"Cadillac One"

what's wrong with this picture?

(I mean, aside from the white-wall tires.) Notice the windshield pillars. Aside from the fact that it's clearly not a pretty sight, what does it actually mean that Bush is the first American emperor to have to travel by tank wherever he goes?

The so-called Cadillac limousine which was first used at Dubya's inauguration is actually a tank disguised as an automobile, a very big and very, very, very heavy vehicle.

We aren't allowed much information, even if one way or another we did pay for it, but today the BBC tells us this much about the truck/tank they have dubbed "Cadillac One", and it's a lot more than we've gotten from any other news source up until this moment:

1. The car is a special version of the Cadillac deVille, with five inch thick armour, able to withstand rocket-propelled grenades
2. The tyres are designed to function even if punctured
3. The exact dimensions and specifications of the car are kept secret, and a second decoy car is always used
4. The car is designed to withstand chemical and biological attacks
5. The underside of the car is also armour-plated
6. The car can carry six people
Two miles per gallon, tops, I'd say.

The same article explains why this particular tank doesn't need a gun turret on the top, while reassuring us that lesser mortals, if also well-funded, may have recourse to offensive as well as defensive devices when ordering their own vehicles.

Clearly a man like President Bush travels with a huge security entourage tasked with counter-attacking assailants while his vehicle escapes.

But for those with something short of a private army, there are other counter-measures available on the market.

One of the leading companies in the field offers to create hidden weapons compartments, strengthened bumpers for ramming other vehicles off the road and, in extreme circumstances, concealed gun ports in the doors.

Gosh, it seems like just yesterday President William Jefferson Clinton was driving around in his open-top Mustang. Hey, it really was just yesterday!

By the way, the SS (Secret Service) now insists that when they are retired all presidential limousines must be destroyed rather than preserved in museums or put on used car lots - for security reasons, they maintain.

But it's not just the car of course. Bush is just a puppet, so why does he need to be surrounded by hundreds of assistants on what is clearly only a ceremonial trip? Nobody's even going to see the puffed-up little little warlord! And who would miss him if he were gone?

From the Guardian on Wednesday, in the account, "Laura, me and 700 friends", comes one figure not disputed elsewhere:

Mr Bush, his wife, Laura, and a 700-strong entourage worthy of a travelling medieval monarch, flew into Heathrow airport slightly late, at 7.22pm. The couple were greeted by the Prince of Wales, then whisked to the palace by [armored] US military helicopter.
Aside from his staff, his staff's staff, everybody's hangers-on and members of the invited and adoring press, Bush's personal armed security detail in England numbers in the hundreds by any account, all authorized to shoot to kill, and it's augmented by about 14,000 local police officers in London alone.

Shouldn't we at least be asking how we got to this point, was it inevitable, where will it end, and can we do anything to change it?

[image from the BBC]

Presidents have been driving armored limos for some time now. They even have one or two dummy limos in the motorcade as decoys. I can't criticize the Secret Service on that one and am also hesitant to refert o them as the SS. In ACT UP the thing that impressed me the most about the Secret Service as opposed to the NYPD, Parks Police in DC or the multitude of private security we encountered was that they were solely interested in protecting the president from physical threats. They did not get involved in embarrasing protests or other protest or speech actions that were politically harmful but represented no threat to his personal safety. Also these limo tanks will be used in the future to protect liberal presidents. Looking at history and specificly American assasinations, a liberal pro-gay, pro-civil rights, free speech, separating church and state and economicly progressive president has a much greater chance of being assasinated by a right wing psycho than Bush does by a liberal pacifist.
Jon W

perhaps this thread is ancient but i find it funny that when it was bush who had an armored car that you were crying foul but know that Obama has a vehicle (the beast) which wakes bush's look like a hot wheels know we dont say a word. perhaps we should not worry about what they're driving and pay attention to their words and actions

About this Entry

Published on November 18, 2003 1:21 AM.

previous entry: numbers

next entry: Lindis Percy's state visit