Right Thinking From The Left Coast
The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it - Henry David Thoreau

Death Wish
by Lee

Welcome readers from Andrew Sullivan!

Michael Moore managed to pop his head up from his elite multi-million dollar Manhattan spider hole to spew what is undoubtedly his most bile-laden invective in quite some time.  Liberal, conservative, moderate, whatever… what he wrote today is simply beyond the pale of simple human decency.


I have never seen a head so far up a Presidential ass (pardon my Falluja) than the one I saw last night at the “news conference” given by George W. Bush. He’s still talking about finding “weapons of mass destruction”—this time on Saddam’s “turkey farm.” Turkey indeed. Clearly the White House believes there are enough idiots in the 17 swing states who will buy this. I think they are in for a rude awakening.

Wow, we’re not one paragraph into this drivel and already we’ve got Michael Moore’s first outright lie.  Here is the complete transcript of Bush’s speech; I have quoted the relevant section below.

We’ve had some success, Bill, as a result of the decision I took. Take Libya, for example. Libya was a nation that had—we viewed as a terrorist - - a nation that sponsored terror, a nation that was dangerous because of weapons. And Colonel Gadhafi made the decision, and rightly so, to disclose and disarm, for the good of the world. By the way, they found, I think, 50 tons of mustard gas, I believe it was, in a turkey farm, only because he was willing to disclose where the mustard gas was.

Bush was clearly talking about Gadhafi’s weapons programs, not Saddam’s.  And the point he was making is a valid one.  What possible use could there be for fifty tons of mustard gas on a turkey farm?  The only reason it was found was because Gadhafi told them where it was, and the only reason that Gadhafi disarmed was because he was scared of what our batshit crazy president might do to him militarily.  (Don’t believe me?  Refer to Gadhafi’s own words here and here.)

So, I guess Mikey thinks that there are enough idiots among his legion of fans who will buy this lie.  And he’s right.

I’ve been holed up for weeks in the editing room finishing my film ("Fahrenheit 911"). That’s why you haven’t heard from me lately. But after last night’s Lyndon Johnson impersonation from the East Room—essentially promising to send even more troops into the Iraq sinkhole—I had to write you all a note.

Holed up in an editing room is right.  More on that later.

First, can we stop the Orwellian language and start using the proper names for things? Those are not “contractors” in Iraq. They are not there to fix a roof or to pour concrete in a driveway. They are MERCENARIES and SOLDIERS OF FORTUNE. They are there for the money, and the money is very good if you live long enough to spend it.

Exactly what Orwellian language is at work here, Mikey?  Go back to the transcript and do a search for the word “contractor.” The only example I can find is in a question from a reporter.

Mr. President, thank you. You mentioned 17 of the 26 NATO members providing some help on the ground in Iraq. But if you look at the numbers—135,000 U.S. troops, 10,000 or 12,000 British troops, then the next largest, perhaps even the second largest contingent of guns on the ground are private contractors—literally, hired guns. Your critics, including your Democratic opponent, say that’s proof to them your coalition is window dressing. How would you answer those critics? And can you assure the American people that post-sovereignty, when the handover takes place, that there will be more burden sharing by allies, in terms of security forces? [Emphasis added]

So, the only use of the word “contractor” was by a reporter, not the president, and it was specifically used in the context of the contractors being hired guns.  Wow, Mikey, I guess Bush’s Orwellian speech was so Orwellian that I can’t even find an example of his using it!

Look, folks, these are not simple mistakes.  I went to Google, looked for the transcript of the speech, and searched the text.  It took me less than five minutes to find this stuff, and I’m one guy sitting in a room.  Mikey has an entire staff of ressearchers, access to Lexis/Nexis, and all sorts of benefits not available to me.  There is simply no way he made a mistake.  These are deliberate lies designed specifically to deceive the public.  Like everything else Moore does he doesn’t have the ability to make reasonable, fact-based critiques of his opponents, so he manufactures evidence.  It’s his standard operating procedure, and it’s absolutely pathetic.

Halliburton is not a “company” doing business in Iraq. It is a WAR PROFITEER, bilking millions from the pockets of average Americans. In past wars they would have been arrested—or worse.

Speaking of Orwellian language, let’s take a look at what a profiteer actually is.  Merriam-Webster defines profiteer as “One who makes what is considered an unreasonable profit especially on the sale of essential goods during times of emergency.” I’m sure Mikey would consider that an appropriate definition to be applied to Halliburton.  But is it in reality?  I’ve blogged on this subject before.  In this post I quoted a New York Times article on this very subject.

The rebuilding of Iraq’s oil industry has been characterized in the months since by increasing costs and scant public explanation. An examination of what has grown into a multibillion-dollar contract to restore Iraq’s oil infrastructure shows no evidence of profiteering by Halliburton, the Houston-based oil services company, but it does demonstrate a struggle between price controls and the uncertainties of war, with price controls frequently losing. ...

