Two leftist organizations have released a study that claims that the Bush administration lied about Iraq. Somehow I think we've heard that one before. Well, the two groups--the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism--managed to secure major media attention by making the claim that the Bush administration released 935 false statements. Clearly no one was in the mood to read all 935, so the leftist groups boiled them down to 532. We hear that on 532 occasions the Bush administration claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. So the claim is not that Bush told 532 lies, but that he told the same lie 532 times.
But consider this: If Bush actually knew that Iraq didn't possess weapons of mass destruction, and yet repeatedly told the American people that Iraq had them, didn't Bush expect that following the Iraq invasion his deception would be found out? When I raise this point with liberals on campus, they typically say, "Well, we're not saying that Bush knew for sure that there were no such weapons. We are saying that his administration stacked the data." But this is another way of saying that Bush actually believed that there were those weapons, and he mobilized whatever evidence he could muster to make his case. This may reflect prejudice against Saddam Hussein's motives or even imprudent decision making but it is hardly proof of lying.
Consider a similar decision made by President Roosevelt. In the period leading up to World War II, a group of refugee German scientists warned Albert Einstein that the Germans were building an atomic bomb. The project was headed by that country's greatest scientist, Werner Heisenberg. Acutely aware of the dangers of Hitler getting such a weapon, Einstein took this information in the fall of 1939 to President Roosevelt, who commissioned the Manhattan Project. America built the bomb, and later dropped two of them on Japan.
Many years later, Americans discovered that the Germans were nowhere close to building an atomic bomb. Their project was on the wrong track, and it seems to have stalled in its infancy. Some historians believe Heisenberg was trying to thwart the project from the inside. Be that as it may, in retrospect we now know that the intelligence that led to the Manhattan Project was wrong. But no one goes around saying, "Einstein lied" or "FDR lied." They didn't lie. They used the information they had to make a tough decision in a very dangerous situation.
The same is true of Bush. As a statesman, he had to act in the moving current of events. He didn't have the luxury of hindsight. To those leftist pundits who say, "Knowing what we know now, Mr Bush, why did you do what you did then?" Bush's answer is, "Obviously I didn't know what we know now." Acting against the somber backdrop of 9/11, Bush made a hard call based on an assessment of the intelligence provided to him. He may have acted in haste, and he may have acted in error, but he did not act in bad faith. Therefore the claim that Bush lied is itself a lie.
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
Actually Bush Didn't Lie
Posted Jan 23rd 2008 1:20PM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Breaking News, Iraq, George Bush, Controversy
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
- Harvey on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- mac on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- not-pboyfloyd on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- Report: Max Baucus Ex-Aide, Now Girlfriend, Met With His Divorce Attorney
- Mary C. Curtis on UpFront: Obama's Security, Unemployment, Climate Change
- Report: Blackwater Guards Used in Secret CIA Raids
- Joe Biden on Chris Dodd: He's 'Getting the Living Bejesus Beat Out of Him'
- House Votes to Tighten Wall Street Regulation
- Abortion in Ireland: Does the Church Ask Too Much?
- More Negative Marks for Obama on Health Care
Reader Comments ( Page 6 of 32)
76. Brian, there is such a new union of liberal thought, it's called California.
Ed B. at 5:15PM on Jan 23rd 2008
77. You're right, an appeal to ignorance does not justify the claim that we should not have gone to war; yet ignorance does not justify the claim that going to war was a good idea. Logic 101 my friend. Your A-bomb analogy is flawed as well. The Germans WERE trying to build a nuclear weapon. The fact that the Germans failed is irrelevant. Iraq 2003 did not have nuclear weapons, or any WMDs for that matter, and there is no evidence to support the assertion that Saddam was trying to get them.
You're so busy waving the 'conservative' flag that you've missed the point entirely. Maybe Bush believed that he knew Saddam had WMDs. That belief was false. The point of drawing attention to his false belief is to correct the faulty reasoning that brought him to that belief in the first place. That way we can avoid another ridiculous misuse of taxpayers' money when the next leader with a chip on his shoulder gets the itch to toss bombs. Yes, Republicans look bad in light of the WMD misinformation, but deservedly so. I'm afraid that this shoe fits so perfectly all the subtle fallacies and flawed analogies you can muster won't keep your team from wearing it.
alshive at 5:29PM on Jan 23rd 2008
78. DD: "But consider this: If Bush actually knew that Iraq didn't possess weapons of mass destruction, and yet repeatedly told the American people that Iraq had them, didn't Bush expect that following the Iraq invasion his deception would be found out?"
That's easy -- the neocons, and all the rest of the warmongers, had deluded themselves into believing that that war would be a cakewalk, that the masses of Iraqis would be throwing flowers at the feet of their American saviors, and that lots of profit$$ would be made. And in the euphoria, everyone would forget that the original pretext for the war turned out to be false. But it was just a delusion, and now everyone still remembers that the whole thing was built upon a pack of lies.
Duh.
