Lies, More Lies, and Damn Lies


JBeee
#1

by Eric Margolis
by Eric Margolis

window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.locati on.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; As Americans turn increasingly against President George Bush’s calamitous war in Iraq, and revolt spreads through Republican ranks, the White House is again resorting to its tried-and-true ploy of fanning grossly inflated fears of terrorism.

The president just made two preposterous claims last week that insult the intelligence of his listeners. First, Bush insisted US forces in Iraq are fighting "the same people who staged 9/11."

Second, withdrawing US forces from Iraq, as the Democratic-controlled Congress is urging, means "surrendering Iraq to al-Qaida."

These canards mark the latest steps in the Bush administration’s evolving efforts to mislead Americans into believing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are all part of a global fight against al-Qaida.

When marketers want to change the name of an existing product, they first place a new name in small type below the existing one. They gradually shrink the old name, and enlarge the new one until the original name vanishes.

That’s what’s been happening in Iraq. When the US invaded, Iraqis who resisted were initially branded "Saddam loyalists," "die-hard Ba’athists," or, in Don Rumsfeld’s colorful terminology, "dead-enders." Next, the Pentagon and US media called the Iraqi resistance, "terrorists" or "insurgents." The reason for invading Iraq, the White House insisted, was all about removing the tyrant Saddam, seizing weapons of mass destruction, defending humans rights and implanting democracy.

Then, a tiny, previously unknown Iraqi group that had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden appropriated the name, "al-Qaida in Mesopotamia."

This was such a breathtakingly convenient gift to the Bush Administration, many cynics suspected a false-flag operation created by CIA and Britain’s wily MI6. Soon after, the White House and Pentagon began calling most of Iraq’s 22 plus resistance groups, "al-Qaida."

The US media eagerly joined this deception, even though 95% of Iraq’s resistance groups had no sympathy for bin Laden’s movement. Watch any US network TV news report on Iraq and you will inevitably hear reporters parroting Pentagon handouts about US forces "launching a new offensive against al-Qaida."

Al-Qaida in Mesopotamia didn’t even exist before 9/11, but that didn’t stop President Bush from trying to gull credulous voters. He simply ignored the 2006 National Intelligence Estimate that found US-occupied Iraq had become an "incubator" for violent anti-American groups.

If the US were to withdraw from Iraq tomorrow, the nation would be split between warring Shia, Sunni and Kurdish parties. The fake Al-Qaida in Iraq would end up at the bottom of the totem pole, or be wiped out by other Iraqis. Even Osama bin Laden and his number two, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, have blasted the phony al-Qaida in Iraq and called for an end to its attacks on Iraqi civilians.

Polls show that in spite of a mountain of evidence to the contrary, White House disinformation strategy has worked. Today, an amazing 60% of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks.

At least that’s down from the 80% who originally believed this Orwellian big lie in 2003. The White House continues to blur the facts and make Americans believe Iraq and Afghanistan are "central fronts in the global war on terror."

The fact recent polls found 60% of Americans – and 90% of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan – still believe Saddam and bin Laden had colluded to launch 9/11 is shocking, but not surprising. Ignorance of foreign affairs and mindless flag waving are as American as apple pie.

Tens of millions of Americans are fed a steady diet of political or religious ideology disguised as news from the administration’s house organ, Fox News; from evangelical Christian TV and radio; or from the neoconservative’s version of Pravda, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages. The rest are too busy watching brain-deadening TV pap to pay the least attention to events overseas.

They remain unaware the faux "war against global terror" is now costing a mind-boggling US $12 billion monthly, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. That’s the cost of 3 nuclear-powered "Nimitz" class 97,000-ton aircraft carriers every month.

The Bush Administration has spent $610 billion dollars since 2001 on its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, making them the second most expensive conflict in US history after World War II.

Last week, US Homeland Security Czar Michael Chertoff allowed he had a "gut feeling" that an al-Qaida attack on America was imminent this summer. At the same time, Washington was abuzz with a leaked US intelligence report that al-Qaida – the objective of the so-called war on terror – had reconstituted and was as strong as prior to 9/11, 2001.

America’s sixteen intelligence agencies spend $40 billion annually, with another $15–20 billion in their hidden "black budgets." Homeland Security spends $44.6 billion. In spite of these gargantuan expenditures of a trillion dollars – that’s $1,000,000,000,000 – the best intelligence Czar Chertoff can come up with is "gut feeling?"

One suspects Chertoff’s worried stomach has far more to do with the growing Republican Party revolt against the president’s Iraq war than nebulous threats from Osama bin Laden’s loud but tiny group.
Polls show the only area where Republicans still command popular support is the "war on terror."

