“F___ SADDAM. WE’RE TAKING HIM OUT.”

“Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice. It was March 2002, and Miss Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in coalition with America’s Middle East allies. Bush wasn’t interested.”

The above quote was taken directly from the Special Edition, March 31, 2003, Time Magazine. Ironically this quote was just above a picture of our President sincerely praying. This obviously obnoxious, arrogant attitude reflected in the vulgar proclamation of the U.S. Commander-In-Chief, painfully reminds me of another tragedy that occurred to a former high school senior whom I had once briefly assisted. I had met him in my last school where I had been counselor and ombudsman before being employed for six years in a combination of Beirut, Lebanon, and Riyadh, Taif and Jiddah, Saudi Arabia.

In my relatively brief encounter with this Eagle Scout, I soon discovered that, similar to the current U.S. President, he had a fondness for using the disgusting “F.” word when speaking about other people he did not approve of. In my role as a school ombudsman, I had been requested by him to help resolve a grade conflict with his language arts instructor who also was head of the language arts department and quite respected by the vast majority of the staff and students. We were able to resolve his conflict with his English teacher but the young man and I had no further contact because I was not his counselor in our school of 2,000 students. Consequently, I had no further opportunity to work with him regarding his “Bush like,” arrogant attitude that appeared to cause his frequent use of the “F” word. But, similar to what was probably the response of Ms Rice and the three Senators to the President’s crude use of the vulgar word, I never dreamed that that the young man’s “f this” and “f that” attitude would get him into such deep trouble. But tragically the nonverbal “F” word known as “the finger” later cost him his life in a violent encounter with a large, strong National Football League player who was a former star line-backer at the nearby University of Washington.

From the newspaper account that I later read since I was in Lebanon of the time of the regrettable incident, the young man had waved his middle finger at the linebacker the student had passed in his car. (This obscene finger gesture is the nonverbal street equivalent of “F… you.) He then allegedly pulled his pocket knife on the muscular linebacker when the enraged athlete later approached him in the parking lot of a near by drive-in-restaurant. His own boy scout training had not prepared him to realize that when you wave a relatively small knife at a large, strong person you have enraged, its not the time to think that you have frightened the person sufficiently so that you can say to yourself, “mission accomplished.” Reportedly, the angered football player easily knocked his knife away. Then he just as easily hit him hard enough that he fell to the ground. Then he was kicked hard enough so that he later died of fatal injuries in the hospital.

There was a trial and the line-backer served a number of years in prison for what was judged to be man-slaughter.

Very similar to the Iraq war, this tragic event for this immature, arrogant boy and the gifted but enraged line-backer, did not need to have occurred. If before this young man’s arrogance reached the stage of putting him into a lethal encounter with a hostile man who totally outmatched him in size, he had received psychological intervention for his attitude, this lethal encounter quite probably would not have occurred.

Though we as a society have come to accept those who have arrogant, “f you” attitudes as having a right to that type of attitude and think of them as obnoxious but harmless, we do not do that person or society a favor by being so accepting. That kind of arrogant attitude is quite potentially dangerous as the tragedy to the Eagle Scout revealed and as the current tragedy in Iraq continues to reveal.

Also, in this situation it was very possible that the gifted football player could have avoided being responsible for another human being’s death if he had received anger management counseling before his fatal encounter with a much weaker person. For it was reported that he had had an earlier violent encounter with another person who had offended him.

The point is this. As the Quran emphatically reveals regarding the arrogance of fir-aun, (pharaoh) it was “arrogance” which led to the drowning of both the Egyptian leadership and the Egyptian military. And that arrogance by the Egyptian Pharaoh could have easily led to the total extinction of the Hebrew race that existed under Moses’ leadership if it had not been for the supernatural intervention of GOD at the Red Sea. (Regarding the destructive capacity of arrogance and ALLAH’s severe judgment of arrogance, please read Al Qasas 28:39, 40 in the Holy Quran.)

So as the Holy Quran and also the Bible reveal, it can be a lethal mistake for any society to underestimate the horrible destructive capacity of an unchecked, unnoticed or untreated arrogant attitude. So, on a several million times larger scale than the lack of treatment for the Eagle Scout, the same principal of treating an arrogant attitude that could have saved his valuable life could also have saved the valuable nation of Iraq from horrible destruction and devastation. For if some capable, caring person could have helped our immature and very arrogant President resolve his impulsive “shoot from the lip, fuc. you” arrogant, macho attitude and mentality, today quite likely the U.S. would not be in the bloody Iraq War, and at least a million valuable human beings would still be living.

So quite possibly the whole Iraq massacre could have been avoided. But that eventually would have presupposed some type of psychological counseling perhaps by a Dr. Phil type psychologist, who could have helped modify our Presidents “F.. you” attitude.” For it should be obvious to all that to even begin to adequately function as a world leader, it is absolutely necessary that a person must have at least a moderate level of maturity and impulse control. He also must be able to listen to the reasoned opinions of others such as his national security advisor and committed, wise Senators, instead of only listening to his own “F… you” “Bring ‘em back dead or alive,” macho mentality. For as the entire world has tragically witnessed, his type of dangerous, macho, immature attitude can and has led to extreme suffering and absolute chaos in a formerly stable, functioning sovereign nation. That nation, though like a few other nations, was a nation ruled by an autocratic dictator, but Saddam’s autocratic nation was not exporting terrorism as Vice President Dick Cheney still insists. And no matter how much it is denied, there were several other quite reasonable options of how to neutralize the destructive capacity of Saddam Hussein without attempting to democratize his nation and turn former neighbors against each other and unwisely destroy former security and stability. Consequently, rivers of blood now flow in the former stable nation’s streets.

Thus, if the vital importance of a stable attitude had been given its deserved priority by both Democratic and Republican leadership as well as by U.S. Christian leadership and Middle East Arab Muslim leadership and by U.N. leadership, the most powerful man in the world could have received the type of psychological help that he absolutely had to have in order to be expected to safely function as a world leader and not start a predicted and predictable blood bath.

It is absolutely archaic, dangerous and totally inappropriate in these days of nuclear weapons that world leaders don’t give more serious attention to the psychological dysfunction of another leader such as President Bush. After Time magazine on March, 31 ’03 publicized his psychological malfunction in Condoleeza Rice’s doorway, editorial writers in newspapers all over the world had a responsibility to have questioned this key leader’s mental competence and his ability to adequately function both as a President of a nuclear nation and as a world leader.

Why is it that it is only the U.S. who consistently makes serious comments on the mental competence of other nation’s leaders but other nations cannot make appropriate comments on Bush’s mental competence? When answering this question please keep in mind two realities. First, psychological intervention for him could have prevented the devastation of Iraq. Secondly, wherever this President goes, like President Putin of Russia, he probably never has far from him an aid with a box or briefcase which has the trigger to release nuclear weapons. And keep in this context the fact that the first and only person to use a nuclear weapon (he used two atomic bombs three days apart) is this unstable President’s acknowledged hero, Harry Truman.

So it is absolutely absurd in the light of the uncomfortable realties concerning this unbalanced President that otherwise responsible world leaders do not now individually and unitedly attempt to head off the further destruction that can be caused by this obviously psychologically dysfunctional world leader. The following are ten realities which have converged to expose the extent of the potential threat to the Middle East and to world stability posed by this man who is now under even more stress than when he impulsively made his decision to bring devastation to Iraq and impulsively announced this plan by using the vulgar “F” word.

Ten Dangerous Converging Realities

He displayed dangerous psychological abnormality when he was publicly exceptionally rude to the National Security Advisor and to three respected U.S. Senators.

He suddenly imposed his greater authority as President and virtually demanded that four educated and wiser U.S. officials abandon their quite rational plan to involve key Arab leaders and the U.N. to be more active in solving the Iraq stalemate. Instead he virtually insisted that they must accept his decision of resorting to weapons and death to solve the complicated problems in Iraq rather than practicing rational diplomacy.

He has gathered around him advisors who have similar impulsive, militaristic tendencies as himself who have a similar minimal regard for the lives and blood of non Israeli foreigners except for having the more reasonable Colin Powell on his staff who was fired for being committed to contrary concepts and to more humanitarian values.

He is preoccupied with achieving honor from future historians for especially his achievements in the Middle East.

President Harry Truman is possibly his favorite former President. And he has more than once mentioned that though Truman received quite low poll numbers, he became quite popular when he twice resorted to nuclear weapons in order to save millions of lives and more quickly win the Second World War.

Like President Putin of Russia, wherever this impulsive President goes, an assistant carrying a briefcase or box containing the nuclear trigger is quite probably near him.

He is under much more stress now than he was when he impulsively made his alternative to war canceling announcement that he would “F” Saddam and take him out. Of course his brief statement meant mobilizing and going to a bloody war in order to solve the complex problem of Iraq by needlessly sacrificing the blood of men and women and using the fire power of superior weapons instead of practicing patient diplomacy.

He consistently shows how much denial he is in regarding the suffering and killing of foreigners which his own impulsive decisions have brought. Even now he absurdly insists that what he has done in Iraq has been quite successful. Even recently in Australia it is reported that he answered the question of how things are going in Iraq, by wrongly stating: “We’re kicking ass.”

Because he remains focused on a sports mentality where games are decided in nine innings or in two or three hours of play, the immediate results that the Pentagon’s killer weapons bring are much more similar to sports and so are much more to his liking. Tragically, he cannot accept the slow results of the State Department emphasis on the fruits of diplomacy.

