By Brigitte L. Nacos
There are good reasons why politicians are held in low
esteem by those they claim to serve and represent: too many of them twist the
truth too often and some of them lie outright. Vice-President Richard Cheney
has taken truth twisting to the highest level in that he continues to stick to
his version of “facts” when even the administration he dominates tells a very
different story. Thus, on the same time the U.S. Department of Defense released
documents that, as the Washington
Post put it, confirmed “that Hussein's regime was not directly cooperating
with al-Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of Iraq,” the Vice-President
said on the Rush Limbaugh radio talk show that Al Qaeda members were present in
Iraq “before we invaded” and that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi “took up residence there
before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the al-Qaida operations inside
Iraq before we even arrived on the scene and then, of course, led the charge
for Iraq until we killed him last June.” Never mind that the declassified
Pentagon documents contradict the Vice-President’s version but confirm what has
been long known: Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s government were not linked, did
not work together before the invasion of March 2003.
The Vice-President also led the charge against Speaker Nancy
Pelosi’s Middle East initiative, when he charged that she misrepresented the
position of Israel’s
Prime Minister Olmert during her meeting with Syrian President Assad. An
editorial in the allegedly liberal Washington
Post yesterday and anchors, correspondents and other talking heads of
various television networks and radio talk shows joined the attacks on Pelosi.
But the attacks were not based on what had unfolded during the trip—not according to members of the Pelosi delegation—including Tom Lantos, the chairman of the House International Relations Committee. On his excellent blog The Washington Note, Steve Clemons published today a letter that Lantos sent to the editor of the Post in response to the editorial.
Representative Lantos writes, “The editorial is based mainly on a misreading of a statement issued by the Israeli Prime Minister's office. That statement said that a message Speaker Pelosi conveyed to Syrian President Assad -- at Prime Minister Olmert's request -- did not indicate a change in Israel's position toward Syria. True enough. In fact, the Speaker neither said nor implied that the message was a change in Israel's position. But even more to the point, the Speaker told Assad that Syria must end its support for terrorists, including Hamas and Hezbollah, if it wants peace talks with Israel.”
Another truth twisting campaign!
Finally, Vice President Cheney used his interview with Limbaugh to reveal yet another reason for the war in Iraq, when he explained, “It's not just about Iraq; it's about our efforts in the global war on terror and that entire part of the world. It affects what's going on in Iran, where we're trying to make sure they don't develop a nuclear weapon. You can imagine the extent to which the Iranians would be heartened in that effort if they see us withdraw from Iraq, next door…”
Let’s see: No weapons of mass destructions were found, no evidence of an Iraqi role in the 9/11 attacks exists and—in spite of the truth twisting in high places—even the Pentagon documents confirm that there were no ties between Saddam Hussein’s government and Al Qaeda. Thus, besides fighting the war on terrorism in Iraq and establishing a model government there in order to change the face of the Middle East, Cheney tells us now that we stay in Iraq because a withdrawal would encourage Iranians to pursue their nuclear program!
Another twist in the many reasons the administration has cited to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Or does the Vice-President signal some other connection between for U.S. troops on Iraqi soil and Iran's nuclear ambitions?
rush was trying to do the saddam-sept 11 th connection last week. do they think if we just keep repeating it it will come true?
read a great column on sat about this
check it out
http://joeleonardi.wordpress.com/2007/03/31/the-taunts-of-a-coward/
Posted by: mia | April 06, 2007 at 05:07 PM