The War Party Fooled You Again

Better Late Than Never?

Comment by Larry Ross, October 15, 2003

This article by Michael Tennant, "Better Late Than Never?" has an excellent brief record of the US Govt's use of lies to fool or frighten the US public into supporting US wars since 1898. It is only with media cooperation that this technique can work again
and again.
Certainly one of the best examples is Bush lies to get the US public to support his preplanned war on Iraq. It is instructive that
the Bush Admin has tried the same tactics to deceive members of the UN; first for the UN to sanction the war, and now to get a new UN resolution for nations to send troops and money to help pay for the crime. For some years the US right-wing (now in power) have belittled and condemned the UN. Is it now trying to make a case with the American people, that will get their support when it condemns the UN for not helping it.?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

The War Party Fooled You Again

Better Late Than Never?

by Michael Tennant, October 14, 2003

The ship of state, as represented by the Bush administration, has sprung more than a few leaks. In fact, following the release of the David Kay report , the ship is beginning to resemble the Titanic after its collision with the iceberg.

Taking note of this state of affairs, some of the rats who heretofore have supported the administration's war on the people of Iraq are beginning to don their life jackets.

George Will, for example, recently wrote a column entitled “Can't They Just Admit It?” —the “They” being the Bush administration, and the “It” being the fact that “They” took us into a war on the basis of faulty intelligence. Will comes down relatively hard (for him) on the administration for its refusal simply to admit what is as plain as the ever-growing nose on the president's face. Now, ultimately Will is concerned that stubbornness in the face of overwhelming evidence will make it more difficult for any president to drag the country into a war in the future, which, of course, is a good thing. Nevertheless, that Will, Beltway conservative nonpareil, is beginning to question the administration's credibility cannot be considered a good sign for Bush.

Paul Sperry, Washington bureau chief of WorldNetDaily.com, possibly the most hawkish site on the Internet, was even more blunt in his October 6 column, as evidenced by its title: “Yes, Bush Lied.” It doesn't get much more pointed than that. Sperry, who says he voted for Bush, lays out the case that Bush completely misrepresented—no, lied about—every bit of intelligence that the government had prior to the war and continued to lie about what had been found after the war. (To be fair, Sperry has been on the administration's case for months now and has even written a book entitled Crude Politics: How Bush's Oil Cronies Hijacked the War on Terrorism . However, only two of his critical articles appeared on WND prior to the start of the war on March 19, and those only in the week leading up to that date, which gives the impression that either he or the WND editors, or both, were relatively unconcerned about the administration's flimsy case until the war had clearly become a fait accompli .)

Continue...