We have become so accustomed to the avoidable death, destruction, and suffering that has occurred and continues to occur in Iraq, that we now disregard how wicked President George W. Bush’s earlier decisions were. His diminished mental capacity made it impossible for him to take heed to the wise warnings from many in the State Department who warned him of what is occurring right now in Iraq if he proceeded with his quick invasion, quick occupation and quick democratization plans.

Thus, if the vital importance of a stable attitude had been given priority and our President had through some type of psychological intervention, become a more reasonable and prudent human being, then he quite possibly would have discussed with the three U.S. Senators and Ms Rice their two reasonable proposals to more involve the U.N. and skilled, wise Arab leaders in peacefully resolving the Iraq stand off. But instead, his own emotional instability and “F… you” mentality dictated that he only consider the wild, destructive, macho proposals of the mirror images of himself, who were Dick Cheney. Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and other militaristic Pentagon types who were preoccupied and mesmerized with the military advantage that the massive Military-Industrial Complex gave the U.S. over the relatively weak Iraq. Transfixed by that totally immature, myopic attitude, on that fateful day in the formerly quiet doorway of Condoleeza Rice, while three U.S. Senators set there dumbfounded by the sick drama they were witnessing, John Wayne, I mean Clint Eastwood, no, I mean President Bush, abruptly ended their reasoned discussion and authoritatively but definitely not presidentially proclaimed:  

“Fuc. Saddam, we’re taking him out.”

O please America! O please Arab leaders! Stop and consider the reality that could have been if George Bush did not have the kind of personality deficiencies that he had when he stood in the doorway of Condoleeza Rice’s office with the three Senators meeting with her about Iraq. If at that exact strategic moment there had been a mentally stable, competent man standing in that doorway instead of an unstable, incompetent, sick President, significant world history could have been changed. There was a fork in the road that day and it required a reasonably stable leader to choose which path to follow.   Would he follow the path that would have led him into Ms Rice’s office to be involved in their serious considerations about how to best involve competent Arab leaders and a willing United Nations in finding a resolution for the Iraq crises? Or, would he mentally say to himself: “Miss Rice needs to  “F… off, the three Senators need to F.. off, the U.N. needs to F… off, the Arab leaders need to F… off, because me and my wiser buddies know how to F.. Saddam Hussein with our plentiful weapons. And we don’t need anybody else to stick their F…in noses into what is only our business.” But Ms. Rice and the three Senators also have to be faulted for not seeking mental, crises intervention for this sick, sick man who abusively intimidated any one who stood in his way.

Folks, those were the practical contemplations of a sick, sick man who should have been receiving mental health counseling instead of running the most military powerful nation in the history of man. So if a stable President had instead followed the path into Ms Rice’s office, that would have led to a mature discussion, consider how stable Iraq could be today. But it would not only be Iraq which would be changed, but it would be the whole Middle East. It would also be each grieving home in America of military men and women who were slain and maimed in Iraq or who were rendered clinically depressed for the remainder of their lives.

Thus, if Christians, or the press or the Congress or the union of mental health professionals, had insisted on therapy for at the least the arrogant, macho partially mentally ill President and for perhaps other members of his obnoxiously arrogant, “Don’t confuse me with facts or fatalities” followers, today many millions of human beings would be suffering so much less. Instead of the U.S. unilaterally working so fiercely to recruit more terrorists and guarantee more bloody terrorism, our entire world could be cooperating together to eliminate both terrorism and the rage and injustice which creates terrorism.   However, a reasonable case can be made that not enough symptoms of his disability had been revealed to the public before the March 31, 2003 Time Magazine article exposing the pivotal door-way display of severe instability. But after the Time Magazine article appeared revealing his severe emotional instability, it is absolutely indefensible and a case of massive denial that psychological intervention for our President was not insisted upon from a variety of different entities. Not to have had anyone suggesting such intervention was immoral, indefensible and incomprehensible. And if you don’t believe me, ask Dr. Phil for his professional opinion or at least ask Oprah, Rosie O’Donnell, Phil Maher, or Keith Obberman or take a straw poll on CNN and ask the American public or some of the anti-war groups. For at least a hindsight evaluation is better than repeating such irresponsible avoidance of obvious responsibility.

Folks, we are talking about millions of lives and this serious issue cannot be taken lightly. Also, there should be an open investigation of why Time Magazine was the only publication to bring into the open this pitiful display of a leader pleading at least subconsciously for help and not getting it when he publicly made such a fool of himself right in front of four competent and professional U.S. leaders who did absolutely nothing about it but eventually leak it to Time magazine.