So Bush/Cheney & Co. are trying to use al-Qaida to scare Americans to vote Republican, just as they did prior to 2004 elections. It worked well last time and got Bush reelected.

But Americans are increasingly leery of the White House’s crying wolf. Many are also asking how Bush could claim "steady progress" was being made in his wars when it appears the al-Qaida movement is back to pre-2001 strength, anti-American groups are popping up across Asia and Africa, and Iraq is a bloody mess.

After six years of conflict, 3,600 dead and 25,000 wounded American soldiers, expenditure of $610 billion, tens of thousands of dead Iraqis and Afghans, collapse of Mideast peace efforts, and a Muslim World enraged against the US, nothing positive seems to have been accomplished by a leader who likes to style himself, "the war president."

As the White House now ponders an attack on Iran, we would do well to recall the famed words of King Pyrrhus of Epirus, "one more such victory and we are ruined."


July 17, 2007
 
Albertabound
#2
Very well said. I wish more Americans would wake up and realize what is going on. You MUST vote this oil tyrrant out of office......along with his cronies.
 
Walter
#3
Margolis never met a Rebuplican he didn't hate.
 
thomaska
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by JBeee View Post

by Eric Margolis
by Eric Margolis

window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.locati on.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; As Americans turn increasingly against President George Bush’s calamitous war in Iraq, and revolt spreads through Republican ranks, the White House is again resorting to its tried-and-true ploy of fanning grossly inflated fears of terrorism.

The president just made two preposterous claims last week that insult the intelligence of his listeners. First, Bush insisted US forces in Iraq are fighting "the same people who staged 9/11."

Second, withdrawing US forces from Iraq, as the Democratic-controlled Congress is urging, means "surrendering Iraq to al-Qaida."

These canards mark the latest steps in the Bush administration’s evolving efforts to mislead Americans into believing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are all part of a global fight against al-Qaida.

When marketers want to change the name of an existing product, they first place a new name in small type below the existing one. They gradually shrink the old name, and enlarge the new one until the original name vanishes.

That’s what’s been happening in Iraq. When the US invaded, Iraqis who resisted were initially branded "Saddam loyalists," "die-hard Ba’athists," or, in Don Rumsfeld’s colorful terminology, "dead-enders." Next, the Pentagon and US media called the Iraqi resistance, "terrorists" or "insurgents." The reason for invading Iraq, the White House insisted, was all about removing the tyrant Saddam, seizing weapons of mass destruction, defending humans rights and implanting democracy.

Then, a tiny, previously unknown Iraqi group that had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden appropriated the name, "al-Qaida in Mesopotamia."

This was such a breathtakingly convenient gift to the Bush Administration, many cynics suspected a false-flag operation created by CIA and Britain’s wily MI6. Soon after, the White House and Pentagon began calling most of Iraq’s 22 plus resistance groups, "al-Qaida."

The US media eagerly joined this deception, even though 95% of Iraq’s resistance groups had no sympathy for bin Laden’s movement. Watch any US network TV news report on Iraq and you will inevitably hear reporters parroting Pentagon handouts about US forces "launching a new offensive against al-Qaida."

Al-Qaida in Mesopotamia didn’t even exist before 9/11, but that didn’t stop President Bush from trying to gull credulous voters. He simply ignored the 2006 National Intelligence Estimate that found US-occupied Iraq had become an "incubator" for violent anti-American groups.

If the US were to withdraw from Iraq tomorrow, the nation would be split between warring Shia, Sunni and Kurdish parties. The fake Al-Qaida in Iraq would end up at the bottom of the totem pole, or be wiped out by other Iraqis. Even Osama bin Laden and his number two, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, have blasted the phony al-Qaida in Iraq and called for an end to its attacks on Iraqi civilians.

Polls show that in spite of a mountain of evidence to the contrary, White House disinformation strategy has worked. Today, an amazing 60% of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks.

At least that’s down from the 80% who originally believed this Orwellian big lie in 2003. The White House continues to blur the facts and make Americans believe Iraq and Afghanistan are "central fronts in the global war on terror."

The fact recent polls found 60% of Americans – and 90% of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan – still believe Saddam and bin Laden had colluded to launch 9/11 is shocking, but not surprising. Ignorance of foreign affairs and mindless flag waving are as American as apple pie.

Tens of millions of Americans are fed a steady diet of political or religious ideology disguised as news from the administration’s house organ, Fox News; from evangelical Christian TV and radio; or from the neoconservative’s version of Pravda, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages. The rest are too busy watching brain-deadening TV pap to pay the least attention to events overseas.

