Michael Moore and the BIG LIE

I'm sure this topic has been expored to death but I feel compelled to weigh in as well. The idea of George Bush being hung with this "big lie" label just wrankles me. Do people not bother to look deeper than to listen to some bleery eyed buffoon opine about the integrity of George Bush? George Bush was the last of a long line of World leaders and figures to come the conclusion that Iraq has WMD's. The Russians believed it, the British believed it, Bill Clinton believed it, the leaders of both political partis said so, George Bush was the last to say so. For those of you who are not old enough to remember or have not bothered to find out, Saddam had his nuclear capabilities knocked out by the Jewish Air Force in the early eighties, the world was shocked at their action. Can you imagine what might have happened if Iraq were allowed to develop this nuclear capability? Sure they said it was for developing electric power, but remember Baghdad Bob said they (Iraqis) had the city under control including the airport? Just one of many outlandish claims, are they capable of lying, did they lie, would you trust them? It seems we believe what we want to believe it's easier than looking for proof to the contrary or looking for "credible" confirmation of what we believe. Looking for verifiable proof of anything is far too much bother when I can just listen to someone like Michael Moore and say He's right because he put it in print or in a "documentary". It has often been said by the left that Rush is the most dangerous man in America, I think that title belongs to Michael Buffoon Moore. I welcome liberal "True Believers" to challenge my assertions.

The 'Bush Lied' story by the Left was just that, a story. And were it not for Big News, Michael Moore, and the DNC, the American public would be focused on matters more important. In fact, the real 'Lie' is the way the Left portrayed Bush's statements leading to the War.

Consider:
Big Lie #1: The Left charged Bush with saying the threat of Iraq WMDs was 'imminent.'

Reality: Bush clearly stated that Iraq did not yet present an imminent threat. But given evidence of Saddam's weapons programs, the US and world should not wait for the threat to become imminent. Also consider that on September 11, 2001, Iraq was the only nation-state that was actually firing on US aircraft, breaking their truce in the No-Fly Zone. The equivalent of North Korea doing the same to US forces along the DMZ.

Big Lie#2: Richard Clarke said a lot of things. But throughout his self-contradictory statements, the bottom line was that Bush wanted to go after Iraq as soon as he took office, and was ignoring al Queda.

Reality: The 911 Commision documented that it was Bush that cautioned going after Iraq immediately after 911. And Bush actually increased intelligence funding to get Osama five-fold over the effort and resources expended by William the Impeached.

Big Lie#3: Joe Wilson, the former US ambassador in Gabon, was sent on a mission by the CIA to investigate reports of Iraq buying or trying to buy yellowcake in Niger. Wilson comes back from his trip and reports he sees no evidence of this, and publiclly charges Bush with lying about it.

Reality: Bush is correct. British intelligence reports confirm that Iraq indeed was trying to buy yellowcake. And Bush's SOU speech with the '16 words' Wilson called lies was indeed accurate.

Big Lie#4: No ties between Iraq and Terrorists, particularly Osama.

Reality: Bush was careful over the course of events leading to the war not to cite Iraq as tied directly to 911. This despite evidence and reports (that have not yet met some standard in US intelligence) to the contrary that at a minimum indicate some level of coordination, including meetings by Atta with Iraq agents in Prague prior to 911. Additionally, and perhaps most important, the Bush Doctrine or mission immediately following 911 was and remains to fight those that commit, support, finance, or harbor terrorists. Iraq was a haven for terrorists, as we all later found out. Abu Nidal, and other terrorists of international repute having been found in or near Baghdad after it was liberated.

Finally, consider that the left still holds onto the idea that America isolated itself by liberating Iraq. That many old allies, particularly France and Germany, refused to join us out of highly principled motives. Then consider that many of these same governments and their 'leaders' may well be up their eyeballs in Clinton-like corruption, particularly the UN Oil-For-Food scandal. Even Marc Rich is reportedly a beneficiary!

So if there is any lesson here it is this: Forget Marx and his 'cute' analogies about free-market capitalism. In reality, today's left - here and internationally - will sell a terrorist the 'rope with which to hang themselves,'and the rest of us for that matter.

If a republican is president, not only will they sell the rope, they'll actually think their treasonous acts of doing so will make them immune from harm.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.