The Key

With the reality in mind of what has been the main factor in creating the regrettable desolation in Iraq, emotional instability, I hope to make an extremely important but totally ignored point. I have become painfully aware that it may take a simple but experienced high school counselor to be willing to pound on such an important point. Regrettably, brilliant analytic types who are often members of prestigious think tanks and who often contribute comprehensive articles to “Foreign Affairs” Journal are either unable, unequipped or unwilling to make relatively simplistic points. They don’t seem to have had the opportunity to pick up the kind of street smarts that come with spending years of learning from “street wise” young people who are often struggling to survive in a hostile environment. Consequently, these scholars do not realize that if everything else is in place, but the attitude and mentality are lousy, the best laid plans of mice and men, simply have no chance to work. Applying that principle about attitude to our presidential situation, his “Fuc. you” mentality and “your ideas are useless but mine are good,” will virtually guarantee the kind of catastrophic results we’ve seen in Iraq.

The “street smart” students I have had the privilege of learning from for years, constantly emphasize the key role that a bad attitude plays in guaranteeing failure. Regrettably, often members of prestigious think tanks are unwilling to state very obvious realities about the mental state of a leader who is potentially making both his own nation and a foreign nation his abuse victims. Why? Because their own professional status is quite possibly more important to them than the expendable, viewed as useless lives of foreigners.

Such scholars just do not seem to have the street smarts that are a somewhat natural result of spending years as an open minded school counselor learning from a diverse variety of young people. So it is easy for the professional scholars to miss something so simple and basic as a national leader having a really wrong or really bad attitude which will inevitably lead to all kinds of miserable consequences such as economic jumps in the price of oil which will in turn lead to world wide economic problems and also to horrendous problems for the precious people of a vulnerable but valuable nation such as Iraq.

In fact, so key do many students consider a bad attitude in guaranteeing failure that they do not usually even put the qualifying good or bad before the word attitude. So one student will simply say about another, “He or she has an “attitude” and the implication will always be a bad attitude so that the student with an attitude is consistently labeled as a serious trouble maker. For almost certain, if these students had been around Donald Rumsfeld, most of them would get a strong disapproving look on their face and say, “That man has an attitude,” which would 100% be implying that he has a very bad attitude. And if they had been in the room with Condoleeza Rice and the three Senators when President Bush made his key foreign policy announcement about “F…ing Saddam,” they would have most certainly said, “Wow, our President has an attitude. How can the people and government of the U.S. allow such a dangerous man to continue to be the President of our great nation?” Yes, many of the students from whom I have learned, would have asked this obvious question. So why was such an unbalanced man even elected to a second term? Because an evil and brilliant Carl Rove was able to make John Kerry the evil man instead of George W. Bush being the “evil” man and because supposedly Christian voters see pro life for unborn fetuses as much more important that pro life for vulnerable, innocent foreign Iraqis in their own sovereign land. It simply is not that one issue is so important so that the life of the Iraqi foreigner can be totally disregarded. For John Kerry’s thoughts on abortion legislation were much more reasonable than the Roman Catholic smear campaign against him would have you believe.

So scholars seem to be afraid of seeming judgmental, or simplistic if they focus on a horrible attitude as being the key causal element in a complicated potentially bloody foreign affairs problem. So they invariably avoid this issue and just label it as arrogance or hubris and don’t treat it as the serious foundational issue that it is. So it does not receive the in depth recognition that it must have if a nation such as the U.S. is to continue to survive as a leader among nations and not be allowed to destroy nations. Therefore, not seriously dealing with the bad attitude and emotional instability of a leader such as George W. Bush will inevitably affect the entire world. It also can definitely cause a nation or an empire to forever lose its leadership role. So this foundational leadership defect must have serious, immediate attention for there to be any hope for saving America and especially the Middle East from the attitudinal defects of unscrupulous, powerful leaders such as George Bush, Dick Cheney, Richard Pearle, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and their faithful followers.

Significantly, that long ago brilliant counselor of Presidents and other leaders emphasized again and again a certain vital but usually overlooked principle. For it was no less than the amazing humorist, Mark Twain, who repeatedly proclaimed to all who would listen:

“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”

Therefore, if a certain leader has his will set on maintaining a certain destructive attitude, and he gathers around himself a cadre of amoral “yes” men who have the same type of destructive, calloused attitudes, all of the correct information, scholarly position papers and even CIA reports will not succeed in changing either their minds or their destructive policies. The hard reality that must be recognized is that until their wills and attitudes are changed, they cannot and will not be influenced by facts. Wicked leaders have closed minds and it is 100% wrong and quite harmful for others not to recognize this sad reality. (For those who object to my use of the term wicked, how much needless blood must flow in the streets of Iraq until we will call those who needlessly caused that blood to flow, “wicked?”)

President George Bush, all those he gathered around him with the exception of Colin Powell, and the one Eagle Scout, virtually all had arrogant, macho attitudes who felt virtually an entitlement from GOD to do whatever their sick attitudes told them to do, no matter what the facts or standard norms of normality told them that they should do and should not. Consequently, that attitude must be aggressively dealt with, not as a strange abnormality that must be tolerated in a democracy, but dealt with for what it is, wickedness personified. If it is not considered by the people of the world as wickedness personified, and treated by both republicans and democrats as wickedness personified, evil will prevail in the U.S. administration and more human suffering like Iraq will be the result. But another result will be the rapid fall from power of America. Not wickedness personified but unchecked wrong choices to verbally “f” others with the “f” word and with the middle finger cost a promising Eagle Scout his life when his unchecked attitude caused him to make a virtually suicidal mistake in judgment.

In the Iraq conflagration that type of unchecked “F… you” attitude and mentality by the entire administration of the greatest super power in the history of the world has brought death to over one million mostly Iraqis. This is a time when we must especially be trying to win the hearts and minds of all Muslims to help deter the small percentage of extremist people calling themselves Muslims, from bringing needless death and suffering on others. Instead we are providing them with an excuse to do so. Such self contradictory behavior by our nation is not only wicked but it is virtually beyond insanity. But in addition to the multitudes of dead, we have either maimed and wounded well over another million mostly Muslims and sent four million mostly Muslims fleeing from their homes to other safer nations because of the catastrophic consequences of our unchecked “F… everybody who is not with us.” Because our President reasons that if they are not with us, they are both against us and against freedom. Therefore, all of this untold suffering is either the direct or indirect result of an unchecked and untreated, out of control, mentally sick, calloused, clueless U.S. President.

But absolutely amazingly both he and the American public and even world leaders don’t realize the depth of the denial that the whole world is accepting as normal business as usual. For in addition to his being in denial and remaining callously optimistic about Iraq, (“We’re kickin ass!”) he has created a propaganda video featuring his dog, Barney. But in addition to the ridiculousness of using his own dog to spread Bush propaganda, according to Jim Rutenberg of the N.Y. Times, (Seattle Times, Sept. 2) he gave a book interview in the Oval Office last December about his plans after he leaves office. Rather than any mention of his aiding the suffering people of Iraq, here are the plans he spoke of that appeared on the front page of the Seattle Times, from Interviews with author to be, Robert Draper.

“I’d give some speeches just to replenish the ol’ coffers. I don’t know what my dad gets – its more than 50-75” thousand dollars a speech, and “Clinton’s making a lot of money.”

“We’ll have a nice place in Dallas” where he will be running what he called “a futuristic freedom Institute”… “promoting democracy around the world.”

In view of the devastation that George Bush (who now has an estimated 20 million dollars in assets) has already brought to the vulnerable Muslims and Christians of Iraq, his comments about his future plans to make money from what he has done to the Iraqis and to start a “Freedom Institute” is well beyond obscene.

It is like Hitler joining the staff of Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship and making tremendous money on giving speeches to college students on “How to Discover the Will of the Risen Christ For Your Life.”

If the N.Y. Times printed the preceding immoral quotes by the President and did not also publish an editorial discussing his unequalled callousness and hypocrisy, they should have every newspaper in the U.S. and many from abroad publishing editorials condemning and exposing the N.Y. Times.

I am writing these lines while in bed at 2:45 A.M. on Memorial Day in the exact place where the words, “Publicly Mock” speaking of Bush publicly mocking GOD’s Risen Christ, supernaturally came floating to my eyes. With these last quotations by our President, he has moved well beyond only mocking GOD’s anointed Messiah. He also has figuratively given him his middle finger with the vileness that obscene act represents. I should he praying, “Oh GOD forgive this man, for he has no comprehension of his sins against GOD and man” but I am having great difficulty being sincere in such a prayer in view of his rampant denial and hypocrisy.

“O GOD forgive me for my own inability to forgive George Bush for you have forgiven my own unintended and intended sins against both You and others.”

What To Blame For The Iraq Disaster

Despite having read the brilliant sophisticated and heavily nuanced essay by Rand Corp. specialist, James Dobbins, in the September/October, Foreign Affairs Journal entitled “Who Lost Iraq?”, I personally remain convinced of one glaring reality. America’s patient tolerance of a flagrantly stubborn and irresponsible Commander in Chief who surrounds himself with arrogant, calloused, GOD ignoring leaders with sick attitudes, is what lost Iraq. All other explanations conveniently overlook this one basic reality. All the other contributing factors to the Iraq debacle would not be the significant factors that they now are and which Mr. Dobbins makes them, if it were not for this one immorally ignored and conveniently swept under the rug ugly reality about his attitude. The President and his assistants have had a sick, arrogant macho mentality that is even now tolerated rather than being treated.

Therefore, we all must share the blame for our subconscious and conscious decision to tolerate this leader’s sick mind rather than demanding that he be treated. And if he had refused treatment, he should have been forcefully removed from office.