So far this year, Halliburton’s profits from Iraq have been minimal. The company’s latest report to the Securities and Exchange Commission shows $1.3 billion in revenues from work in Iraq and $46 million in pretax profits for the first nine months of 2003. But its profit may grow once the Pentagon completes a formal evaluation of the work. If the government is satisfied, Halliburton is entitled to a performance fee of up to 5 percent of the contract’s entire value, which could mean additional payments of $100 million or more. ... [Emphasis added]

So, Halliburton is doing government work, for which it is currently making very little profit.  At some point in the future, provided they complete their work satisfactorily, they are entitled to a bonus of 5 percent.  Is this an “unreasonable profit on the sale of essential goods” during a time of war?  It doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me.  Nor does it to Steven Kelman, a former Clinton administration official, who I blogged on here.  He writes:

Many people are also under the impression that contractors take the government to the cleaners. In fact, government keeps a watchful eye on contractor profits—and government work has low profit margins compared with the commercial work the same companies perform. Look at the annual reports of information technology companies with extensive government and nongovernment business, such as EDS Corp. or Computer Sciences Corp. You will see that margins for their government customers are regularly below those for commercial ones. As for the much-maligned Halliburton, a few days ago the company disclosed, as part of its third-quarter earnings report, operating income from its Iraq contracts of $34 million on revenue of $900 million—a return on sales of 3.7 percent, hardly the stuff of plunder.

See, Mikey is hoping that most of his fans are too stupid to know what profiteering actually is.  Well, he’d be right, most of his fans are that stupid.  See, profiteering is different from simply profiting.  The companies who made bullets, bombs, planes, and submarines for the United States in WWII all made a profit doing so.  Without the profit motive there’s no reason for doing anything, something that multi-millionaire Michael Moore knows all too well.  So companies who provide services to the government, whether in wartime or in any other capacity, all make a profit doing so.  This does not make them profiteers.  Halliburton is, in no sense of the word, a profiteer, but that won’t stop Mikey from making the claim both in this message and in his upcoming craptastic lie-fest of a film.

The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not “insurgents” or “terrorists” or “The Enemy.” They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush? You closed down a friggin’ weekly newspaper, you great giver of freedom and democracy! Then all hell broke loose. The paper only had 10,000 readers! Why are you smirking?

This paragraph is one of the most vile, despicable things I have ever seen written by Mike, and I’ve read just about all his stuff.  This is the true, dark face of the “peace movement” left.  This is the 2004 version of Jane Fonda remarking that she’d like to shoot down an American plane.

Mike wants to see America lose, just so he can prove his point.  And in order for America to lose American soldiers have to die.  A lot of them.

First off, comparing the Islamists to the men who fought to found this country is obscene.  Let’s look at what these “Minutemen” are fighting for.  They want to implement Islamic Sharia law, a theocratic ideology as fascist as anything ever envisioned by Adolph Hitler.  They want to make women the property of their husbands.  They support female genital mutilation.  They view Jews as “apes and pigs.” Need I go on?  We all know just what these “revolutionaries” stand for—pure, fundamental, human evil.  There are no two ways about it, no excuses, no dismissals.  What these men are fighting for is the same type of oppression that has been the hallmark of much of human civilization for thousands of years. 

And these are the men that Mikey supports.  His hatred of America, of George W. Bush in particular, is so keenly honed, so overpowering, that he is actually hoping for the deaths of American servicemen so that he can have the satisfaction of pointing fingers and saying, “I told you so.” Every American death is a notch in Mikey’s ample belt.  Like the rest of the left he whores out servicemen and women to advance his cause, without ever actually giving a shit about them. 

Mikey hates America as much as Osama bin Laden, but the latter at least has the integrity to admit it.

One of the most important lessons America learned from Vietnam was the way NOT to treat its soldiers.  During that war the pro-communist left would simply get up and accuse soldiers of being baby-killers, then spit on them when they arrived at the airport.  Well, the left learned its lesson from that experience.  Now they wrap their anti-American invective in the veneer of faux patriotism, stating that we should “Bring the troops home,” as if their concern was for the troops and not for their greater goal of seeing America defeated. 

I also love the way Mikey mentions the closing of an Iraqi newspaper as evidence of America’s crushing of dissent.  According to one Iraq-based correspondent for the Washington Post there are “more than 200 Arabic-language newspapers in Iraq, and the headlines and newscasts on al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya seem to show nothing but the violence at times.” The one newspaper that was closed by the authorities was done so because they were specifically inciting violence against coalition forces and foreigners.  (Note, Mikey, that the First Amendment to the Constitution does not guarantee an individual the right to incite violence.  You can look it up and everything.) So one paper closed, with over 200 still up and printing away.  Wow, that’s quite a crushing of free speech you’ve uncovered there!

