This from a mass e-mailing today by Peace Action:
Bush to lay wreath in honor of Gandhi
”National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley gave a press briefing Friday and announced that George Bush will lay a wreath in honor of Mohandas K. Gandhi when he goes to India this coming week….”
I think I may be physically ill. What a travesty/obscenity/farce/insult/joke (pick five). I doubt Dubaiya even knows who Gandhi was, much less what he did and what he stood for.
Mohandas, of course, would simply offer George his unconditional love, as he did for all oppressors. Me? I’m not quite that evolved…
Nicholas Kristof is fund-raising to get Bill O’Reilly a trip to Darfur.
Perhaps we could fund-raise to buy a loom for the Oval Office.
It is an outrage except that Ghandi would have welcomed him. Yes, I’m not there yet either.
The sad part of it is that MSM will cover it and portray gwb in a good light. It really irritates me that people don’t know the history of what Ghandi really stood for. Make that any history! (I’ll stop now before I go into a rant.)
the waiter at the curry joint died.
Another re-calibration is required.
Peace
Yes, it has now been documented…
Chimps have no sense of irony… or SHAME.
Just like… Rethug politicians.
Even Nixon wasn’t this frigging shameless.
LL
Dubya being a hypocrite? Lawdy, lawdy what’s the world coming to?
His attendance at Coretta King’s funeral was an obscenity of the highest order too!
He was so wiggly and jerky during it all.
(I sure liked Bill and Hillary’s speechifying though … i know it was just steam, but it was beautiful too …)
Mohandas, of course, would simply offer George his unconditional love
unconditional love AND resistance to the point to death. ifywould not have been hugs all around. if you think bush got an earful at king’s funeral….. that was NOTHING compared to what he would have received from ghandi.
ghandi was not passive in the face of injustice.
Sorry, I should have written something to that effect for people who don’t know their history. It’s an unfortunate fluke of the English language that “passive” is so similar to “pacifist.” But Gandhi, among many other things, led the first truly successful anti-colonialist revolution in modern world history. He was a brilliant political strategist with a will of iron, and while he was offering Bush that love he would have made sure Bush’s hypocrisy and brutality were on display for all to see.
aided by the fact that the Raj was becoming more costly than profitable to England.
Had that not been the case, and had the occupying gunmen consisted of an entire army of General Dyers, well… I think it will be enough to say that even if the crusade lands had a Gandhiji, or if one should become present, the situations would not be comparable.
Her Majesty’s government was not, in those days, inclined to forfeit completely the welfare of its citizens and the future of its children merely to further enrich a handful of rich men.
What they did in the end, however, was equivalent to a spoiled and brutish child who breaks the toys of his little neighbor before going home.
I will personally send Dr. Singh a couple hundred rupees if he can engineer the arrest of His Nibs for war crimes the moment his plane touches down on Indian soil.
Yeah, I know, but I can dream, can’t I?