Cutting Through The Crap

Monday, July 16, 2012

True Lies


This is interesting: while the clinically insane wing of the smoking remnants of the Republican party pump out conspiracy theories about Obama like two-dollar gasoline, their brethren on the right ignore actual evidence of actual lies. Lies you don't need to make up on your own. Lies that are already out there, lies that led to the death more more than a hundred thousand, maimed our troops, cost us a couple thousand billions of dollars, and materially added to our current economic calamity. Turns out, not only did George W. Bush lie about the reasons for invading Iraq, he's been lying about his role ever since. In his upcoming book, Colin Powell says as much:

In a chapter discussing what he calls his “infamous” February 2003 speech to the United Nations where he authoritatively presented what was later exposed as gross misinformation about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Powell notes that by that time, war “was approaching.”

“By then, the President did not think war could be avoided,” Powell writes. “He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met -- and never would meet -- to discuss the decision.”

[...]

Bush insisted in his own 2010 memoir, "Decision Points," that the invasion was something he came to support only reluctantly and after a long period of reflection. During his book tour, he even cast himself as “a dissenting voice” in the run-up to war. “I didn't wanna use force,” he said.

But Powell supports the increasingly well-documented conclusion that there was actually no decision-making point -- or decision-making process -- during the events between the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with those attacks.

Former CIA Director George Tenet made an admission similar to Powell’s in his own 2007 memoir. "There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat," he wrote. Nor "was there ever a significant discussion" about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.

Indeed, history shows that Bush had long wanted to strike out at Saddam Hussein and was trying to link Iraq to 9/11 within a day of the terrorist attacks.

[...]

An analysis of the historical record by the National Security Archives in 2010 concluded that, “In contrast to an extensive record of planning for actual military operations, there is no record that President George W. Bush ever made a considered decision for war...”


I suppose it's not so hard to understand. The truth of their failures and the depth of their deception is so great that none on the right can really face it. Instead, their leaders have played a game of hide-the-ball, and at their fringes, where the failures are abraded even more by the image of that black guy smiling back, they've wallowed within one conspiracy after another, and fallen into the black hole of their own minds, from which no light can escape.

Meanwhile, as the craziest of the right-wing crazies endlessly ply the still waters of their fevered minds, seeing a terrorist-lover in the White House, Bush's war becomes -- as if it weren't obvious from the beginning -- the greatest gift Iran has received since Reagan sold them weapons.

We're truly in a world where sense has become inverted. As Obama picks off al Queda leaders like skeet, the RWS™ continues to see him as a terrorist-planted America-hater; while the guy who undeniably -- no crazy conspiracies needed -- weakened our country to the point of near-collapse, and whose reckless decision to invade Iraq has strengthened our enemies escapes any mention at all. Especially by The Rominee, while quietly putting the band back together, ready not only to foist upon us yet again the failed Bush-league economic policies, but his gang of neocon blunderers, too, as if nothing ever happened.

But the tinfoil-hatted, happy to stew in the broth of their own bamboozlement, see nothing there, nothing at all. Which, of course, is the point: someone feeds them this stuff, knowing they'll gulp it down, happy in their ginned-up hate, looking away. Gee. Wonder who that might be.

[Updated: here's another way of saying the same thing: unwillingness to take responsibility. For anything.]



17 comments:

Frank Drackman said...

Of course the Iraq War wouldn't have happened without the "Yes" votes of Joe Biden, John Kerry*, YOUR Senator Cartwell, Tom Daschle, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Diane Feinstein, Tom Harkin, Ernest"goes to camp" Hollings, Herb Kohl, Mary Landreau, Blanch Lincoln, Hary Reed, Nelson Rockerfeller, and Chucky "The Nose" Schumer...
and those are just the ones I remember off the top of my bald head...
Oh Yeah, Hilary Clinton, might wanta save that one*...

OK, Ted Kennedy, Who left a lovely young woman to Asphyxiate(NOT Drowned, there's a difference) 42 years, 51 weeks, and 4 days ago DID vote his Conscious...

Frank

*"Dumber and Dumber" reference

Anonymous said...

Terrific post Sid, Thanks.
Thought I'd add a quick comment before Frank comes over to take his regular crap.
Re the decision to invade Iraq - you missed this key quote from the Huffington piece:
"In Powell’s explanation of how he came to provide the misleading and inaccurate account of Iraq’s WMD capability at the UN, the former secretary of state points an incriminating finger at Vice President Dick Cheney’s office -- confirming previous reports such as the one by Karen DeYoung, in her Powell biography."
In my view, Cheney always pulled the strings on Bush W and the decision to invade Iraq predates Cheney's days as defense secretary for Bush HW. Powell knows this full well but is too full of upper echelon military cowardice to ever say so.
BTW - "abraded" is my metaphor of the day.
Thanks Much
Jacob Horner

Sid Schwab said...

Well, you were too late to get in ahead of Frank, Jacob. But thanks for a good comment.

As to Frank: see, the thing is, Frank, when people lie, others may believe them. Had Cheney and Bush not lied, and had Powell not corroborated those lies, the people you listed wouldn't likely have voted yea. The point was about lies, Frank. And what lies do. And how Rs don't care. Seems you don't, either.

And whereas I doubt Nelson Rockefeller cast a vote from the grave, the point remains: when liars lie, people die. More to the point: the lies of President Cheney and Mr Bush are out there and undeniable, and teabaggRs don't care. They'd rather ignore that and make up shit about Obama.

Frank Drackman said...

Well thank god EICOTUS took over 3 years, 5 months, and 26 days ago, and no Americans are currently being killed, nay, even STATIONED in Iraq/Arghanistan...
I mean that DID happen, didn't it,

Bueller? Bueller?

Frank

Anonymous said...

Sid,
"As to Frank"...
I just don't get it,
Apparently you can't see what a detriment he is to an otherwise outstanding, perceptive & unique blog.
Why do you continue to swim in that shit? (I'm not buying your previous answer - see Afterbirth, 7/3)
Jacob Horner

Sid Schwab said...

In my new mode, Frank, I might not have published that one; but it's so surpassingly stupid it's worth keeping around, for people new to the blog, so they'll more easily get a handle on what passes for thought down there in GA.

Sid Schwab said...

Jacob, I posted the above before reading your latest, so it might seem a little out of order.

Frank excepted, I welcome contrary comments here, but they are few and far between. I know the occasional commenters continue to read; I think a reason they comment rarely is that I try to point out why they're wrong or ill-informed and at some point they have no come-back.

But I don't want this blog to only show positive comments. Maybe it says a lot about the opposition that Frank's the only one willing to take it on.

I've not published several of Frank's comments in the last couple of weeks (and have rejected many over the years.) The first on this post bore a point worth responding to, even though his remark about Ted Kennedy is about the thousandth time he's said the same thing. I don't want to appear unwilling to address what, for Frank at least, passes as a reasonable counter, so I published it.

I suppose I could have copied the relevant (to the extent that the world applies) parts and included and addressed them in a comment of my own. Maybe I'll do that on the rare occasion he makes a point worth addressing.

I've taken your point, and that of others, regarding Frank to heart. All I can say is that sometimes he amuses me and I let stuff through. Professional courtesy, maybe. Problem is, it's never without baggage.

All I can say is that my modus has gone to "reject" more frequently, but I haven't quite gotten to outright ban. I'm glad you still visit.

Sid Schwab said...

I should add that there's at least one other-sider who sometimes leaves very thoughtful comments, and when that happens, I try to engage in kind. Sometimes it even leads to an overlapping zone of common ground. Sort of like this.

Frank Drackman said...

Sid,
Maybe its the second hand Nitrous but...
So basically you're(:) saying Veteran Hardnosed DemoKKKrat Politicians, including the 2004 Presidential/Vice Presidential Nominees, Current Vice President/Secretary of State/Senate Majority Leaders are Gullible-Naive-Chuckleheads who get outfoxed even by a Waterhead like "W"?


Frank

Sid Schwab said...

No. I'm saying they were convinced by Powell's willingness to go before the UN with the lies; and, being politicians, bullied into being afraid to be portrayed as "weak on terror" or sleeping with the enemy, which, as you recall, was part and parcel of the Cheney/Bush propaganda/lying machine at the time.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Sid,
Problem is that Frank is way outside the category of comments and commenters - contrary or not.
He treats your comment pages as if they were his own blog. He has no real interest in your or anyone else's replies.
When I visit and click on comments I find myself in another place where I cringe and the insights and perspectives you so nicely provide become instantly clouded.
There is a world of difference between a Frank "comment" and any of the others I've seen here.
You might send him to, let's say, The Burning Platform where his juvenile, narcissitic, clever by less than half crap might really be cut through.
But, that's just me.
Your posts are nicely aimed at the "right brain" and their value should never be guaged by the number of comments; especially contrary ones. The other side's right brains have been closed for a couple of decades.
I appreciate your efforts.
Jacob Horner

Anonymous said...

I recall a move to impeach G W Bush for abuses of power (I had to look this up):
35 articles of impeachment against Bush (crafted by Dennis Kucinich) went to the House of Rep. where they voted 251 to 166 to refer the impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee on July 25. No further action was taken on the matter and W was out of office by January 20, 2009,rendering impeachment efforts moot. So he was never held accountable, nor was Cheney, Rice, Powell.
As much as I respect the willingness of military people to put themselves in harm's way to defend our freedom, the waste and loss associated with Iraq is especially depressing. I am also aware that many people think the Iraq War and 9/11 are causally related events.
I can't believe I am saying this, but I agree with Frank that those who voted "yes" are also to blame; they were "little Eichmanns".
DD

Cory said...

Really Sid? Do we really need to be reminded, reminded, and reminded again of intentionally ignorant crap like Franks? We get enough of it everywhere around us, do we really need to see it here? For you to let it in is a stain on your work, or an indication of something else...

Sid Schwab said...

Care to specify the "something else," Cory?

Anonymous said...

"...intentionally ignorant crap like Franks? We get enough of it everywhere around us, do we really need to see it here? For you to let it in is a stain on your work, or an indication of something else..."

Once again, I say, Frank serves as a living specimen and a horrible example of that which Sid is talking about, when he serves up Crypto-Fascist, Teabagging Republicans - en brochette - for our delection.

There he is, with all his feverish, festering puerility, rampant for all to see - a sort of gagging sauce that contrasts the delicious tastes of a fine meal.

Let him be, as when Sir Rodney told the little king of ID "Sire, the moat is full of scum!"

The king replied "The peasants have as much right to swim there as anyone."

EugeneInSanDiego

Cory said...

Not a clue Sid. Something else I can't see, or be in tune with, comprehend, or understand. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Jim said...

I am late to this particular party due to a slow internet connection lately and besides no one but Sid will likely read this.

As usual, I enjoy and, at the same time, continue to be depressed by the obvious common sense represented in your blog.

But this comment is about Frank. I realize that some people are offended by his comments and I ask why do you read them. I mean the first, second or third time we can all understand but after that it would seem your offense if your own doing.

I for one am entertained by the absurdity of his comments but also find some relevance in parts.

We are all too serious about this stuff. Unless you are well connected and rich nothing we say or do is going to change anything regards the political direction of this country.

Whoever wins will represent the will of a handful, small percentage, of the voters and thus, as is said, we will get the government we deserve.

Jim