The Bush Administration vs. the Truth About Iraq

By now, it would be hard for anyone to pretend that the Bush Administration did not knowingly and intentionally lie to the American public about Iraq.  Bush and his cronies introduced us to such terms as yellow-cake Uranium, dubya-ed-dees, nucular assaults, along with a general fear of brown people.  Now, it seems that even Congress won’t hold the President accountable.  In fact, people seem quite willing to let past “indiscretions” slip away without any repercussions.  We have people ranging from the CIA to the our Armed Forces that have quite their often-illustrious careers because they were forced to lie and manufacture evidence. 

The L.A. Times attempts to provide some perspective for those of us who tend to forget (or even forgive) far too easily.  From the commentary piece, How does President Bush lie?:

A month later, in August 2002, the administration set up the White House Iraq Group, designed solely to sell the public on the imminent threat posed by Saddam Hussein. In essence, it was a marketing campaign to sell the war by escalating the rhetoric and misleading the public. And lying.

And boy, did they. Here are statements from the administration in 2002 as they beat the drums for war. Dick Cheney said: “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use … against us.” Condoleezza Rice: “We do know that [Hussein] is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon.” Donald Rumsfeld: “[Hussein’s] regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons.”

These statements were designed to cultivate in Americans fear of Iraq’s imminent threat, the keystone of Bush’s push to war. They were grossly and intentionally misleading, suggesting that the administration possessed incontrovertible facts on which were drawn these definitive conclusions. In reality, the facts were known to be ambiguous at best. Absolutely no intelligence existed at the time that would allow anyone to reach such concrete conclusions.

Americans seem to be very forgiving when over a million deaths have resulted from an engineered invasion and plundering of a nation.  But, if sex is involved, it’s a whole different story.  Can anyone explain how we could impeach a President for lying about his private life while people like Bush and Cheney aren’t even pressed to answer any questions at all.  It’s not a good sign for the future of what should have been a democracy based on accountability.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: