Chomsky, Schell, Zinn, and Polk

Jeffrey over at Library Chronicles spotted this. Also from The Guardian, four powerful voices weigh in on the mess in Iraq.

I wonder if Bush is so full of shit and hubris that he'd take the same path if somehow he could go back and start again. Alas, probably so. The other day I caught a replay of his "all glory and honor are yours, almighty Rumsfeld" speech. Dubya's look and tone when he barked about "completing the mission" spoke volumes as to his persona: petty, vain, vindictive, narcissistic--and his exit offered more of the same. Emperor Tinpot, unable to trouble himself with the masses.

Bush, and his minions, live in a world of myth. In their, uh, well, I can't honestly call it mindset, but that the closest match, the United States=all good, and the Middle East/Central Asia=, well, that's the funny part. They can't decide if they're trying to help the little brown skinned people find "western democratic happiness" or if they're leading a crusade against the swarthy heathen. They change their minds, sometimes in the course of minutes, as to the paradigm of the day.

Recently, I read the opening essay in the compendium Reel Bad Arabs--it included a quote from, of all people, John F. Kennedy:

"For the great enemy of truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, continued, and dishonest--but the myth--persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears."

The book, like this Robert Fisk article, demonstrates an ongoing portrayal of Arabs in our entertainment media as sub-human connivers and snivelers. No doubt this feeds upon, and then fuels, the ongoing racism expressed in BOTH attitudes noted above. The problem, though, is that it doesn't add a single constructive idea to the debate.

I hope it's a little rash to talk seriously about Armageddon. But turning the Middle East into a shooting gallery might well bring about something similar.