Trying to Legitimize the True Lie

The Rant ^ | January 27, 2005 | Frank Salvato

[MikeEdwards]

The confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice’s nomination to the office of Secretary of State have been cantankerous. Throughout a process that everyone agreed would end with Dr. Rice being confirmed, those among the extreme liberal left in the United States Senate derogated the good doctor as one who had allowed her “respect for the truth” to become “overwhelmed” by loyalty and branded her a liar. Dr. Rice’s confirmation hearings became less about her qualifications and the office of Secretary of State and more about being a vehicle for those disingenuous extremists categorized as anti-war.

The underlying thought that fuels the obstructionism of the anti-war left in the senate – as well as around the world – is that President Bush lied in order to go to war in Iraq. It was the cornerstone of failed presidential candidate John Kerry’s 2004 campaign and it remains on the lips of every “head-in-the-sand” liberal politician who refuses to come to grips with the reality that the American people champion President Bush’s viewpoint. It doesn’t matter that the “lie” scenario makes no sense; it sounds ominous and puts them in opposition to a president they believe served four years illegitimately.

Truth be told, the issue of Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction was not the singular reason stated by President Bush in asking congress for the authority to remove him from power. The President made it abundantly clear on several occasions that there were multiple reasons for removing him. . . . .

[MadAnthony1776]

The looney left refuses to realize that Hussein had at one time, WMD. He use chemical weapons during his war with Iran and also on the Kurdish minority in his country. After Desert Storm in 1991, his government signed a ceasefire in which there were to be UN inspectors allowed in Iraq to verify the destruction of his WMD. Over the years that followed, during the UN inspections, the inspectors were obstructed and only shown what Hussein wanted them to see. He thwarted most attempts to verify his destruction or lack of WMD. Then he threw the inspectors out to where there was no longer a viable verification procedure in place. His refusal kept his country under UN sanctions by which his people starved while he and several UN individuals as well as Russian, German and French individuals were involved in the oil-for-food scandal. Also there were numerous contacts between Iraqi government personnel and terrorists that were in violation of the ceasefire. He could've avoided this whole situation by allowing the inspectors to verify that indeed he had destroyed his WMD (if it isn't sitting in Syria or elsewhere). This would've lifted sanctions (but he'd have lost billions in his pocketbook) on his country. Any person with an ounce of brains would think by his actions he had something to hide. His actions were those of a guilty person, not someone in compliance with agreements he had signed. So to the looney left, when you call someone a liar, make sure the facts will back you up and not give a person reason to wonder just what may be the case. Her advice to President Bush was based on the intel they had at their disposal.

You also have to realize that the problems with intelligence gathering were created back after the assassination of Salvador Allende. Congress basically hamstrung our intelligence gathering and we are now reaping the consequences of a short-sighted Congress reacting to an event instead of trying to make it better. Since that time they have placed enough restrictions that has made our intelligence gathering agencies weak and impotent.

When you look at the facts, the facts do not support the looney left's accusations of Dr. Rice as a liar. A lot of these problems were created years and years ago and we have reaped the harvest of what they've sown.