Wednesday, October 29, 2003

Eno's Posts: Very good support re: NPR's willful blindness (another example of pathology). Even I, a Bush doubter in spades, heard a multitude of statements by the Administration regarding the suspicion of strong foreign influence in the Iraq bombings. I mean, NPR has no leg to stand on regarding that position. Of course I will re-iterate that Bush's speech on the carrier was more than just a little bit pumped up. His "Mission Accomplished', while technically accurate (the mission to remove Saddam from power [if not the planet] was certainly accomplished), tended to down play what was ahead (certainly the tougher of the two missions). Better that the banner read: "So far, so good" or "Part I of VI achieved". It's like if we had won the African campaign during WWII and FDR comes out and says "Game over except for the 'difficult work ahead' in liberating and rebuilding Belgium and France, and then invading and rebuilding Japan, the South Pacific and Germany."

As for Clinton's lying problem, don't rule out that Blair is lying. Let's say he covered up the first few murmurs but as they recurred, he saw the need to come out in the open about them. One murmur is minimal news, 5 or 6 certainly would be cause for worry.

More of an aside: W/r/t WMDs in Iraq. Either Bush "lied" to us regarding the intel on Saddam's capabilities or our intelligence-gathering/interpretation was woefully inept. Which would you prefer? And no weasilng that we were more concerned about the "potential" for WMDs - clearly it was being played that WMD capability was imminent if not already achieved.

No comments: