Bring It On!

The Slow Trickle of Truth

August 18th, 2005 | by Dr. Forbush |

I feel like I am repeating myself, but I’m not. Even though the truth about the build up to the Iraq War has been out in public for years now, this evidence isn’t accepted as the truth among those who continue to support the President’s vision of pre-emptive invasion. This is because the American people in general put trust in our nation’s leader to defend the United States of America and to uphold the Constitution. For some people it takes an enormous amount of evidence to convince them that their leader could act for personal gain prioritizing it over national security. This is because it would take an enormous amount of hubris, an extreme degree of evil intention, or a large amount of stupidity for an American leader to commit these acts of selfish behavior bordering on treason.

Not everyone places the same degree of respect and expectation on the office of the President of the United States of America. Some people allow their political ideology to cloud their vision of the truth. For example, extremists on the right were eager to impeach Bill Clinton when it was discovered that he lied about a sexual encounter. The politics clouded rational thought on this issue. Similarly, on a much more serious issue, the reason for taking our nation into war, the politics has once again clouded rational thought.

Obviously the crowd on the left who was first out with this evidence also reacted with a clouded view as well. This group had called for impeachment before an investigation. It simply makes more sense to do these things in order and not to jump to conclusions. Unfortunately, an investigation without cooperation leads to stonewalling and little information.

The evidence that is required to prove a crime is often difficult to find even if there is a strong suspicion of guilt. This isn’t unusual when a criminal wants to hide his crime they don’t tend to make it easy for the investigators. Police tend to catch the stupid criminals, but the smarter ones often get away with their crimes. In even worse cases organized criminals are able to get away with a multitude of crimes because of their ability to coordinate their efforts. Therefore it isn’t difficult to imagine that if organized crime is able to cover up it’s crimes, then an organization within the government that actually has its hands on the levers of power would be even more effective at covering up its crimes.

Sources of evidence in the form of documents within the government are concealed by classifying them as secret or top secret. Even when documents are released to journalists or investigators they are often redacted in such extreme ways that takes away the ability to trace relationships and interactions. This means that the administration has a great deal of influence over which documents are released and what is redacted from the documents that are released. These actions take time and the truth is only able to leak out slowly as the release of a document travels through the court system or bureaucracy of government. The hope of the criminals is that the information is delayed and by the time it is released people no longer care, because the people already believe that they understand the “reality” based on the lies that the criminals have spread.

Documents from other governments are not subject to the same control as the documents within the US government. This is why the Downing Street Memo is so significant. The Downing Street Memo tells us that the Bush administration was “fixing intelligence” in order to increase public support for a pre-emptive War in Iraq. But, the Downing Street Memo comes from another government not controlled by the criminals.

To add to the evidence that the Bush administration mislead the public into support for the pre-emptive War in Iraq are a set of newly declassified documents released yesterday August 17, 2005. These documents support the Downing Street Memo. These documents support what many people have told us about the run-up to the Iraq War. These documents tell us that “planning for post-Saddam regime change began as early as October 2001.”

Wait a minute, planning for post-Saddam regime change began right after 9/11/2001? If they planned this so early why was post-war Iraq so screwed up?

As the new documents continue to trickle out they all tend to confirm the conjecture that the War in Iraq was planned long before the claims of the Bush administration. Additionally, the criteria for the war was created out of thin air in order to deceive the American public into supporting an unnecessary, unjust and illegal War.

politics,
Iraq and
Downing Street Memo

  1. 20 Responses to “The Slow Trickle of Truth”

  2. By James on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Having followed many of these same leads and stories myself, I find some of it disturbing, yet I can’t bring myself to buy into the “evil intentions” theory so many love to parade.

    I find it VERY hard to believe that it has been so many months and years since 9/11 and the Iraq War began, and not once have we heard any solid, damning evidence that hasn’t been dropped like a hot potato weeks after it’s initial rounds.

    If the President DID pre-plan everything, it would have to have involved SO MANY people that we’d be SURE to have many more leaks than we “have”.

