Sunday, March 21, 2004
Give me a break! Another administration official, Richard Clarke, is accusing Bush of misleading the nation into war with Iraq by establishing immediately an inquiry into whether or not Iraq was involved in 9/11. This is supposedly proof, to be discussed in a book released tomorrow, that Bush just wanted war in Iraq.
The really amazing thing is the length to which liberals will go to discredit the administration. It may interest them to know that Israeli intelligence in the first days after the attack labeled the Iraqi dictator as being behind the attacks. It seems only natural for Bush to want to know if this was true. Nobody on their own would have guessed the Taliban in Afghanistan would be behind this dastardly attack. And Saddam's history of assassination and terrorism would certainly lead one to believe him the more likely villain of the opera. Furthermore, the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection should be well documented by now. Why would Al-Qaeda care what happened to the secular dictator of Iraq unless there was? And more lucrative proof was discovered in Bagdhad during the War.
But proof is not an issue with liberals. Their ideology blinds them to the truth. Hopefully, the average American will be smarter than they are. It won't be hard. All people like Clarke do is prove that animosity dies hard. Incompetents dismissed from their posts do all that spite and envy can do to bring down the government they are supposed to protect. The press release from CNN tried to build sympathy for Clarke, saying he was dismissed by Bush "after 30 years in government". I don't see how that's exactly a glowing recommendation considering that period included the stellar presidencies of Ford, Carter and Clinton, none of whom were very good on national security. Perhaps Clarke would have preferred we went to war with Iraq to keep Bush's name out of the papers in connection with a female secretary. That's certainly what the media would prefer. Wars like that seldom have question raised about their justice. It's only when the goal is justice that people wonder.
The really amazing thing is the length to which liberals will go to discredit the administration. It may interest them to know that Israeli intelligence in the first days after the attack labeled the Iraqi dictator as being behind the attacks. It seems only natural for Bush to want to know if this was true. Nobody on their own would have guessed the Taliban in Afghanistan would be behind this dastardly attack. And Saddam's history of assassination and terrorism would certainly lead one to believe him the more likely villain of the opera. Furthermore, the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection should be well documented by now. Why would Al-Qaeda care what happened to the secular dictator of Iraq unless there was? And more lucrative proof was discovered in Bagdhad during the War.
But proof is not an issue with liberals. Their ideology blinds them to the truth. Hopefully, the average American will be smarter than they are. It won't be hard. All people like Clarke do is prove that animosity dies hard. Incompetents dismissed from their posts do all that spite and envy can do to bring down the government they are supposed to protect. The press release from CNN tried to build sympathy for Clarke, saying he was dismissed by Bush "after 30 years in government". I don't see how that's exactly a glowing recommendation considering that period included the stellar presidencies of Ford, Carter and Clinton, none of whom were very good on national security. Perhaps Clarke would have preferred we went to war with Iraq to keep Bush's name out of the papers in connection with a female secretary. That's certainly what the media would prefer. Wars like that seldom have question raised about their justice. It's only when the goal is justice that people wonder.
// posted by The Pendragon @ 3:17 PM 