They remain unaware the faux "war against global terror" is now costing a mind-boggling US $12 billion monthly, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. That’s the cost of 3 nuclear-powered "Nimitz" class 97,000-ton aircraft carriers every month.

The Bush Administration has spent $610 billion dollars since 2001 on its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, making them the second most expensive conflict in US history after World War II.

Last week, US Homeland Security Czar Michael Chertoff allowed he had a "gut feeling" that an al-Qaida attack on America was imminent this summer. At the same time, Washington was abuzz with a leaked US intelligence report that al-Qaida – the objective of the so-called war on terror – had reconstituted and was as strong as prior to 9/11, 2001.

America’s sixteen intelligence agencies spend $40 billion annually, with another $15–20 billion in their hidden "black budgets." Homeland Security spends $44.6 billion. In spite of these gargantuan expenditures of a trillion dollars – that’s $1,000,000,000,000 – the best intelligence Czar Chertoff can come up with is "gut feeling?"

One suspects Chertoff’s worried stomach has far more to do with the growing Republican Party revolt against the president’s Iraq war than nebulous threats from Osama bin Laden’s loud but tiny group.
Polls show the only area where Republicans still command popular support is the "war on terror."

So Bush/Cheney & Co. are trying to use al-Qaida to scare Americans to vote Republican, just as they did prior to 2004 elections. It worked well last time and got Bush reelected.

But Americans are increasingly leery of the White House’s crying wolf. Many are also asking how Bush could claim "steady progress" was being made in his wars when it appears the al-Qaida movement is back to pre-2001 strength, anti-American groups are popping up across Asia and Africa, and Iraq is a bloody mess.

After six years of conflict, 3,600 dead and 25,000 wounded American soldiers, expenditure of $610 billion, tens of thousands of dead Iraqis and Afghans, collapse of Mideast peace efforts, and a Muslim World enraged against the US, nothing positive seems to have been accomplished by a leader who likes to style himself, "the war president."

As the White House now ponders an attack on Iran, we would do well to recall the famed words of King Pyrrhus of Epirus, "one more such victory and we are ruined."



July 17, 2007


Nothing new here, once again.

This Margolis guy must get his stuff from the same people who write Bush's speeches.
 
Toro
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Albertabound View Post

Very well said. I wish more Americans would wake up and realize what is going on. You MUST vote this oil tyrrant out of office......along with his cronies.

Yes, let's vote him out.

He may not be constitutionally allowed to run for a third term, but let's make sure we vote against Bush in 2008!
 
Albertabound
#6
Quote:

Yes, let's vote him out.

He may not be constitutionally allowed to run for a third term, but let's make sure we vote against Bush in 2008!

Sorry there Toro I meant to say impeach. You MUST Impeach that oil tyrrant out of office. I know you can do it, after all you impeached Clinton for getting a bj and I am hoping you know that Bush has done a lot more than that. Just a thought.
 
talloola
No Party Affiliation
#7
The article is old news, but still very true.

Is it really possible that the american people are that gullible. Can't they do simple math, and remember that on 911 Iraq was not involved, and Bin Laden and his cronies were not in Iraq, they
were in Afghanistan, and there wasn't an Iraqi among them.

The sooner the u.s. gets rid of Bush, the sooner they can begin to struggle back to respectability.
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#8
The American people got what they deserve when it came to George, the are blinded by their own sence of importance and the attitude that the world is there to serve them. For years they have been repeating the mantra that Iraq was involved with terrorists when it was not true.
Now their forces are surrounded by a civil war that America started because it couldn't mind its own business. This is not a case of waking up it is really an attempt to save what is left of the Republican Party. Evangelicals and greedy special interests rode into town on Georges coat tails and now they are blaming george for their own greed and shame. George is not a bad person he is merely, really really
politically stupid and that is worse than bad.
Now the greedy and the evangelicals are going to be left stewing in their own juice
 
MikeyDB
#9
damngrumy

I agree. It's wonderful to see America having it's contract with its government thrown away because ideas like the Constitution and Habeas Corpus aren't convenient to Carlyle and the American petroleum cartels. So much yack yack yack from Americans about how great their Constitution and legal and administrative "systems" are....and at the same time..."Bush stole the election"...."consumption is freedom"....and on and on and on...

Arogance that's second only to the Energizer Bunny in its staying power.
 
Logic 7
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by JBeee View Post

[CENTER]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=3][B][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Eric Margolis


July 17, 2007


I called them now, Fairy tail News!! People who believe strongly in santa claus and god won't see anything wrong in this.
 