I sincerely ask you: Which would GOD prefer? Which do we prefer? A more pragmatic interpretation of the U.S. Constitution which would have prevented the needless death caused by the unrestrained immoral activities of the President and his Carl Rove and Dick Cheney type assistants so that they were not restrained from killing more and more and more Iraqis, British and American human beings. Or would GOD and ourselves prefer that it would be the intended checks and balances to be restrained so that it is these out of control men who would be allowed to continue with their unrestrained assault on human values and accepted standards of decency?

My Apologies

I will now use more of President Bush’s vile language that he himself used to reveal that he would not be deterred from carrying out his fixed intention to do away with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and any resistance that might oppose Bush’s intentions. Thus, when the President spontaneously revealed his lethal intentions using the vile language that he crudely displayed in the presence of refined, cultured, civilized individuals, he gave us a glimpse into the depth of his heart by revealing how he intended to brazenly steam roll over all obstacles which would stand in his way of accomplishing the evil purposes of both he and his small band of like minded men with similar committed attitudes who had already made their decision to invade and demolish Iraq. So by this strong language he was clearly putting on the table that he and his men, like bull dozers, would ruthlessly push aside any institutional entities which would get in their way. So he emphasized by his language, that if anything would stand in their way of accomplishing their intended mission of “F…ing” Saddam Hussein and Iraq, those obstacles would also be “f…ed.”

This distasteful reality of his “F you” mentality must be both recognized and acknowledged before it can be fully grasped how deep in his own commitment and willingness to despise or “F…” all restraining factors or checks and balances that would prevent him from accomplishing this plan to begin and finish a blood bath in Iraq. Ladies and gentlemen, if you object to my vivid word “blood bath,” what else do you accomplish other than a blood bath with tens of thousands of military personnel, hundreds of thousands of tons of bombs and other munitions and equipment which were amassed by the mighty U.S. in order to carry out this President’s spontaneously announced intention to “F… Saddam” Hussein. He resorted to this strong, uninhibited language because it came from the depth of his heart and being. It carried the strong, strong message that he intended for nothing in heaven or earth to prevent him from accomplishing his bloody mission.

Also I apologize for the way that his own vile word will consistently be repeated. Yet, it appears to me that I may be the only person who kept the March 31, Time Magazine article about his sudden, spontaneous foreign policy announcement of “F..king” Saddam. Therefore, I may be the only person to continue to reflect upon what his watershed “F” announcement was actually conveying. For such an announcement by the U.S. President and self acclaimed leader of the free world must cause us to seriously reflect about its deep and over arching significance. For his six words set off for the entire Muslim world some of the greatest suffering and upheaval that part of the world has ever been forced to endure since the cruel crusades. And it was all started in the doorway of an office in the White House by an educated white man who has taken the “F” word of the street to a low point that should shock and offend every last person who has ever used or not used this vile word.

His choice to use this word to introduce his accompanying four word proclamation about liberating Iraq from the tyranny of Saddam may be the most concise foreign policy speech ever made by any leader of any era. Regrettably, not to consistently repeat his own four letter “F” word is to risk causing us all to miss the horrible point of how extreme his own arrogant superiority attitude is which has turned Iraq into something well beyond ugly.

There is an Arabic proverb that states: “Repetition teaches the donkey.” Regrettably, we all seem to be somewhat like donkeys who need reminding. Because none of us should have forgotten that it is this President’s “Fuc. you,” attitude which has led to the human desolation that has occurred to a formerly stable Middle Eastern, predominantly Muslim nation right in front of the shocked eyes of all of the world. Yet, it does not even shock us that this calloused man that initiated all of this overwhelming human suffering to the suffering Iraqi people would be openly discussing with the potential author of his book, about how he can add to his already 20 million dollars in assets by giving speeches for fifty to seventy five thousand dollars a speech after he is no longer the U.S. President. Such a statement by this sick man gives obscenity a new meaning.

Other Institutions That He F…ed

Regrettably, there are several other quite logical extensions of where this not so nice President aimed his “F word” which he so crudely proclaimed to at least one woman and to possibly additional women on that March, 2002 day in the office doorway of the soft spoken Condoleeza Rice. When he rudely and dismissively cut off their significant discussion about alternatives to war in Iraq with his own vile words: “Fuc. Saddam, we’re taking him out,” whether Christians agree or disagree, he was also making a concise statement to the Transcendent GOD who so deeply cares about Justice and Who is so strongly against all of the oppression, exploitation, suffering and killing that is occurring to His beloved Iraqi people.

So when President Bush made his watershed “F” announcement about “F…ing and taking out Saddam” he was definitely also expressing to the GOD of the people he was planning to “F,” “F… you also God, we’re also taking you out.”