Answer me this DD -- how is it that all the intelligence services of the "free world", except for the US and Britain, knew that there was really no imminent threat from Iraq?
Joe Bob at 5:31PM on Jan 23rd 2008
79. A new book shows Saddam did support al Qaeda and the Taliban:
'Both In One Trench: Saddam's Secret Terror Documents'
http://www.bothinonetrench.com
Ray Robison at 5:32PM on Jan 23rd 2008
80. It's very difficult to response to a moron like Dinesh. If you made his brain into cork, it wouldn't be big enough to cork up a piss-ant's ass.
gshort3011 at 5:41PM on Jan 23rd 2008
81. everything wrong in america gets back to bush.
xx
no, brian for those of you with overripe fish entrails for brains, the buck stops with CLINTON.
I understand your logic since he was the last president that was actually elected, but in general people hold the executive accountable for the performance of the corporation.
Of course since libertarianism, ceo's often get rewarded for trashing a company, but we're not completely privatized until you mussolini republicans win the civil war you're fomenting.
Clif Kuplen at 5:43PM on Jan 23rd 2008
82. 'if you really believe it, it's not a lie'
-george costanza
Maybe we just have a 'seinfeldian' president?
not that there's anything NOT wrong with that...
Clif Kuplen at 5:45PM on Jan 23rd 2008
83. 77. It's very difficult to response to a moron like Dinesh. If you made his brain into cork, it wouldn't be big enough to cork up a piss-ant's ass.
gshort3011 at 5:41PM on Jan 23rd 2008
xxx
phrase from my youth - 'you could shove yer brain up a gnat's ass and it would rattle like a BB in a boxcar'. Somewhere in that boxcar is li'l georgies atrophied cerebral cortex.
Clif Kuplen at 5:47PM on Jan 23rd 2008
84. "If Bush actually knew that Iraq didn't possess weapons of mass destruction, and yet repeatedly told the American people that Iraq had them, didn't Bush expect that following the Iraq invasion his deception would be found out?"
***************************************************Bush thought that the invasion would be such a rousing success that only a handful of LIBERALS would even care that he lied about weapons of mass destruction. The delusional idiot really did believe that American troops would be greeted with showers of rose petals. Didn't quite turn out that way,did it?
emelpe at 5:49PM on Jan 23rd 2008
85. In Re: Tim at 2:37PM on Jan 23rd 2008
Actually, no one gives a sh*t about France’s and Germany’s belief, as they were implicated in selling nuclear technology to Iraq, Of course, they wouldn’t agree with other intelligence services. Instead of trying to discover, they were trying to cover up.
Marlinj Brown at 5:53PM on Jan 23rd 2008
86. The thing that gets me is people keep saying that bush claimed that he had proof that Iraq had WMDs. He made the statement that we suspect that they do. I also can't figure out how Bush sent us to war single handedly. He must be a pretty bad A dude to override the laws of war. Oh wait the majority of America was all over going to Iraq based on the fact (it IS a FACT) that Iraq HAD WMDs at one point, was willing to use them, at denied inspectors the ability to say, "Nope Iraq is WMD free".
marc at 5:56PM on Jan 23rd 2008
87. Alan Lee says, "Let the uncircumcised roar..."
What does having the end of yer dick cut off have to do with anything at all???
@ Clif... I'm seeing the "You are ME!" here... apparently 'moral' folk can see that the Decider is also the Truth-teller... who stumbles and bumbles through speeches yet speaks clearly if not eloquently about how brilliantly he circumvents democracy and the Constitution. He even crows to reporters that his 'stupid-me act' is intended to fool people...
... but it's not liberals that he intends to fool, it's evangelical Christians and Repuglicans..
Like he, himself said though, "You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
not-pboyfloyd at 6:00PM on Jan 23rd 2008
88. TimLogeman wrote: "Katrina is another story. The Democratic leadership at the city and state level in Lousianna never seems to get their share of criticism for failures during Katrina. New Orleans is a great example of a welfare state that requires the federal government to take care of the mass. Democrates have made the people so dependant on Goverment that they can't take care of themselves."
Mr. Logeman, as a resident of New Orleans, may I request that you go fsck yourself?
grigori at 6:03PM on Jan 23rd 2008
89. Actually, it's not a request, Logeman... just go fsck yourself. Then you can go fsck your buddy W, and the two of you can roar with laughter at the death of two dear old friends of mine during W and Brownie's disasterous handling of Katrina.
You UNVBELIEVABLE SCUMBAG.
grigori at 6:07PM on Jan 23rd 2008
90. Actually DD. You are totally wrong. Just one example.
I live in Oak Ridge where the aluminum tubes were sent for testing. Our scientists agreed that the tubes could have no nuclear purpose. The administration, after reading their report still trotted out the "Aluminum tubes argument" knowing that it was a lie. Frontline had a good report on this if you are interested.
Honestly DD, do you not feel shame when you say these things?
Steve Seivers at 6:12PM on Jan 23rd 2008