Toro
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDB View Post

damngrumy

I agree. It's wonderful to see America having it's contract with its government thrown away because ideas like the Constitution and Habeas Corpus aren't convenient to Carlyle and the American petroleum cartels.


That's silly.

Carlyle works for my organization. I cannot recall a single time when we've ever talked about suspending the constitution and manipulating the US government to do whatever we please.

However, the "annexation of Canada" comes up a lot.
 
Minority Observer84
#12
Bush is a liar and a hypocrite the fact that the American public is now under the heel of his oppression doesn't make me feel sorry for them they elected him an he's ruining their country both inside and out hope they make better choices in 2009
 
iARTthere4iam
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

That's silly.

Carlyle works for my organization. I cannot recall a single time when we've ever talked about suspending the constitution and manipulating the US government to do whatever we please.

However, the "annexation of Canada" comes up a lot.

That's comforthing Toro
 
Albertabound
#14
Quote:

However, the "annexation of Canada" comes up a lot.

Good luck with that, we Canadians will never allow that to happen. In Canada we actually have a say in what our gov't does, at least to some extent. If this were to ever to happen then we would all know that we are living in an open dictatorship unlike the closed one we live in now.

I do realize though that the US would like nothing more than to slowly put their arm around us as buddies and then slowly tighten that arm until they choke and consume us to death.

Some of your best friends become your biggest ememies.

Quote:

Carlyle works for my organization.

For someone that is involved in the banking business and organizations, you must tell me Toro how does one have so much time for forums
Last edited by Albertabound; Jul 21st, 2007 at 11:16 AM..Reason: add on
 
missile
Conservative
#15
Let's just cut the crap here about Bush being elected. He was put into office by NeoCons..everybody knows Gore had more of the popular vote
 
Albertabound
#16
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygb5u...related&search=

Don't you just love freedom.
Last edited by Albertabound; Jul 21st, 2007 at 11:36 AM..
 
Toro
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Albertabound View Post

Good luck with that, we Canadians will never allow that to happen. In Canada we actually have a say in what our gov't does, at least to some extent. If this were to ever to happen then we would all know that we are living in an open dictatorship unlike the closed one we live in now.

We've set the date for February 29, 2011, Albertabound.

Get ready!

Quote: Originally Posted by Albertabound View Post

For someone that is involved in the banking business and organizations, you must tell me Toro how does one have so much time for forums

I'm bored.
 
Blackleaf
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Minority Observer84 View Post

Bush is a liar and a hypocrite the fact that the American public is now under the heel of his oppression doesn't make me feel sorry for them they elected him an he's ruining their country both inside and out hope they make better choices in 2009

I thought anti-war people loved people being oppressed. If the anti-war people had their way, Saddam would still be in power now. So it's very lucky that they didn't.

In fact, I don't think Britain and American have done ENOUGH. We now need to invade Zimbabwe and oust Robert Mugabe. Britain especially has a duty to do this considering that Zimbabwe was a British colony until 1980. And I'm sure the British and Americans will have the full support of at least 90% of the Zimbabwean people.
 
MikeyDB
#19
Hey Toro....

I used to live just off Losolas boulevard (I appologize for my spelling...) a block from A1A in Ft. Liquordale.....fifty years ago.

I loved that city. When I moved to Miami and then eventually to Miami Springs, I thought I'd died and gone to heaven.

I worked as a "gardener" cut lawns pulled that long runner kind of grass/weed that grows like a creeper through people's yards.....collected palm leaves and coconuts and weeded flower beds and such....cause I liked being outdoors.

That was a long time ago. America then wasn't America today.

I'm as mad as hell at what's happened to America. With the same frequency as you'd experience meeting not-so-nice folk in Canada that's the memory of how Americans treated me as a kid.

People were different and I can hear the catcalls and whistles...it truly was a kinder gentler America.

That's changed.

And I see the kinds of changes and the quality or temperament of the American government of today as 'foreign' to coin a phrase, with respect to governments of those days. I lived and taught highschool in Miami Springs through integration and bussing calamities. I remember drinking fountains and washrooms marked "For Whites Only" in restaurants and public areas. It was a time when change was ripe and change came.

Change is sometimes very difficult and demanding.

The United States and Canada are served much better by governments of integrity and wisdom than either of our nations has been run....for a long time.

I respect your perspective and acknowledge that we butt heads more frequently because of my bellicose posture than yours.

I care that we agree and that we disagree....so long as we're each prepared to acknowledge that we share that availability to compromise that permits folk to agree to disagree and move on.

Are you as optomistic about America as I'm pessimistic? And can your feelings of pride and responsibility to your country permit an answer to that question?
 
