Earn Your Paychecks, Mainstream Media!
Point: Bush manipulated intelligence and lied to the American people in order to start a deadly and unnecessary war. We knew that, but now we have (more) proof. I'll let my favorite wonk, Joe Conason explain:
Are Americans so jaded about the deceptions perpetrated by our own government to lead us into war in Iraq that we are no longer interested in fresh and damning evidence of those lies? Or are the editors and producers who oversee the American news industry simply too timid to report that proof on the evening broadcasts and front pages?Why isn't anyone reporting on this? Have you seen Chris Matthews go apeshit about this like when he saw the faked picture of Jane Fonda and John Kerry supposedly at a rally together in the 60s? Oh wait, I'm sorry. For Brad, I wanted to do a counterpoint.
There is a "smoking memo" that confirms the worst assumptions about the Bush administration's Iraq policy, but although that memo generated huge pre-election headlines in Britain, its existence has hardly been mentioned here.
...
What the minutes clearly show is that Bush and Blair secretly agreed to wage war for "regime change" nearly a year before the invasion -- and months before they asked the United Nations Security Council to support renewed weapons inspections as an alternative to armed conflict. The minutes also reveal the lingering doubts over the legal and moral justifications for war within the Blair government.
But for Americans, the most important lines in the July 23 minutes are those attributed to Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6, who in spy jargon is to be referred to only as "C." The minutes indicate that Sir Richard had discovered certain harsh realities during a visit to the United States that summer:
"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the U.N. route ... There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."
At the same meeting, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw confirmed Sir Richard's assessment:
"The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."
Counterpoint: Hey, let it go, dude. Sometimes the president has to lie to start wars. Welcome to the real world.
No comments:
Post a Comment