Those Who Say “Bush Lied” Not Looking at Facts
- 1 April 2007 by Author 0 Comments
Those Who Say “Bush Lied” Not Looking at Facts
By Richard Larsen
Published – Idaho State Journal, 04/01/07
Generalizations and broad statements issued as “fact” abound in today’s political environment. It is expected that ignorant and uninformed people should make some of the outrageous and unsubstantiated claims they repeat, because they hear someone say something idiotic that happens to fit their belief system and they accept it is gospel. Those of us who accept very little on face value and research everything to get to the facts are amazed that such people can even function in society.
But there’s something very disconcerting about those among us who should be, or at least project the image of being well informed making the same asinine comments as those who are totally ignorant. It’s scary because those people not only vote, obviously ignorantly, but they’re also sometimes in a position to influence others because they appear ostensibly to be erudite and informed.
For example, how many times have we heard “Bush lied!” Often times there’s a corollary attached, like “…people died.” That just has such a great ring to it in the ears of those who would blame President Bush for everything from the attacks of 9/11 to hurricane Katrina. But is the phrase, with or without the corollary, factual?
The presumption is that the President lied about the WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) intelligence. If one is to display even a modicum of intelligence, some evidence must be presented. Where is that evidence? In 1998 President Clinton, citing U.S. intelligence sources about the WMDs Saddam Hussein maintained in his military arsenal, made a regime change in Iraq a matter of policy. Fifteen United Nations resolutions called for Hussein to destroy, dismantle, and discontinue his WMD programs. He refused to abandon his production programs and destroy his existing stockpiles, which led to the ultimate invasion of Iraq. And frankly, since Hussein had failed to comply with the terms of the cessation of hostilities from the Gulf War in 1991, the U.S. attack in 2003 was a resumption of hostilities because of Hussein’s failure to comply with those terms that ended the Gulf War. The invasion was preemptive only from the standpoint of preventing proliferation of WMDs (which we knew he had, along with U.K., Russian, and Israeli intelligence bureaus) to terrorists.
After the fall of Hussein, we failed to find the massive stockpiles of WMDs that Hussein had refused to give up. We found over 500 munitions of mustard and serin gas, but not the more recent additions to his stockpiles. His 2nd in command of the Iraqi air force, Gorges Sada, has written a book documenting how a Russian Spetznaz (special forces) group led by Yevgeny Primakov, the former Russian Intelligence Chief, assisted in transporting the stockpiles to Syria. Sada witnessed it first hand. In a court of law, an eyewitness proves culpability.
So where in all this is evidence that “Bush lied”? Some have maintained that he doctored or only accepted intelligence that fit a predefined plan for attacking Iraq. If that is the case, how was he able to “doctor” Russian, British, and Israeli intelligence? They all had come to the same conclusion, that the WMDs were there, and they posed a great threat. If Bush lied, then so did Vladimir Putin, Tony Blair, and Ariel Sharon, and their respective intelligence bureaus.
Another favorite expletive for many is “neocons.” The “neocons” in Washington are blamed for everything that is wrong in the world, especially Iraq. Yet, what exactly is a “neocon?” The original neoconservatives were liberal intellectuals led by Irving Kristol and were self-described as “liberals mugged by reality.” Most were Jewish, and extremely pro-Israel. Fundamental to their ideology is the fact that there is such a thing as evil in the world, and rather than rationalize it away or intellectually minimalize it, it must be confronted in order to protect our way of life and preserve the principles of liberty as propounded by our Bill of Rights.
So the natural question is, who in the Bush administration is a liberal, Jewish intellectual, mugged by reality? George Bush? Richard Cheney? Donald Rumsfeld? Condoleeza Rice? Can’t be any of them, for not only are they not Jewish, but according to those who are so quick to blame Iraq on the “neocons” the aforementioned are all idiots, and none of them could be categorized as ideologically liberal. So who are the neocons that got us into Iraq and have turned global sentiment against the U.S.? Probably the closest you could find in the administration is Paul Wolfowitz who was Deputy Secretary of Defense under Rumsfeld. He certainly had an influence in shaping the President’s response to the attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent toppling of the Hussein regime in Iraq, but he’s been President of the World Bank for two years. So again, the question begs an answer: who are the “neocons” in Washington who are to be blamed for all the worlds ailments?
As an informed electorate and citizenry, it certainly behooves us to question conventional sources of information and to not accept carte blanche statements as fact. It is imperative that we educate ourselves beyond the typical 4th grade education level (no offense intended for all the smart 4th graders out there!) that the mass media promulgates its tainted news in. And especially if you have a forum for your opinions, at least have the respect for your audience to have facts or evidence to support your claims, if you have any. And if you don’t have any, don’t expect us to lend your opinion any credence.
So next time someone tries to tell you “Bush lied,” ask what he lied about, and where’s the evidence. For there is none, it’s just become an accepted phrase out of the liberal lexicon of anti-Bushisms. And when they blame Iraq on the “neocons,” ask who they are, because as far as I can see, there aren’t any in our administration.
Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.