bush and his bloody «big lie»
«bush continues the big lie in the face of mountains of contrary evidence»by ivan eland
for the independent institute
«incredible as it may seem, despite the 9/11 commission’s conclusion that al-qaeda and the regime of saddam hussein had no “collaborative relationship,” president bush and vice president cheney continue to insist that there was a “relationship.” the president and vice president are calling a few meetings between members of the terrorist group and Iraqi government officials a “relationship.” but by analogy, if a charity was able to arrange an appointment with a large corporation or foundation in an attempt to get a contribution but then ultimately got rejected in its solicitation, the bush administration’s logic would conclude that the charity and the corporation had established a philanthropic relationship. a similar outcome apparently occurred between al-qaeda and the iraqis. according to the commission, osama bin laden requested a haven for his training camps and help in buying weapons, but the iraqis apparently never responded. that doesn’t sound like much of a relationship.
all of the bush administration’s quibbling about the definition of the word “relationship” is as ridiculous as president clinton’s hair-splitting over the definition of the word “is” during the monica lewinsky scandal. when a president’s justification for actions taken hinges on the definition of a single word, that usually spells trouble.
if mere meetings between functionaries are sinister, then US envoy donald rumsfeld’s friendly meeting in the early 1980s with saddam hussein, just after saddam had used poison gas against the iranians, may take the prize...»
america, remember! in less than five months we can "kick... them... out!"
