross hairs.
Dan Norstrand

John Roach
John Roach's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 days ago
Joined: May 29 2008 - 5:22am

Daniel, I don't care about your opinion of Bush #1. I understand it, I just don't care.
I just wanted to correct the statement that Kuwait was part of Iraq. It never was

Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

I didn't mean to demean your point at all John. I'll admit right now that I was wrong....sort of. I do in fact welcome the scrutiny, and wish more Americans did so. My point was that the whole of Mesopotamia did encompass those countries making Kuwait a part of Iraq. And Iraqis as Mesopotamians have every right to lay claim on land that has been usurped and pupetized for the benefit of britan, to the detriment of the region. The whole region has been fractionalized and played against each other in order to further the agendas of Europeans. And displaced Europeans. The only difference between those subjugated peoples and Americans in regards to imperialist britain, is that our founding fathers had the political savey to defeat our distant rulers. Although they still do meddle in our affairs. (One of their "former" assets created the bogus Trump dossier).

Daniel Norstrand
Daniel Norstrand's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jul 18 2016 - 10:27am

And as far as not caring about my opinion, that kinda sucks but if that's truly the case then it shouldn't have to be mentioned. As long as someone gets a kernel of truth that has been denied them, or even simply has cause to think, or research, I'm grinning because much of what Americans are exposed to as "news" is propaganda and diversion. And I'm quite happy that you at least understand why I know what bush is.

Post new comment

Log in or register to post comments

Calendar

S M T W T F S
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31
 
 
 
 
 

Copyright © 2008-2019 The Batavian. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
 

blue button