Diane Sawyer/Bush Interview:
No WMDs in Iraq--"So what's the difference?" says Bush ".....
In the debate over the necessity for the war in Iraq, few issues have been more contentious than whether Saddam Hussein possessed arsenals of banned weapons, as the Bush administration repeatedly said, or instead was pursuing weapons programs that might one day constitute a threat..."Bush's response to Diane Sawyer about the topic:
"So what's the difference?" Could
the difference be that the Bush Administration lied to the American public nearly every day?
Look at the lies...many of those lies are right
HERE.
The NY Times did their own unique part in spreading propaganda through this woman..Judith Miller--a disgrace to the world of journalismWhat's the difference that over 400 soldiers have died in order to find a tin-pot dictator hiding in a hole in his own piss with nothing more than a can of Happy Tuna, some broken eggs, and a broken spirit?
Look at all those vibrant, on-the-move, hate-empowered terrorists who are
NOT hiding, but running amok in the once tightly-yet-brutally controlled land of Iraq.
Think about how that tin-pot dictator known as Saddam was once contained like a bug in a jar by the UN before all the frenzied fundies from the varied Islamic sects inciting civil war were unleashed by Bush's pre-emptive dream-come-real!
So what's the difference?Here's the difference.Bush lied. Nobody likes a liar. Especially when the liar comes back later and tells you he doesn't even care that he lied to you.
His pre-emptive war caused death upon many. It was based on the premise that those he sentenced to his brand of war-death posed an IMMINENT threat to America.
It turned out not to be IMMINENT at all.
Bush doesn't think that's important.His liar's war caused more danger than was present before..not only for innocent people throughout the Middle East, but for America. It's a natural consequence of universal law: an increase in hate will cause an increase in danger..unless we keep murdering those we've caused to hate us. What a ridiculous cycle! When will we learn?
When will an unexpected nuke appear upon our shores? Where is Homeland Security when a young man like
Nathaniel Heatwole can stash box-cutters on airplanes and have to BEG the FBI by e-mail to pay him some attention and find the items? While we're shooting at Iraqi protestors at their rallies and playing into Osama Bin Laden's dream of a religious war (without the physical or moral support of most of our former allies), is there a danger we are not anticipating brewing from the most unexpected source?
art credit: A TapletLet's face it, intelligence was God-awful before all of this. Richard Perle and Douglas Feith picked what sounded really convincing from a pile of utter garbage-intelligence and fed it to the public through their Bushpuppet and Cheneymannequin every day as we led up to hitting Iraq last Spring.
What's the difference?The difference is this: We aren't going to vote for a liar who is bold enough to tell us he doesn't care, in the end, whether we've swallowed the lies or not.
**See Paul Krugman's "
Telling It Right" which was published in the NY Times a couple days after I wrote this entry....***
Now maybe, just maybe, Saddam's capture will start a virtuous circle in Iraq. Maybe the insurgency will evaporate; maybe the cost to America, in blood, dollars and national security, will start to decline.
But even if all that happens, we should be deeply disturbed by the history of this war. For its message seems to be that as long as you wave the flag convincingly enough, it doesn't matter whether you tell the truth.