Toro
#20
Mikey

That is an interesting post. Its good to hear that you enjoyed your time in South Florida. No doubt, it is a very different place today.

I am very optimistic about America's future. Just as I am very optimistic about Canada's future. Living in America has made me more confident. Americans - despite their shortcomings - are very positive, energetic and forward-looking people.

I agree that people are better served by governments of integrity and honesty. I detect the very human element of nostalgia in your post, though, when you reference the past. Nostalgia tends to dim the negative elements of the past and accentuates the good memories. I find myself very nostalgic for where I grew up, though I couldn't wait to get out as soon as I could when I was a teenager.

I believe that government is no more corrupt or manipulated than in the past. The difference is that in this era of 24/7 cable news networks, forums, blogs, etc., more of it comes to light. In fact, I think you can make a very cogent argument that because of heightened scrutiny, such problems are less pervasive than in the past.

I do not view the war in Iraq as evidence of things are worse today when compared to history. Despite my admiration for the country, I am not oblivious to the negative aspects of America. Unfortunately, this disastrous war in Iraq is merely one of a long line of "regime-changes" and interventions the US has undertaken since it declared the Monroe Doctrine 150 years ago. It does not surprise me that there is such antipathy towards America in some parts of the world. But I don't think it is any evidence of a worsening situation. The CIA helped engineer a coup in Chile in 1973, in part, to protect ITT's telecommunications investment. The CIA helped the British overthrow a democratically elected President of Iran when he threatened to nationalize the oil fields in the 1950s. The US has sent the marines in on countless escapades to rid itself of leaders it felt threated its interests, most recently in Grenada and Panama. Let's not forget the use of napalm in Cambodia. And that's only recent history. So, I don't think Iraq is out of the ordinary. Unfortunately. America, as a great power, is engaged in the Great Game of international relations, as all powers through the history of time have engaged, despite its protestations of ideals such as liberty and democracy.

Perhaps people are less friendly than have been. People are also far less deferential to authority - just ask any teacher who has taught her whole career, and I'm not talking about the students. But I don't think that's an American thing. I think its pervasive throughout much of the world.
 
MikeyDB
#21
I respect your optimism, I just don't share in it.

And yes of course nostaligia is at play....not only is the grass always greener...the hourglass isn't either just half full or half empty.....

We believed that there was a place in America for compromise, and although the Cuban misile crisis and several other nasty interludes swept us up in passionate debate, we had a sense that "this too shall pass..."

I fear that the luxury of space time and distance have in and of themselves re-defined our perspectives on many things. The world is a less friendly place...and that may sound strange coming from someone who's participated in some of hte most "unfriendly" places on the planet. I agree that media and the sense of immediacy of world events and global dynamics experienced through today's
culture and communications has had significant affect on our preceptions.

Thanks for your response.
 
Walter
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Minority Observer84 View Post

Bush is a liar and a hypocrite the fact that the American public is now under the heel of his oppression doesn't make me feel sorry for them they elected him an he's ruining their country both inside and out hope they make better choices in 2009

They will actually make the choice in '08.
 
Toro
#23
Mikey

You might want to listen to this. Its about the Kennedy years. I found it fascinating.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=10374276
 
talloola
No Party Affiliation
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpy View Post

The American people got what they deserve when it came to George, the are blinded by their own sence of importance and the attitude that the world is there to serve them. For years they have been repeating the mantra that Iraq was involved with terrorists when it was not true.
Now their forces are surrounded by a civil war that America started because it couldn't mind its own business. This is not a case of waking up it is really an attempt to save what is left of the Republican Party. Evangelicals and greedy special interests rode into town on Georges coat tails and now they are blaming george for their own greed and shame. George is not a bad person he is merely, really really
politically stupid and that is worse than bad.
Now the greedy and the evangelicals are going to be left stewing in their own juice

Yeah, I did mention in another post, that George Bush, was a good find for Carl Rove and the Evangelists, as he is a rather 'blank', but talkative dip stick, and they used him for everything
they wanted spouted out for their own interests.
They have single handedly dragged their own country down into the gutter, not to mention what they have done to the Iraqi people, and they won't begin to
crawl back up, till after the 2008 election, (we hope), as long as the PEOPLE think, and elect
the right person.
When the campaigning starts, the people get sucked right into the 'horrible' tactics that the parties
use to smear each other, the republicans being the worse of the two in that respect.
 

Similar Threads

8
The Lies That Led to War
by JBeee | Mar 24th, 2008
5
Fools and their Lies
by mrmom2 | Aug 27th, 2005