Bush Wept

From Whitehouse Briefing, August 4, 2006:

Today, Ron Hutcheson of McClatchy Newspapers writes: "If there's a starting point for George W. Bush's attachment to Israel, it's the day in late 1998 when he stood on the hilltop where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and, eyes brimming with tears, read aloud from his favorite hymn, 'Amazing Grace.'

" 'He was very emotional. It was a tear-filled experience,' said Matthew Brooks, a prominent Jewish Republican who escorted Bush, then governor of Texas, and three other GOP governors on the Middle East visit. 'He brought Israel back home with him in his heart. I think he came away profoundly moved.'

"Eight years later, Bush is living up to his reputation as the most pro-Israel president ever. As Israel's military action in Lebanon heads into its fourth week, the president is standing firm against growing international pressure for an immediate cease-fire.

What's Wrong With Stopping for the Sake of Stopping?

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.

Jesus of Nazareth, c. 33 CE

What shall we talk about?

I'm thinking about tomorrow evening when the man I love and I will be joining friends for dinner. It will, no doubt, be a sweet, cool evening; unusual for this time of year in the Southwest, but we've been given grace from the desert heat this week.

Perhaps we'll dine outdoors in the garden, a lovely small oasis of wild flowers, vegetables and grapes among the alien green lawns or sensible xeriscaped front yards of cacti and stone and the Mediterranian herbs that grow so well here ... rosemary, lavender and the delightful foreigner, the Russian sage. I suppose a deal of water is expended on that garden, even with the drip irrigation, but hey, that's what an oasis is for -- water, green solitude in a desert where people may meet in peace.

But when we do -- my lover a Christian, I a wayward Catholic who wandered for a while and came back a pagan witch, and our hosts, Jews who not only identify as Jews but worship as Jews -- when we meet in their oasis of a garden ...

What will we talk about?

The weather, the cool breeze, how the kids are doing; and look how well their older dog is getting on; they'd been worried about him, as we do about our ageing pets. And the food will be delicious; no doubt the wine will be as well. (I'll be taking people's word for that.) Our host will be, as ever, gracious and after all the catching up is finished and the clatter of dinner over ...

What can we talk about?

We cannot talk about the state of the world. That is clear. Someone might try to, but we know, all of us, that we'd better not. After all, we'd all edged quietly past "The Passion of the Christ" -- and we all thought it was hideous.

(And everyone's lord knows we are not going to talk about Mel. No, no, not Mel.)

"The Passion," even Mel's latest rancid blathering -- these are small potatoes compared to what the world looks like tonight and will look like tomorrow night. We are not all of a mind about Israel and Lebanon, Israel and the American President, the Middle East itself. No, we certainly are not going to talk about that.

We have not been able to have any but strained discourse when it comes to Israel and her neighbors. In Yahweh's name (but he doesn't really have one that we know), in Christ's or that of any goddess I can mention, how can we talk about the Middle East now that it's all so much worse than the last time we met to dine?

And yet, we should start talking. Soon. At dinner tables, in coffee houses, in the small oases of our back yards and gadens, we should be talking about Israel, Lebanon, the American President, Iraq; about Syria and Iran and the unthinkable -- nuclear weapons gone astray.

We really should talk about it and find a way not to lay blame. We should try to find a path to a small oasis where we can meet in peace.

It won't be easy, but all of us should try, because, in the words of the old song:

The eastern world, it is exploding . . .

Really?

Vice President Dick Cheney on Friday pointed to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah as fresh evidence of the ongoing battle against terrorism that underscores the need to keep President Bush's Republican allies in control of Congress.

"This conflict is a long way from over," Cheney said at a fundraising appearance for a GOP congressional candidate. "It's going to be a battle that will last for a very long time. It is absolutely essential that we stay the course." -- AP

Really?

Of course, I don't doubt he said it, he's been saying it for years. But ... really? Could this really be a good reason to return Republicans to the House and in a few years to the Senate and the White House?

One war after another, the mideast in flames and -- well, the water is running red in Qana, but that's not because anyone is changing it into wine.

(Yes, it's that Cana)

Return Republicans to Congress, stay the course ...

Do you really think we should?

Really?

What's wrong with stopping for the sake of stopping?

President Bush acknowledged growing international pressure for an immediate Middle East cease-fire Monday but dismissed any idea of simply "stopping for the sake of stopping" withouta plan for lasting peace.

How about stopping for the sake of letting Lebanon's children live?

Or, how about stopping for the sake of giving everyone a chance to cool down?

Or, here's an idea -- how about stopping so Americans can take some time to get an idea of what's really going on in the Middle East?

Since none of these reasons seem to appeal to our President, perhaps it isn't that Mr. Bush can't find a reason to stop. Maybe he isn't interested in learning whether he still has the power and influence to get Israel and Hezbollah to stop at all.

America, whether Mr. Bush has the will or the power to stop the fighing now or doesn't, you still have the power to go here to find a pretty good idea about what's going on beneath the surface and behind the headlines: Blood in Beirut -- and don't forget to read all the way to the part about Exxon's fabulous profits.


You could do it for the children -- your own, the helpless ones who are dying in Qana and other cities, and the beautiful little girls who are signing the bombs, "From Israel with love."

In Lebanon

They wonder, why?

Why are they paying for the sins of others?

Or, why are they caught between Hezbollah and Israel?

Perhaps they wonder -- and they should -- why does the American Preisdent think the destruction of their democratic nation will bring the "flowering of democracy" to the Middle East?

In Lebanon, they probably wonder whether all their children will die because two Israeli soldiers became casualties of a war no child started.

It is a cause for wonder, don't you think?

Greg Palast has something for you as you begin to wonder:

We are trained to think of Middle Eastern conflicts as just modern flare-ups of ancient tribal animosities. But to uncover why the flames won’t die, the usual rule applies: follow the money.

Am I saying that Tehran, Riyadh and Houston oil chieftains conspired to ignite a war to boost their petroleum profits? I can’t imagine it. But I do wonder if Bush would let Olmert have an extra week of bombings, or if the potentates of the Persian Gulf would allow Hamas and Hezbollah to continue their deadly fireworks if it caused the price of crude to crash. You know and I know that if this war took a bite out of Exxon or the House of Saud, a ceasefire would be imposed quicker than you can say, “Let’s drill in the Arctic.”

So, maybe, you could go read the rest of what Palast has to say, and think about what's really happening to Lebanon and the Middle East. It truly is a wonder.