When you pause to consider the ominous implications of the official, elected leader of an entire nation using such vileness and making it the official policy and attitude toward God that his nation will pursue, the undeniable implications are dreadful for his entire nation. But if he was “f…ing” the people whom GOD loved and cared for so he was also definitely intending to “F” their GOD.

Furthermore, however, Bush was also F..King each entity or institution which would dare to have an agenda which would possibly be an obstacle to him accomplishing his agenda of “Fu..ing Saddam” and his potential resistance. So he would be compelled to also take them out. So his list included in addition to GOD and Saddam:

“F…” the U.N., we’re taking it out.”

“F…” all the people and all of the military of Iraq, we’re taking them out.”

“F..k” all who are against us, such as the democrats, we’re taking them out.”

“F..K” all who resist democracy in the Middle East and especially in Iraq, we’re taking them out.”

“F…” the Congress, we’re taking it out.”

“F…” the office of National Security advisor, we’re taking it out.”

“F..” the State Department, we’re taking it out.”

“F…” the CIA, we’re taking it out.”

“F..k” the Constitution, we’re taking it out.”

“Fu..” ordinary standards of humanitarian decency, we’re taking them out.”

“Fu..” the aspects of majority democracy that do not fit in with our plans, we’re taking them out.”

“Fu..” the checks and balances of our system of government, we’re taking them out.”

“Fu..” the ethical responsibilities of the U.S. Attorney Generals’ Office, we’re taking them out.”

“F…” the way the Civil Service Dept. is supposed to operate, we’re taking it out.”

“But thank God for our thriving Military Industrial Complex.”

For in his warped world all those persons, entities or institutions who were not with his agenda of “f…ing Saddam” and Iraq, had to be “F..ed” and taken out. And I am categorically stating that at the very time he made his first public “F” statement about Saddam and about taking the Iraq resistance out, that the circumstance of the statement definitely implied that he also was at least subconsciously if not consciously intending to take out every entity I listed. And the unpleasant reality is this. Retrospect confirms that for all practical purposes, each entity I listed, he and his hatchet men have desperately attempted to both “F” and take out and regretfully their many successful accomplishments have been amazing.

Since what I have just written has not been spoken or written by anyone previously, there will undoubtedly be many who will say my application of his "F. Saddam." statement to other entities is unfair to the U.S President. However, I disagree. When you realize how much horrible upheaval in the whole Middle East has been experienced since he opened the door to the chaos with his "F. Saddam" proclamation which introduced the Iraq invasion and occupation, as well as the gross contempt with which the U.S Congress and the U.N have been treated by this President and his arrogant administration, this is no exaggeration. So my addition of the other entities of which Bush was virtually F..King when he F...ed Saddam Hussein is quite consistent with what has occurred subsequent to his original "F" proclamation at the door of the office of the U.S NATIONAL SECURITY Advisor.

Therefore, Bush at the least, one time intentionally used the "F word" to cancel all other means of solving the Iraq crises and then imposed his own "F em" mentality when he authoritatively proclaimed, "F Saddam, we're taking him out." Consequently, since the "F" word was used to announce the enormous amount of blood that would flow in the process of taking Saddam out, it is consistent to say that the process that Bush so casually initiated to shed blood to eliminate Saddam, was in affect, despising and blasphemy GOD. So it also is not an exaggeration to say that he flagrantly despised the U.N, despised his own Congress, despised the butchered people of Iraq, and has despised the entire Muslim Middle East.

Therefore, it is wrong to credit Rand Corp, Gene Dobbins’ brilliant FORIEGN AFFAIRS article for exploring all of the significant lessons to be learned from the Iraq debacle. Regretfully, his otherwise well researched, comprehensive essay has inadvertently omitted the most obvious lesson that would have made all the other lessons irrelevant, if this one obvious lesson had been learned prior to the totally irresponsible invasion and occupation. That is, the world cannot risk allowing a man as mentally disturbed and in so much denial as George W. Bush to remain in office without yelling and screaming about it and calling the entire world’s attention to this travesty.

Who Did Lose Iraq?

Christianity lost Iraq! Islam lost Iraq! Democracy lost Iraq! The U.N. lost Iraq! The worldwide Media lost Iraq. On and on the list can and should go of the human institutions that lost Iraq. Because not one of these institutions sufficiently sounded the alarm about the wicked and destructive attitude that was gushing forth slime like a mighty poisonous waterfall. And it was initiated by one man with a poisonous contaminating mentality. This obviously destructive attitude caused exceptionally unwise choices to be made that introduced millions to death and untold suffering. Yet this smiling man has now revealed to an author that he is eagerly awaiting the opportunity to join his father on the lecture circuit to earn 50 to 75 thousand dollars a speech. This gross wickedness that GOD is waiting for multitudes of severely offended human beings to speak out against, must begin. Whether they be Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Communist, atheist or girl scouts who speak out, we must all speak out. This mad man must be exposed and treated before he multiplies the harm he has already brought to the predominantly Muslim Mid East and to the U.S by his useless, disgusting invasion and occupation of Iraq.

So one key lesson is: if the centrality and foundational aspects of attitude are overlooked, ignored or minimized, the results will be absolutely catastrophic, as we have regretfully observed in Iraq. When our entire nation foolishly refused to adequately deal with arrogant, macho, GOD rejecting leaders and even millions of Christians and Muslims forced themselves to be convinced that at least the President was a principled GOD fearing leader, our entire nation has caused itself to lose the respect of other nations, we are even hated and pitied by the majority of persons of most Middle Eastern Muslim nations. Even more disturbing is the fact that most experts agree that the U.S., who is supposedly leading the "war on terror" is now the world's leading recruiter of potential terrorists. But each of these negatives would not be the realities that they are if we had not refused to deal with the sick attitude of this massive debacle’s main leader, who at the very least, has a character disorder.

Mr. Commander-In-Chief, if being the world's master recruiter of terrorists was your primary mission when you invaded Iraq, you can now look anyone in the eye and proudly proclaim:

"Mission accomplished!"

Additionally you have accomplished your announced goal of Fuc.ing Saddam and taking him out, just as you arrogantly and rudely boasted to three U.S Senators that you would do. Regretfully however, in the process you have figuratively Fuc.ed the whole Middle East.

The Ignored Reality

Sadly, Americans have such an unjustified reverence for whomever is elected President, our nation will literally allow the occupier of this prestigious office to get away with the public mass murder of foreigners. Consequently, there must soon be developed a system in which our government can reasonably reign in out of control, sadistic administrations which by hook or by crook gain control of the powerful office of the President. That must be done so that such an irresponsible administration be severely limited in the international harm it can do. Then the lives of millions of vulnerable foreigners will be protected, so that U.S democracy will not become a monster to be feared and jeered rather than a system of government to be respected and emulated. The incontrovertible reality is this. The unscrupulous trinity of George Bush, Dick Chaney and Carl Rove along with their capable disciples such as Donald Rumsfeld, have masterfully exposed the achilles heel of majority democracy. For when the political mechanism is such that career politicians must risk losing their powerful political offices and their prestigious careers if they responsibly force dangerous, irresponsible leaders out of office in order to protect the lifeblood of vulnerable foreigners, it will inevitably be the foreigners blood that will be sacrificed on the twin alters of job security and political party security. So most elected officials will virtually always find a way to avoid following through on his or her sacred responsibility before God to save and protect foreigners. So it is a given that an amoral and immoral administration such as the Bush Administration can now with impunity unjustly and unethically exploit the public’s fear of Islamic terrorism and the politician’s fear of losing his career. This is found quite easy to do and inevitably leads to the manipulation, exploitation and degradation of relatively weaker, vulnerable Muslim nations.

For how else can you explain all the blood and suffering in Iraq to bring about a supposedly quick liberation of a suppressed people and to supposedly find non existent weapons of mass destruction? Yet by building in the already crowded Baghdad green zone a 104 acre American Embassy (416 dunams) (6 times larger than the entire U.N. Complex in New Your City) (over ten times the acreage for the new embassy in the gigantic nation of China.) which will cost a billion dollars a year to run this one embassy for the small nation of Iraq; we have blatantly exposed our evil intentions. Yes, you can bet your bottom dollar that U.S. leaders are flagrantly lying to the U.S., to the people of Iraq, to the U.N. and to the world community about why the U.S. is truly in the small nation of Iraq which is so strategically located and so rich in oil.

How can either the Democratic or the Republican parties explain away America’s gross and degenerate exploitation of Iraq and its people? We obviously intend to exploit its tremendous future oil resources in order to attempt to secure the future prosperity of the U.S. as the world’s leading industrialized nation. Of course we don’t dare openly acknowledge our true motives in building by far the world’s largest embassy in the relatively small occupied Iraq. The September/October “Foreign Policy” Journal refers to this new embassy as a fortress.

But no admission of our purposes in Iraq are needed. For the exceptionally conspicuous 104 acre, (416 dunam) fortress with its 21 buildings in the heart of Baghdad speaks far louder regarding U.S. purposes in invading and occupying Iraq than any public admission about our true motives ever could. Furthermore, explanations are soon forgotten or rationalized away. But a sprawling 21 building, 416 dunam, monstrosity in the heart of Baghdad totally surrounded by a nine (9) foot reinforced wall speaks an exceptionally loud message to the entire Mid East about U.S. intentions in that oil rich region. Our monstrous Embassy in Baghdad is a loud and powerful permanent reminder to all Middle Easterners of the true non-altruistic intentions of the once upon a time, friendly, altruistic U.S. Do we dare ever to ask again: “But why do they hate us?”