-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution 

Lies about Iraq rise to level of the absurd 
Lies beget more lies; a policy built on deception will always require 
further deception to sustain itself.Case in point: The campaign by 
leading members of the Bush administration to rebuild faltering 
support for their invasion of Iraq. To hear them tell it, everything 
that has happened since last March has just proved how right they've 
been all along.To cite just one example, consider a recent speech by 
Vice President Dick Cheney to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative 
think tank in Washington. Cheney is credited by many for having led 
President Bush, and by extension this country, into invading Iraq. So 
it's no surprise that he has been unflinching in defending that 
policy.

As he explained the rationale:

"We could not accept the grave danger of Saddam Hussein and his 
terrorist allies turning weapons of mass destruction against us or 
our friends and allies."

Of course, no such grave danger existed. Having failed to find any 
WMD, we know that now. More importantly, we knew it in the fall of 
2002, when this push for war began. Even back then, the CIA was using 
terms such as "unlikely" and "low probability" to describe the odds 
of Saddam handing WMD to terrorists.

Somehow, "low probability" and "unlikely" were transformed 
into "grave danger." Claims about Saddam's nuclear program have 
followed a similar trajectory.

In January 2002, the CIA reported that Iraq's nuclear weapons program 
consisted of no more than low-level theoretical work, an assessment 
that time has proved quite accurate. Yet eight months later, Cheney 
was somehow claiming that Iraq was close to completing The Bomb.

In his Heritage speech, Cheney also described the prewar efforts to 
contain Saddam -- "12 years of diplomacy, more than a dozen Security 
Council resolutions, hundreds of U.N. weapons inspectors, thousands 
of flights to enforce the no-fly zones and even strikes against 
military targets in Iraq" -- and dismissed them as failures.

That too denies reality. In fact, multilateral efforts to contain and 
disarm Saddam had succeeded to a degree that few had imagined 
possible.

In 1991, Saddam had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, 
production facilities to produce still more, and a maturing nuclear 
weapons program. By 1998, and certainly by 2003, he had none of those 
things.

Sanctions worked. Inspections worked.

Then Cheney got to the core of his argument:

"Another criticism we hear is that the United States, when its 
security is threatened, may not act without unanimous international 
consent. Under this view, even in the face of a specific agreed-upon 
danger, the mere objection of even one foreign government would be 
sufficient to prevent us from acting."

With that statement, Cheney abandons deception and traipses merrily 
into the Land of the Completely Absurd. Nobody -- not the Democrats, 
not the United Nations, not even the French -- makes the argument 
that he describes. It would be insane to do so.

Cheney invents that argument to support his larger point: After Sept. 
11, the Bush administration at least did something, while its less-
than-manly critics would have done nothing.

And that is the ultimate falsehood.

The true policy choice is between actions that make things better for 
the United States and actions that make things worse. If we were to 
assess the invasion of Iraq on those grounds, the outcome would be 
something like this:

Saddam had no WMD, no nuclear program and no ties to al-Qaida. So 
invading Iraq did little or nothing to improve our security. It did, 
however, come at a cost that may take decades to fully tally.

The invasion has strained our alliances and international standing, 
making it difficult to draw support against real threats in North 
Korea and Iran. Our military is overextended. The financial toll is 
$150 billion and counting; the toll in U.S. lives continues to mount 
as well.

If the administration truly did expect all that, they are bigger 
fools than even their harshest critics have claimed.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Jay Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor. His column appears 
Thursdays and Mondays.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Rent DVDs from home.
Over 14,500 titles. Free Shipping
& No Late Fees. Try Netflix for FREE!
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/mk9osC/hP.FAA/3jkFAA/zgSolB/TM";><B>Click 
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
ctrl is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds 
are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are sordid matters and 
'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-directions and outright frauds�is 
used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout 
the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, ctrl gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always 
suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. ctrl gives no credence to Holocaust 
denial and nazi's need not apply.

There are two list running, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
has unlimited posting and is more for discussion. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is more for 
informational exchange and has limited posting abilities. 

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Om 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to