Thursday, July 10, 2003

Depends on what the meaning of "knew" is ...

More news on the bogus Bushism delivered in the 2003 State of the Union Address:

CIA officials warned members of the President’s National Security Council staff the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa.

The White House officials responded that a paper issued by the British government contained the unequivocal assertion: “Iraq has ... sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” As long as the statement was attributed to British Intelligence, the White House officials argued, it would be factually accurate. The CIA officials dropped their objections and that’s how it was delivered.

Clever, huh? There is no out and out lie to pin on Bush ... Karl Rove is, after all, an *evil* genius, but a genius nonetheless. He's not going to let his puppet be caught in an obvious lie, as the story above proves. But even Einstein got some things wrong.

What the apologists for the increasingly corrupt Bush regime are doing here is called "dissembling." They want us to believe that the President didn't know that the British report was false. But more and more evidence is coming to light that shows the corrupt occupant of the Whitehouse and his handlers knew exactly that ... the British report was bogus.

Just what did Bush know and when did he know it? The only way to clear W's "good name" is to launch an investigation. But don't hold your breath -- the Imperial Resident and his simpering minions value secrecy above all else. They're already stonewalling an investigation into administration and intelligence failures pre 9/11/2001. They've fought long and hard to shield Cheney's corrupt dealings. They'll do everything they can to prevent the real story of their motives for the Iraqi invasion from seeing the light of day.

More and more it seems that the right wing believes that Republican presidents aren't first among equals, they're divinely instated kings to be followed unquestioningly. As long as there's a profit to be made, damn the consequences.

To those of you following along, it should be clear -- for soulless neo-conservatives, misrepresenting facts and shading the truth is okay -- after all, it's not their kids who are dying in the hot Iraqi sun, is it?


Post a Comment

<< Home