The CIA asked Britain to drop it’s Iraq claim while President Bush said that the CIA “I gave a speech to the nation that was cleared by the intelligence services.”
Remember that Bush’s State of the Union address didn’t claim that the US believed that Iraq was buying nuclear material from Niger or other African countries. It said that British intelligence thought Iraq was. Shifting responsibility for the claim gave the Bush team the wiggle room to include an allegation they knew was probably not true. It’s the triumph of politics over truth.
As I’ve written before, there is a political brillance to the Bush Presidency. The Administration knows that it can sway large portions of the American public just by making claims. It doesn’t matter if the claims are wrong –even obviously wrong– as long as they feed into some deep psychic narrative. It’s been awhile since we saw a President that could bully through reality as long as the story sounded good. Ronald Reagan, the ex-actor, was good at it but I’m suspecting our current President is even better. The question is whether enough people will start insisting on the truth and demand investigations into the lies. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and President Bush knew it. The American people would not have gone to war if we had known that Iraq wasn’t a threat and this too President Bush knew.
Quaker Ranter
A Weekly Newsletter and Blog from Martin Kelley
“Not that stupid piece of garbage”
July 10, 2003
“My thought was, how did that get into the speech?“This choice quote comes from Greg Thielmann, an intelligence expert in the US State Department (now retired). In today’s papers this Bush Administration insider has come right out and said that the White House “lied about Saddam threat”.
Meanwhile the happy-go-lucky Donald Rumsfeld has said the occupation is costing the US $3.9 billion per month (see sidebar) and General Tommy Franks predicts high troop levels will be needed “for the foreseeable future.”
Nation developing new Weapons of Mass Destruction
July 7, 2003
News that the country that has recently defied the United Nations and started two wars in as many years now has plans to develop new types of weapons of mass destruction: “That policy paper embraces the use of nuclear weapons in a first strike and on the battlefield; it also says … nuclear testing may soon be necessary.” This renewed development is coming from the only country that has used nuclear weapons in wartime against civilian populations.
Shameless fundraising plug
July 2, 2003
I’ve run up a lot of Nonviolence.Org expenses over Iraq War II – the flood of visitors have eaten up the bandwidth. Help keep the site going by buying a fundraising t‑shirt, only $22 while supplies last!
William Gibson: the future will find you out
June 28, 2003
An interesting article on George Orwell and the future we’ve become. What would Orwell have thought about the big brother of national security and the never-ending war on terror. And what would he have thought of the internet and blogs? Here’s a snippet:
“In the age of the leak and the blog, of evidence extraction and link discovery, truths will either out or be outed, later if not sooner. This is something I would bring to the attention of every diplomat, politician and corporate leader: the future, eventually, will find you out.
It’s hard not to make the connection
June 21, 2003
In Iraq, U.S. soldiers are blaring the soundtract to ‘Apocalypse Now’ to psych themselves up to war:
“With Wagner’s ‘Ride of the Valkyries’ still ringing in their ears and the clatter of helicopters overhead, soldiers rammed vehicles into metal gates and hundreds of troops raided houses in the western city of Ramadi”
Meanwhile in my hometown of Philadelphia four teenagers listened to the Beatles’ ‘Helter Skelter’ over forty times before attacking and beating to death one of their friends.
Horrific as both stories are, what strikes me is the choice of music. ‘Helter Skelter’ and most of the music on ‘Apocalpse Now’ were written in the late 1960 and early 70s (the movie itself came out in 1979). Why are today’s teenagers picking the music of their parents to plan their attacks? Can’t you kill to Radiohead or Linkin Park? Couldn’t the Philly kids have shown some hometown pride and picked Pink? Why the Oldies Music? Seriously, there have been some topsy-turvy generational surprises in the support and opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Is there some sort of strange fetish for all things 70s going on here?
It’s hard not to make the connection.
June 21, 2003
In Iraq, U.S. soldiers are blaring the soundtract to ‘Apocalypse Now’ to psych themselves up to war:
“With Wagner’s ‘Ride of the Valkyries’ still ringing in their ears and the clatter of helicopters overhead, soldiers rammed vehicles into metal gates and hundreds of troops raided houses in the western city of Ramadi”
Meanwhile in my hometown of Philadelphia four teenagers listened to the Beatles’ ‘Helter Skelter’ over forty times before attacking and beating to death one of their friends.
Horrific as both stories are, what strikes me is the choice of music. ‘Helter Skelter’ and most of the music on ‘Apocalpse Now’ were written in the late 1960 and early 70s (the movie itself came out in 1979). Why are today’s teenagers picking the music of their parents to plan their attacks? Can’t you kill to Radiohead or Linkin Park? Couldn’t the Philly kids have shown some hometown pride and picked Pink? Why the Oldies Music? Seriously, there have been some topsy-turvy generational surprises in the support and opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Is there some sort of strange fetish for all things 70s going on here?
The Selling of the Iraq War
June 21, 2003
The New Republic has a long article by John B Judis & Spencer Ackerman detailing the subversion of the intelligence agencies to the political agenda of the pro-war hawks in the Bush Administration. The job of the Central Intelligence Agency is to provide the U.S. with credible information on threats to national security. Subverting it to fit a political agenda is the real threat to national security.
“Had the administration accurately depicted the consensus within the intelligence community in 2002 – that Iraq’s ties with Al Qaeda were inconsequential; that its nuclear weapons program was minimal at best; and that its chemical and biological weapons programs, which had yielded significant stocks of dangerous weapons in the past, may or may not have been ongoing – it would have had a very difficult time convincing Congress and the American public to support a war to disarm Saddam.”