  3. By Dr. Forbush on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    James,

    You make a good point, but you fail to realize that this administration is more tight lipped than any administration in the history of our country. If you read Paul O’Neill’s book he describes this disturbing security style that prevents almost all information from leaking out, unless the information is intended to leak out. Hence, the Rove and Libby leaks were planned leaks while no other opinions can get out. The very nature of this organization should implicate George W Bush, because he should be able to plausibly deny the spreading of these lies or the knowledge about them.

    In spite of this there have been leaks. The Paul O’Neill book is a major leak. There were people at the Pentagon, FBI and the CIA that have said things after they retired. Un-retired people are just to fearful of retaliation, hence the very low number of sources.

    Keeping the number of sources low is the key for Karl Rove. He can discredit the few sources that do come up slowly. If there were an avalanche of sources he wouldn’t be able to keep up with it. The administration has effectively used fear and lies to control the information…

  4. By TheChosenOne on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Sorry, but Downing Street Memo is HISTORY. No one cares. It’s much to do about nothing.

    Good luck wasting your time folks. I bet you are the type of people who stock piled food and shit for the Y2K bug. Shit, better get ready for the Y3K bug next.

  5. By Joe Snitty on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    There’s some speculation that what’s being perceived as a failure to quell rebellion in Iraq is actually a sequence of planned actions intended destabilize the entire region. There’s been a thread about this going on Moxie’s blog. I haven’t decided whether I buy into the theory, but it’s interesting nonetheless.

  6. By Paul on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    I think that it is now almost irrefutable that Bush and his cronies started a war of choice that had nothing to do with the official justifications. The actions of the US government during the year before the start of hostilities in Iraq show rather persuasively that any suggestion Bush waged war as a “last resort” as plain hooey. It is a shame that there isn’t a bigger uproar by the citizens of this country regarding being conned into supporting a war that has turned into a foreign policy disaster.

  7. By steve on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Doc:

    I hate to say it but it needs to be said. This entire post is complete bull sh*t. It is stacked high and smells bad.

    First off this entire paragraph:

    “Not everyone places the same degree of respect and expectation on the office of the President of the United States of America. Some people allow their political ideology to cloud their vision of the truth. For example, extremists on the right were eager to impeach Bill Clinton when it was discovered that he lied about a sexual encounter. The politics clouded rational thought on this issue. Similarly, on a much more serious issue, the reason for taking our nation into war, the politics has once again clouded rational thought.”

    Bill Clinton got right up on TV and lied is ass off to the American people. Plain and simple. If you think otherwise you are pretty jaded. Sane rational people of America saw the man as guilty. You did too. It may not be a big deal to you and your little liberal ideology that a married man got a blow job at the White House but it was a big freaking deal to other Americans. America does not want a morally corrupt President. Say all you want about Bush’s month long vacation, at least he is not getting some head from an impressionable young intern. Bush cares for America regardless of what you think of his actions.

    Second, you made the statement in that paragraph that “Some people allow their political ideology to cloud their vision of the truth.” Speak for yourself left winger, that’s why you guys do not have a President in the White House and the right does. That’s why the American public doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the Downing Street Memo. And yes, as I stated in that Axis of Evil post from a few days back, just last night, I have read the memo. Again I will say it. If the Bush Adminstration was “fixing” intelligence to make a case for war then why is it that later in the memo the British fear Saddam Hussein using the WMD’s at the beginning of the war on Israel or Kuwait? Here’s the quote from the DSM:

    “For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary.”

    I don’t know but that statement alone conflicts with what all you guys say about the memo being the smoking gun, the blue stained dress, that’ll lead you down the path to a Bush impeachment. If there were no WMD’s then how could Saddam use them? There still is no, defining evidence that there was no WMD’s in Iraq. Zarqawi is smart. He’s probably sitting on them. And if he uses them the whole world would know that Bush was right and just. Instead he’s using the ploy to get people like you against the President. We were screwed no matter what because the world, this time didn’t come to America’s back. Shame on those people.

    Dr. Forbush, you are sitting there right thinking I am a complete idiot. You are ready jump out of your chair and bust me in the chops. So what, I’ll tell you another truth. War is hell. I learned that statment before the first Gulf War back in January 1991. I had the pleasure and honor to perform the Star Spangled Banner for a real hero from Vietnam, BT Collins. He was a state senator in California and he gave a moving speech regarding the first war. He was severely disfigured in Vietnam but led a successful life, taking no bullshit in the process. In his speech, he described the deaths and the horrors but the necessities of advancing freedom, justice and ridding the world of evil. The dedication to America. But, in the end war is hell and always will be.

    You can site all the polls you want regarding the waining support for this President and the war. Just because 60% of the people are against it or feel the war is not going makes no difference to those that would perhaps vote for a President.

    The last thing I am gonna say and it’s regarding the last thing you mentioned about the documents released yesterday. What, is that supposed to be another I told you so? C’mon man. When you destroy the leadership of another country you have no idea what is going to happen afterward no matter how you plan it. America has never had an enemy like the terrorists and/or Saddam Hussein until the latter part of the 20th Century. It’s uncharted waters. But it’s your political ideology that feeds the insurgency. It’s your ideology that makes the President and this country weak. It is your ideology that keeps allies like France and Germany out of the war on terror and Iraq. It only your insistence that our country is going to shit with this President. It is your problem… It’s not me. This is the exact reason why the Democrats have only run one good candidate for President since Nixon quit. In fact, since JFK, there is only one. (that would be Clinton and he could have done more) Think about it. You have had ample with Nixon, Reagan, Bush Senior and Junior. They are and were not perfect Presidents. Carter? If Carter stomped on Iran when he had the chance I wouldn’t be typing this comment today. Think about it.

    Now that I have offended every single one of you and Dr. Forbush, hey, I am sorry.
    I have said my piece and I’ll stick with it.

    Steve

  8. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    If the Downing Street Memo is HISTORY, it’s because the not-liberal media ignored it. Interesting diversionary tactic, Chosen Inane, but understandable from someone with no valid points to raise on the issue. 1. dismiss the issue 2. change the subject to something entirely. Sorry, champ, that crap may work on MSNBC and Faux News, but you won’t get away with it here.

    Gosh, wonder what genius “Steve” has to say about it?

  9. By steve on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Brad:

    Duck!

    Steve

  10. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Ahh, Steve, working on his nonsense as I was typing. He went the other route. Talk and talk about nothing at all.

    Are you implying that Bush did not “get right up there on TV and lie his ass off”? I seem to remember, oh, I don’t know, 16 little words about Africa. That was a lie. So, I guess you’re saying Bush should be impeached then, right?

  11. By steve on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    It depends what the definition of is, is.

  12. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    “America has never had an enemy like the terrorists and/or Saddam Hussein until the latter part of the 20th Century”

    Need to work on your attention span, superstar. Ever heard of “duck and cover.” McCarthy hearings, that whole thing? That was another one of those trumped-up enemies the government brings out every couple generations to keep everyone scared.

  13. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Wow. Good one. Got me.

    Later

  14. By steve on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Oh and hey Brad, you are such a follower… At least I use original thought instead of copying, Dr. Forbush, Bastard, Cranky Liberal, the Gun-Toting Liberal and oh, I don’t know Sally, Moxie and Pia. At least they are intelligent enough to put up a good fight.

  15. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    I proved you wrong on every actual point you made (which weren’t many). I call that a good fight.

    Oh, and just because we all know what we’re talking about doesn’t mean anyone’s copying anyone else.

  16. By steve on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    Still… you haven’t read everything I wrote… But that comprehension thing is gonna take some time I guess for you.

  17. By Brad on Aug 18, 2005 | Reply

    And therein is the crux of your argument. Trying pathetically to insult someone without any actual information to back up your claims.