The truly ironic thing?  There is only one Arabic country in the Middle East with a free press—Iraq.  And that freedom didn’t exist under Saddam Hussein.

One year after we wiped the face of the Saddam statue with our American flag before yanking him down, it is now too dangerous for a single media person to go to that square in Baghdad and file a report on the wonderful one-year anniversary celebration. Of course, there is no celebration, and those brave blow-dried “embeds” can’t even leave the safety of the fort in downtown Baghdad. They never actually SEE what is taking place across Iraq (most of the pictures we see on TV are shot by Arab media and some Europeans). When you watch a report “from Iraq” what you are getting is the press release handed out by the U.S. occupation force and repeated to you as “news.”

Odd that for the past year we’ve been getting news reports from Iraq and they’ve all been US Army press releases, considering that the Army’s press agency just went live this month.

The U.S. military will launch its own news service in Iraq and Afghanistan to send military video, text and photos directly to the Internet or news outlets.

The $6.3 million project, expected to begin operating in April, is one of the largest military public affairs projects in recent memory, and is intended to allow small media outlets in the United States and elsewhere to bypass what the Pentagon views as an increasingly combative press corps.

U.S. officials have complained that Iraq-based media focuses on catastrophic events like car bombs and soldiers’ deaths, while giving short shrift to U.S. rebuilding efforts.

They’re not the only ones complaining about it.  Take a look at the organization Spirit of America, which is raising funds to support the free press in Iraq.  Take a look at this image from their front page.


Be honest, Mikey.  When was the last time you saw a story anywhere in the US media about the good our soldiers are doing in Iraq?  It’s been a long time.  If all we’re getting are US Army press releases, why don’t they portray the military operation in a better light?  Consider the kill ratio.  See, every time there is a report from Iraq on American soldiers who are killed, we almost never hear anything about the number of Jihadis killed in retalliation.  This is a subject I blogged on recently.  An AP report mentioned that recent fighting had killed 4 Marines and 280 Iraqis.  That’s an astonishing kill ratio.  I wrote:

The reporter has to, of course, try to spin this as being as bad as possible for the United States. But the fact remains that, according to this article, we’ve killed 70 of them for every one of us that they’ve gotten. That’s quite a ratio, and I imagine the number of Iraqi dead is going to rise exponentially while the number of US dead will rise linearly, if at all.

To prove my point, let’s do a completely unscientific test using Google news.  Searching for the string “dead marines” yields 364 results.  “quagmire” yields 1830.  “Kill ratio”, however, yields five, none of which are about Iraq.  The string “building schools” iraq gives us 147 links, with just as many negative articles as positive ones.  So, where is this massive display of pro-war propaganda that Mikey speaks of?  I can’t find it anywhere.  I wish the media were more on our side, but after doing everything they could to predict a quagmire they’re now working feverishly to prove themselves right.

I currently have two cameramen/reporters doing work for me in Iraq for my movie (unbeknownst to the Army). They are talking to soldiers and gathering the true sentiment about what is really going on.

Ah, yes.  Now we get to the crux of Mikey’s hypocrisy.  Note that he’s got guys “working for him” in Iraq.  In other words, Mikey didn’t have the balls to go to Iraq himself.  He’s more than willing to openly hope for the defeat of America (and by implication the deaths of American servicemen) but he’s too much of a gutless coward to haul his fat ass over there himself.  As much a tool as I think Sean Penn is, at least he had the guts to go to Iraq twice to see for himself what’s going on.  Mikey’s going to make a movie, the basis of which is Iraq an George Bush, and he couldn’t even go over there and film it himself. 

Oh, Mikey?  I realize you’re going to find a few servicemembers who are willing to badmouth the mission there.  Most of them are going to be reservists, who figured they were going to be doing their weekend warrior stuff and never planned on going to war for a year or more at a time.  But overall the troops support the mission.  If you’d like to hear what a true hero thinks, read this letter from one of my readers.

Well Lee, This is it.  I’m out tomorrow on my way back to Iraq. I just wanted you and others on hereknow that I appreciate the words of encouragement and sincere feelings of caring for myself and other soldiers. I hope I don’t sound like a broken record, and some on here may not agree with me one way or another, but you truly need to keep supporting us because of all the liberal bullshit that is spewing out of the news will surely make some young jar-head have second thoughts about why we serve this country and her people. . . . If I sound like I’m rambling on it’s because I’m a little nervous and pumped up and I can vent on here, and not have to bother my wife and get her going too. She shows no fear in my leaving, and that kind of bothers me into thinking that she can handle it with or without me. I’m more scared then she is. . . . Well I guess that’s it for now. If you don’t hear from me in a few months, I’m either dead or having one hell of a time kicking rag asses. Lets hope it the latter of the two.

That, Mikey, is a brave, selfless man.  He’s going back to Iraq, gladly, and he’s prepared to make the sacrifice of his life.  You don’t have the balls to include someone like him in your film.  You’re going to send your camera crew out to film as many soldiers as possible who are willing to piss and moan, and then you’re going to portray this skewed version as reality.  If you were to run into this Marine over there he’d beat the living shit out of you.

Actually, I just had a thought.  In addition to your sheer cowardice, I just realized why you would never go to Iraq.  Most of the military despises you, a fact you know all too well but will never admit.  I bet your camera crew pretends to be a standard news outfit, and doesn’t inform the soldiers that they’re being filmed for Michael Moore’s latest anti-American propaganda piece.  If you were running around the desert with a camera and a microphone you would most likely get a rifle butt in your face and you damn well know it.

They Fed Ex the footage back to me each week. That’s right, Fed Ex. Who said we haven’t brought freedom to Iraq!

In case you forgot already, you did.

The funniest story my guys tell me is how when they fly into Baghdad, they don’t have to show a passport or go through immigration. Why not? Because they have not traveled from a foreign country—they’re coming from America TO America, a place that is ours, a new American territory called Iraq.

After WWII Douglas MacArthur ruled Japan for about four years, if memory serves.  Japan’s constitution was written by MacArthur and handed to the Japanese.  By copntrast we’ve allowed the Iraqis to forge their own constitution, and are handing over power to an Iraqi government about 18 months after the fall of Saddam.  Japan seemed to work out okay in the end, didn’t it?

There is a lot of talk amongst Bush’s opponents that we should turn this war over to the United Nations. Why should the other countries of this world, countries who tried to talk us out of this folly, now have to clean up our mess? I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle. I’m sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe—just maybe—God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end.

Again we have Michael Moore actively praying for the deaths of American soldiers simply so he can have the satisfaction of being right.  See, this is what I find supremely sickening about Mikey and his ilk.  Allow me to relay an anecdote that I have used numerous times in the past.

One of Bill Clinton’s first major acts as president was to deploy US Marines to Haiti in order to restore Jean Bertrand Aristide, their first democratically-elected left wing dictator, to power.  I wholeheartedly disagreed with this operation.  I don’t think the entire island of Haiti is worth the life of one US Marine.  That being said, the second that the decision was made to deploy the troops I completely dropped my objection and got behind the game.  I hoped that the troops would get there, kill anyone that needed killing, accomplish their objective as quickly as possible, and come home victorious.  Never, in a million years, would I have hoped for US troops to die simply so I could point my fingers at Bill Clinton and say, “I told you so.”

Michael Moore has written in his own words his desire for US troops to die in sufficient numbers that we lose in Iraq.  How anyone can claim that this man is anything other than an America-hating scumbag is beyond me.

Until then, enjoy the “pacification” of Falluja, the “containment” of Sadr City, and the next Tet Offensive – oops, I mean, “terrorist attack by a small group of Baathist loyalists” (Hahaha! I love writing those words, Baathist loyalists, it makes me sound so Peter Jennings!)—followed by a “news conference” where we will be told that we must “stay the course” because we are “winning the hearts and minds of the people.”

And in the end we will win hearts and minds, and we will be victorious, despite your best efforts to aid the Islamofascist jihadis and secure the deaths of as many American soldiers as possible.

I’ll write again soon. Don’t despair. Remember, the American people are not that stupid. Sure, we can be frightened into a war, but we always come around sooner or later—and the one way this is NOT like Vietnam is that it hasn’t taken the public four long years to figure out they were lied to.

Actually, what America learned from Vietnam were two lessons.  The first is that supporting the troops is essential to winning the war, as lesson you have used for your own evil devices.  The second lesson is embodied in the Powell Doctrine.

Essentially, the Doctrine expresses that military action should be used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to national security by the intended target; the force, when used, should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy; there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public; and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the military is engaged.

None of these things were done in Vietnam.  What the American military learned was how to correctly fight a war.

Now if Bush would just quit speaking in public and giving me more free material for my movie, I can get back to work and get it done. I’ve got four weeks left ‘til completion.

Now this I find interesting.  I would have thought that Mikey would have waited until closer to the election to release his lie-fest.  That way he’d be able to get his message out just in time to try and skew the election to his favor.  Perhaps it is because he knows that the major media in this country are going to give him a free pass, and the only criticism he’s going to get is from the blogging community?  Beats me.

No matter what, Moore will be free to spew his hate-filled lies and wish for the deaths of Americans, and he’ll make millions and millions of dollars doing so.  Talk about a war profiteer.

Update: I’ve got more thoughts on Bush’s turkey farm comments here.

Posted by Lee on 04/16/04 at 02:12 AM (Discuss this in the forums)


Next entry: A Few More Francs

Previous entry: WKRAP in Cincinatti

<< Back to main