Friday, June 03, 2005
the downing street memo
Here's a question for international news hounds. Who is the ''son of a bitch'' referred to in this comment by a U.S. Defence Department spokesman?but more disturbingly -- and functioning as a rather healthy fisking of the campaign against an activist, liberal media -- is the complete absence in the american media of yet another damning (this time, british) report on the utter primacy of ideology in sending our armies into iraq and the complicity of the bush administration in contriving "evidence" to defraud the public to their side.
''People are dead because of what this son of a bitch said. How could he be credible now?''
Is he an unnamed Defence Department source who told Newsweek magazine that he had read a government document detailing an incident where U.S. military personnel at the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, allegedly flushed a Koran down a toilet?
After all, that report, which was printed in a small item in last week's ''Periscope'' section of the magazine, spurred violent protests across the Muslim world, particularly in Afghanistan where at least 15 people were killed and the government of President Hamid Karzai badly shaken just a week before he was due to travel here.
Or is the ''son of a bitch'' U.S. President George W. Bush, whose administration began fixing intelligence at least eight months before invading Iraq in order to make the public believe that Baghdad posed a serious threat to the United States and its allies?
After all, the war and its bloody aftermath have taken a toll of at least 30,000 lives, according to the most conservative estimates, and ongoing conflict continues to kill scores more every week with no end in sight.
Readers of the British press might be inclined to choose the second option based on the sensational leak to the London Times two weeks ago of the minutes of a July 23, 2002, meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and his closest advisers during which the head of the intelligence agency MI6, just back from Washington, reported that Bush had decided on war and that ''the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.''this memo, of course, serves as confirmation from british intelligence for seymour hersh's reporting about stovepiping and the fabrication of a justification as pretense to begin a war the administration desired for other reasons -- be it the ideology of a clean break or the desire to start a global democratic revolution or both -- reasons of idealism detached from the objective reality of the world, subject to a utopian delusion.
While that was big news in Britain, it was hard to find any trace of it in the U.S. press.
So consumers of U.S. media would choose option number one, because the Koran story has been the nation's top news story since the magazine published a qualified apology for it Sunday before making a vague retraction Monday.
Clever, that W.
On the other hand, perhaps the WMD programs were real, perhaps they would have been continued, though significantly slowed by the inspection program, would have been continued and accelerated as soon as the sanctions were dropped.
------ ------- ------
that isn't making a mistake. that's deceiving.
the story you just repeated -- which is the propaganda line emitted by the admin all along -- is a falsehood designed to lure those inclined to support the admin or those who wish to believe teh admin isn't capable of behaving in so ghastly a manner. intel in favor of every view is always in existence. its establishing what information is credible that should keep the admin from making horrifying mistakes like this, which get tens of thousands killed.
the admin specifically circumvented that process of vetting information so that they would not be bound by the facts -- so that they could use any incredible tale they wanted as fabrication for the case for war.
i don't know what your politics are, but you've subscribed to what is being proved to be a lie. please read through the seymour hersh article i linked in the article re: stovepiping, which is what is now being corroborated by the downing street memo.
i would be queasy but not accusatory if i believed what you seem to. i'm not out to crucify bush because he's a republican, like so many partisan idiots are, just as i never crucified clinton merely for being a democrat.
i detested clinton because he lied under oath before federal prosecutors who were trying to uphold the law. i detest bush because he and his administration purposefully constructed a case of falsehoods to lie the united states into an ideological war.
------ ------- ------
Post a Comment