    Your brilliant claims: getting a blowjob is worse than leading the country into an illegal war, killing 1862 American citizens… using a quote from the DSM which was military planning as some sort of ridiculous bombshell, especially since it has been proven that Iraq has zero WMDs. Rice and Powell both admitted that in 2001. And doing math (I know it’s hard but focus here), based on a consistent troop force of 50,000, which is very, very low, each troop would have to cover 32 square feet a day to have searched the entire country. (based on 838 days in country and Iraq’s size) I think they’ve searched it pretty well by now. And your idea that Zarqawi is “sitting on them” is hardly worth acknowledging… Then some junk about how you sang for someone or something, blah, blah… already proved you wrong about the “enemy like no other… blaming liberals for the state of this country? That’s funny. Most people would assume the leaders, especially the same raging moron who was the only president to cut taxes during a war and think it would help the economy.

    What can I say, Steve? Your ignorance inspires me to prove you wrong. And there you are, point by point.

    Goodbye.

  18. By BYOC on Aug 19, 2005 | Reply

    look, here is the deal on the planning for the war: It was planned from the moment Gulf I ended. Appearantly several administration officials now serving in the cabinet had belonged to a Washington think tank that advocated the invasion of Iraq and the ouster of Saddam Hussien, for the purpose of securing the long term interests of the United States during the 1990’s. Most of those interests center around our longevity as a nation as international populations begin to expand and global energy resources get scarce. And you know what I have no problem with the idea of tampering with a totalitarian or hostile nation on the back water, using seasoned professionals to secure our stability. However I expect honesty when we launch a massive invasion force of teen agers, as well as Moms and Dads (in a few cases even grandmas) even if they volunteered, and I expect that we will know how to secure the peace and get them back out when we have no other options left… but to use an invasionary force to defend our nation. And I don’t believe that last part was the case I think we had other options.

    I want to point out once again that the Rove investigation is the lynch pin in on the road to getting proof that the intell was tampered with. And never forget it was the CIA that requested that investigation, they have Americas intrests in mind in everything they do. I have posted at some length as to how I think the Rove puzzle fits together here. I also want to point out that our nation is increasingly de-stablizing on the civil and domestic front and not just because of the war, but because of bad economics, and the spread of absolute party indentiies, through the passage of totally rediculous legislation aimed at creatint the gap.

  19. By steve on Aug 19, 2005 | Reply

    I shouldn’t do this but:

    1862 citizens that VOLUNTEERED to join the military fight for this nation. They should be honored by you and not forgotten by your rhetoric.

    You can read up on Rice here
    So you can get your “facts” straight. I stand by my previous statements about the DSM because your don’t make sense.

    I wasn’t singing but thanks for reading!

    And here is the state of the economy today.
    Name a another President whose country was attacked by terrorist and compare Bush to him. (don’t even try with Roosevelt because Japan wasn’t a similar enemy) FYI we got our tax rebate checks before 9/11.

    Unfortunately Brad your response to my ignorance, all be it, good in effort, is way off par. It reminds me of a quote the great, Dr. Forbush once left on my blog:

    “Step it up or you’ll never make it to the next level”

  20. By Brad on Aug 19, 2005 | Reply

    Explain to me how I’m forgetting them, you ignorant boob. I mentioned them, didn’t I? That would imply “not forgotten”, right? Forgive me if I’m off-base here, but doesn’t that make sense? Perhaps had I not mentioned them, that would be forgetting them.

    Explain this about your beloved Rice. And citing (yes, THAT’S how you spell it) Fox News? Come on. You might as well cite your cat.

    Of course, the economy appears to be doing well. But if you actually read the paper you cite, you would read that it is the worker getting screwed. The disparity between upper and middle class is growing, the poor are on the rise, and what about that big number? I think it’s called the deficit. How’s that doing?

    I tire of proving you wrong. This is why I quit my blog. Takes too much time out of my day proving raging idiots wrong.

  21. By TheChosenOne on Aug 19, 2005 | Reply

    Brad,

    Your diaper has had a massive blow out. Better go get mommy to change it for you.

    By the way Brad, haven’t seen you post anything worth reading yet!

    Brad, you mean to tell me that if the DSM had any leg to stand on that YOUR piece if shit CBS and the New York Times wouldn’t pounce all over it and never let it go? What the fuck are you smoking?

    DSM is dead in the water (D.I.W)! Period! But you go on ahead and keep grasping at straws!

Post a Comment

Fish.Travel