Channel: Home | About

--Impetus for this is a download given to me by BenT--

Kevin Drum, in a little piece called "Marketing the War" paints a reasonable picture with little reason behind it. As I am commenting on 2 pages of download, I am without any links that may have been offered in the original. So, taking it as it is, I am forced to read into it. That is what language is for, after all, to read into speech or writings any intent inherent in the language presented.

Mr. Drum is quick to cede that everyone "believed" Saddam had WMD's; that he had biological, chemical, and a progressing nuclear program. How magnanimous of him, considering it's extremely difficult to deny all the assertions made on the subject by Democrats, Republicans, and foreign intelligence agencies. These people said what they said, believing what they said to be true. If their beliefs somehow turned out to be misguided in the end-- and I'm not convinced they were --it doesn't amount to all these people being liars, or manipulators of intelligence.

So, having graciously ceded to what couldn't be denied Mr. Drum then makes assertions based on assumption, as no corroboration of his personal opinions are offered. The word "personal" is important. This is what he believes, and returning to an earlier point, it doesn't amount to Mr. Drum being a liar. Blinded perhaps, but not a liar.

As to his conclusions, consider the following statements...

"Was there widespread belief in September 2002 that Iraq had an active WMD program? Yes."
Naturally, what else can Mr. Drum say but yes?

"Did the Bush administration nonetheless lie, exaggerate, and dissemble repeatedly about that program? Yes."
And this is where Mr. Drum loses me. This is pure speculation on his part. He has absolutely nothing more than his own personal belief to back this up. Anyone interested in Truth must understand that an opinion is nothing without fact to back it up. It is simply not enough that others believe as well to make an opinion into a true fact. Opinions are, quite simply, not facts.

"["The First Casualty" by John Judis & Spencer Ackerman] was the article that apparently first sent Scooter Libby into hysterics and began the campaign to smear Joe Wilson and expose his wife as a CIA agent."
Note the following words; "apparently", "hysterics", "campaign", "smear", and "expose", all of which are, again, assumptions based on personal belief, not cold hard fact. Mr. Drum could not know what article Scooter read, and whether or not that article precipitated "hysterics", and a "campaign" to "smear" Joe Wilson, and "expose" his CIA agent of a wife.

It never ceases to amaze me how the Left in this country gloms onto the "truths" of their leaders without question. Contrary to what BenT may think, this is something I don't do. Yes, I listen to Rush, Hannity, and Snow. But I also listen to Boortz-- who is anything but a Bush fan. I read OpEds from Liberal Democrats as well as Conservative Republicans, and I try very hard to be fair. I don't always succeed, but that's just because I'm human. But I don't take anything on blind faith, except God-- Fault me on that if you will, but that's not the issue here. Mr. Drum can get away with what he does, as can Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Kennedy, and all the others, because for the most part... For the MOST part, their followers never question anything that comes out of their mouths. So be it. But that's not me.

BenT can hand me articles all day long and still not answer the underlying question with a definitive, "Yes! Bush and all his cronies DID lie about WMD's." You see I can hand him articles all day long exposing the Left's desperate attempts to paint the Republican president as a Liar, and destroy his presidency-- I have far more proof of that than he has for his belief that Bush lied. And as long as the Left continues to turn a blind eye to the obvious lies of Mr. Joe Wilson himself, why should I sit meekly by and let the enemies of Truth continue to poison whatever goodness is left in this country?

So, let's look at the following article: Democrats Push Big Lie About War, by Allan H. Ryskind, posted Nov 4, 2005 at Human Events Online.

Though I recommend you read the entire article, for full context, here are 6 Quotes:

"To believe that the White House concocted a fable about WMD in Iraq, you would have to believe in a massive conspiracy involving not only the Bush people, but both Bill Clinton’s and George Bush’s CIA director, George Tenet; Bush’s first term secretary of state, Colin Powell; Clinton’s secretary of state, Madeleine Albright; Clinton’s key NSC Persian Gulf adviser, Kenneth Pollack; and numerous WMD experts at the United Nations... How many people, for instance, know that Wilson himself, the Democrats’ big stick to beat up on Bush, believed that when the war began Saddam had weapons of mass destruction?"

"Was Clinton’s seasoned expert on the Gulf [Kenneth M. Pollack] also in on the Bush plan to fabricate evidence? The conspiracy buffs may think so, for in 2002, when Bush was in office and worrying about what to do about Saddam, Pollack wrote a book titled The Threatening Storm. The subtitle was more provocative: The Case for Invading Iraq."

"George Bush had been assured by Tenet that there was “slam dunk” evidence against Saddam, so the secretary of State descended upon the CIA in Mclean, Va., spending four difficult days sifting through the intelligence, sometimes with his deputy, Richard Armitage."

"After the final rehearsal in Washington, Tenet, according to Bob Woodward’s most thorough report, “announced that he thought their case was ironclad and he believed that they had vetted each sentence [of Sec. Powell's address to the UN].” "

"Powell then informed Tenet that the CIA director would have to sit behind him at the UN, a visible sign that he was backing the secretary of State’s findings."

"Those who say Bush “lied us into war” based on “manufactured” intelligence are either ignorant or malicious. Either way, they are dangerously undermining whatever chance we still have of rescuing Iraq from chaos and catastrophe."



Finally, as with Mr. Drum, don't take my word for anything. Read, Think Critically, Compare, and then decide for yourself.

Joe Wilson has a lot of questions to answer, and it's a disgrace to our Media that they give him a free pass. That's because the media has an agenda of it's own, and why it's jokingly refered to as the 3rd major party in American politics. The media can't be trusted. If you want the truth you'll have to find it for yourself. Good hunting.

For a different take, a Left leaning take, check out Arianna Huffington's, "Why the Dems Need James Carville to Take a Long, Long Vacation."

It too is a decent read-- Less factual, but far more entertaining than Mr. Ryskind's piece.



5 Comments:

  1. Anonymous said...
    Read this article and see how your iron faith in the Bush administration stands up. I have never said the administration or any of its members "lied" in the lead-up to the Iraq conflict. The words I have used include exagerated, mislead, and distorted. Also you keep trying to pin the start of this conflict on Congress and that just isn't how it works. Congress authorizes the Commander-in-Chief to take military action. It is the Commander-in-Chief that makes the decision to start the war. Truman had it right in the Oval Office is where The Buck stops.
    Anonymous said...
    I'm not trying to pin anything on any particular person or group-- unlike the Media and Democrats/Liberals --just stating what should be obvious to intelligent free-thinking people.
    Anonymous said...
    Interesting article, Ben.

    " WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - A high Qaeda official in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Al Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons, according to newly declassified portions of a Defense Intelligence Agency document.

    "The document, an intelligence report from February 2002, said it was probable that the prisoner, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, "was intentionally misleading the debriefers" in making claims about Iraqi support for Al Qaeda's work with illicit weapons. "


    Is it possible al Qaeda wanted the US to Invade Iraq? Perhaps Afghanistan alone wasn't enough to frighten Radical Islam, so another Bastion of Repression needed to fall to American Imperialism to get the faithful riled enough to kill themselves and others in homicide attacks.
    Anonymous said...
    Oh, for the love of Christ.

    ELAshley said: I'm not trying to pin anything on any particular person or group-- unlike the Media and Democrats/Liberals

    Gotta call you on this one. All you ever seem to do is pin things on particular people and groups. And it's obvious that you target whomever is not like you.

    You are a white, Christian, conservative, Republican, American, male blogger.

    Not that there's anything wrong with that. But given these attributes, it seems to be no coincidence that you spend almost all of your time picking on blacks, muslims, liberals, Democrats, immigrants, feminists, and the MSM.

    All this while accusing liberals of name calling, which is all you do. In your world, environmentalists are eco-nazis. Feminists are hoaxers and whores.

    Get the damn log out of your eye!
    Anonymous said...
    Really? Well, you're entitled to your opinions, as am I. But personally, I don't care whether a person is white, black, Muslim, Christian, conservative, liberal, feminist, or otherwise. What I do care about is whether or not a person can be honest in their opinions, and congratulations! You are!

    Unfortunately most of the idiocy I encounter, and blog about, comes from people who are not! When it turns out I've been hasty in my judgments I quite willing amend my views-- On some issues I'm very reasonable. But again, most people are not.

Post a Comment