|
Edited on Tue Sep-06-05 09:44 PM by StefanX
LIWOP = Let It Worsen On Purpose. We certainly have PLENTY of evidence of this. The question now becomes: WHY?
Remember that most chief executives actually welcome emergencies, in a kind of twisted way: it's a great chance to show that they're can-do, to show "resolve", acquire "stature" and hopefully go up in the polls.
So why does it seem like they're bungling everything on purpose this time? Yes, one possibility is Kurdistan-style electoral politics: Genocide against an ethnic group which has repeatedly jeopardized Bush's election chances (I'm thinking the Black Caucus in Congress 2000 and 2004 being the only ones who stood up for the Dems in the vote manipulation case, Conyers' impeachment initiative, etc.)
My theory is this: Bush and Cheney may literally be fighting for their lives (or to stay out of jail).
Plamegate might lead to prosecutions under the Espionage Act (which was the law that got the Rosenbergs EXECUTED in 1953), and violations of the Geneva Conventions might lead to war-crimes trials in The Hague.
Given these prospects, it would make sense for CheneyBushCo to formulate a general plan. Basically, they need to implement martial law sometime between now and 2008 in order to save their lives and/or stay out of jail. So whenever a crisis comes along, they try to "tilt" it in the direction of general mayhem.
Their actions after Katrina look like they are TRYING to make the thing escalate out of control, so that it goes from being a flood-relief issue to a law-enforcement issue.
The more chaos they sow, the closer they come to this goal of declaring martial law. Does anyone else share this (admittedly rather tinfoil) theory?
|