HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
The
Gang that Couldn’t Talk Straight On Iraq
by
Peter Kurth
September
30, 2003
The
spectacle of the Bush administration trying to lie its way out of the fiasco in
Iraq would be funny if it weren't so -- what's the word? Pathetic? Outrageous?
Insulting? Too late? I'd write about something else if they gave me a chance,
but they never do. Lying is what this pack of varmints does best, and does
most. When they aren't lying, they're "misspeaking." And when they're
not doing that, they're making it up.
"The
pattern is clear," says columnist Robert Scheer in the Los Angeles Times:
"Say what you want people to believe for the front page and on TV, then
whisper a halfhearted correction or apology that slips under the radar. It is
really quite ingenious in its cynical effectiveness." Scheer thinks the
American public might finally be waking up "to the stupid and craven
things being done in [its] name," but I'm not so sanguine. Arnold
Schwarzenegger looks poised to snatch the governorship of California right now
-- the era of the halfwit is apparently secure.
Take
Colin Powell -- please. I was never one those people who thought Powell was a
hero just because he's a white-looking black man who busted Saddam's ass during
Gulf War I. No, I figured Powell was just a general in the Army -- like Norman
Schwarzkopf, like Wesley Clark -- and that generals, along with sports figures,
shouldn't be allowed to say anything once they leave the field.
In
my book, this is an unbendable rule, even though a general, Dwight D.
Eisenhower, once served two terms as U.S. president without blowing us up.
Generals should be out there leading the troops, if you ask me, mapping out
strategies and burning down cities. They shouldn't be explaining themselves all
over the place, as Powell's been doing lately, with results that convince me
he's either as deceitful as his masters or dumber than a box of rocks.
"There
was every reason to believe -- and I still believe -- that there were weapons
of mass destruction and weapons programs" in Iraq, Powell said on Sunday,
facing the nation on ABC's "This Week." The Bushmen sent him out to
say this, of course, as they always do, because exactly the opposite is true:
There are no WMD's whatsoever in Iraq, as Dubya's special envoy, former U.N.
weapons inspector David Kay, is expected to tell Congress this week, in a
"classified" report that already has the White House spinmeisters
consulting their Crazy 8 Balls in an effort to cope.
Not
only that, but Powell himself was caught last week in a trap of his own devising,
when reminded of a statement he made in February 2001, after his first trip to
the Middle East as Secretary of State. Saddam Hussein, said Powell at the time,
"has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of
mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his
neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the
neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in
place." Asked what might have changed over the past two years to account
for such a complete about-face, the good general replied, "A lot,"
adding, "I don't find anything inconsistent between what I said then and
what I've said all along."
Enter
Condoleezza Rice, who also popped up on Sunday to say "it was very
clear," before we invaded Iraq, that Saddam Hussein had
"continued" his weapons program after Gulf War I and that this
program was "a gathering danger." In England, they're about to hang
Tony Blair for saying the same thing, when the whole world knows it's a lie.
But on goes Dr. Rice, spouting untruth, and General Powell, wiping the sweat
from his brow as digs his grave and shames his country in the service of oil
and money. Saddam "used poison gas to kill 5,000 Kurds in 1988,"
Powell retorts -- as if we hadn't sold the stuff ourselves, in buckets, to any
two-bit dictator with cash on the line.
"Now,"
says Powell, "if you want to believe that he [Saddam] suddenly gave up
that weapon and had no further interest in those sorts of weapons, whether it
be chemical, biological or nuclear, then I think you're — it's a bit naive to
believe that." It's a bit naive to believe anything from the mouths of
these creeps, as the voters in Florida and Texas might have told you before.
Pinocchio
himself -- that's Dubya, folks -- turned up in New York last week, ostensibly
asking for help from the United Nations, while insisting that "no
mistakes" had been made in Iraq and flipping the pages of his speech both
forward and backward while pretending to read it. Did anyone else notice that?
My mother pointed it out to me between bouts of Tourette's Syndrome, which she
says has been brought on by watching too much TV news. Words and curses she
never knew she knew now come flying out of her mouth, whenever she sees that
block of wood -- I paraphrase -- preening for the cameras.
"Events
during the past two years have set before us the clearest of divides,"
said Dubya to the world, "between those who seek order, and those who
spread chaos; between those who work for peaceful change, and those who adopt
the methods of gangsters." His speech fell as flat as the land around
Crawford, where, if there's a God, he'll be clearing more brush than he can
handle after 2004.
Meantime
Laura's on a trip to Europe, spreading "literacy" on the only
continent left in the world that arguably doesn't need it. Someone should tell
the First Librarian -- good works begin at home.
Peter Kurth is the author
of international bestselling books including Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna
Anderson, Isadora: A Sensational Life, and a biography of the
anti-fascist journalist Dorothy Thompson, American Cassandra: The Life of
Dorothy Thompson. His essays have appeared in Salon, Vanity Fair, New York
Times Book Review, and many others. Peter lives in Burlington, Vermont. He can
be reached at: peterkurth@peterkurth.com.
Visit his website at: http://www.peterkurth.com/