Lying Again, This Time About
by Walter C. Uhler / August 10th, 2007
In Sept. `02, Bush invoked a
nonexistent IAEA report to claim that
During his January 28, 2003,
State of the Union address, Bush defrauded Americans at least three times. He
presented a less than candid assessment of the intelligence linking Saddam
Hussein to al Qaeda. He also presented a less than candid assessment of the
intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction. As
former federal prosecutor, Elizabeth de la Vega, demonstrated in her book,
Bush, according to Title 18,
United States Code, Section 371: "It is still the
law of the
Bush then built upon these two fraudulent assessments to establish a third, Saddam's link to 9/11: "Before September 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents and lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons, and other plans — this time armed by Saddam Hussein."
In order to defraud the American public a third time, Bush and his speech writers employed a hallowed axiom of propaganda; one recognized by Walter Lippmann decades earlier: "[T]he more untrained the mind, the more readily it works out a theory that two things which catch its attention at the same time are causally connected."
Bush also lied in mid-July 2003, when he told reporters that "we gave him [Saddam] a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in." In fact, Saddam did let the inspectors in. But, the Bush administration made them leave, lest they discover that no WMD existed and scotch the invasion.
In December 2003, ABC's Diane Sawyer pressed Bush about justifying a war to the American public by stating "as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he [Saddam] could move to acquire those weapons." Put on the spot, Bush
asserted: "So what's the difference?"
In late 2005, Bush lied
again, when attempting to justify his unconstitutional order permitting the
National Security Agency to eavesdrop on
in the war against terrorism,
evidently forgetting that, in April 2004, he assured an audience in
And he lied again on December 14, 2005, when he asserted that his critics in Congress "saw the same intelligence I saw and then voted to authorize the use of force against Saddam Hussein." In fact, Bush was receiving many more intelligence reports than any member of Congress.
Bush lied again, on the eve of the November 2006 mid-term elections, when he said that he wanted Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to stay on until the end of his presidency. In fact, Bush already had commenced work on replacing Rumsfeld and knew he was lying when he said Rumsfeld would stay on.
In a December 19, 2006, interview with the Washington Post, Bush lied again. According to the Post, when he was asked to reconcile his "absolutely, we're winning" in Iraq assertion of October 25, 2006, with his new assertion, "We're not winning, we're not losing," Bush "recast" his former assertion "as a prediction rather than an assessment."
Just a few days ago, during
his August 6, 2007 "Joint Press Availability" (mini news conference)
Thus, after noting that it
was up to
We can be sure that Bush
lied, because virtually everyone, except for a few morons, knows that "the
Iranian government has never articulated such a desire and in fact has
repeatedly claimed, genuinely or disingenuously, the opposite." [Farideh Farhi, "
Let us assure that this lie is not another lie for another war.
Yet, beyond the lies, I've noticed another pattern in the president's recent speeches; suggesting a type of psychological projection that results in the "pot calling the kettle black."
Simply read Bush's
"Joint Press Availability" assertions about
But, in every sentence where
you see the word "
For example: "It's up
Take another example:
"So I believe that it's in the interests of all of us that we have an
Here's a classic in
psychological projection: "And I must tell you that the current leadership
Finally, consider one more case of the pot calling the kettle black:
"The people of
But because of the actions of this government, the country is isolated." True, but then consider Glenn Greenwald's recent analysis of the worldwide Pew poll of public opinion.
According to Greenwald,
"the polling data demonstrates that while
Thus, the conclusion appears inescapable: When Bush becomes the pot that calls the kettle black, it's because he's still living in a bubble After all, he appears far too ignorant to be taunting the impotence of his domestic opponents with such a wicked sense of irony.
That being the case, all we can expect is more bad news based upon lies — both for citizens of the United States and the world — unless Bush is impeached, convicted and removed from office (but after Cheney).
Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is President of the Russian-American International Studies Association (RAISA). He can be reached at email@example.com. Read other articles by Walter C., or visit Walter C.'s website.