If you believe they put a man on the moon
Primary tabs
I hope the United States is ready for the stunning revelations in General Petraeus's upcoming report on the Iraq War.
Some have speculated that he'll merely offer a "stay the course" agenda, modulated by a few admissions of "challenges."
Nothing could be further from the truth. And if there's one thing that the Bush administration doesn't want to be, it's far from the truth.
And come next week, they're coming clean: there is no war in Iraq.
In the wake of 9/11 and the botched mission at Tora Bora, America needed a feel-good story, much as 1960s America needed the Apollo 11 fiction to salve the wounds of that tumultuous decade.
In what should be obvious by now, there never was a U.S. invasion of Iraq, at least not since Operation Desert Storm.
Truly, Operation Enduring Freedom (AKA "Operation Infinite Justice" and "Operation Iraqi Liberation") has been a mission accomplished, to coin a phrase, beyond all expectations.
In the year following the World Trade Center attacks, America was in a serious funk, barely able to hit the malls and golf balls that make our economy the strongest in the world.
Americans were boringly united, which endangered our nation's massive capital investments in rightwing thinktanks.
Something had do be done — or made to appear so. And it was.
As Petraeus will explain next week, American journalists weren't embedded with our troops. Actors dressed as troops were embedded on green-screen sets at Fox News, CNN, and msnbc.
Seen though the prism of truth, it all seems so obvious now:
- Of course America's skilled and savvy journalists wouldn't have found the "evidence" in Colin Powell's speech compelling. But they did their patriotic duty by pretending those sketchy claims amounted to a casus belli. Does anyone honestly believe we'd start killing Iraqis and putting our troops in harm's way over baseless speculation about metal sheds and vials of imaginary anthrax? If you believe that, I've got some unpostmarked Florida absentee ballots I could sell you.
- Would the Commander-in-Chief really send only a fraction of the several hundred thousand troops General Shinseki said were required? Puh-leese! But how many troops can you keep holed up at General Cinemas, Tower Records stores, and other facilities purported to have gone out of business in order to help the country spin its way back to health?
- Wouldn't we see footage of caskets loaded onto planes and hear body counts of Iraqi civilians?
- Wouldn't we have a draft and war-bond drives?
- Wouldn't we be mobilizing our manufacturing resources to build armored vehicles, and running Congressional commissions to ensure no one was profiteering?
- Wouldn't the young Republicans who cheerled this war be lined up at recruiting offices, ready to answer "the call of this generation"?
- Would we really let Walter Reed fall into disrepair if America's bravest were coming home wounded?
- Would there really be tax cuts for the wealthiest in a time of war?
- Wouldn't there be at least one call to sacrifice something? Hello? Hello? Anybody home? Think McFly, think!
- Would we really nullify the writ of habeas corpus, a foundation of freedom since the 12th century? Not in this country, we wouldn't! And ditto for the Fourth Amendment.
- Would the Greatest Nation on Earth really flaunt international opinion and even the Geneva Conventions? What a hoot!
- Wouldn't the Democrats who were elected expressly to stop the war, actually — oh, I don't know — stop the war? C'mon, get serious, folks! Of course they would!
- And finally, knuckleheads, wouldn't we have found those WMDs? You didn't have to play this thing backwards to hear the clues, y'know.
The only problem was, this ploy was too successful.
Sure, the "war" hasn't cost much, but it does take a few bucks to maintain so large a fiction.
And lest our children and children's children bear a burden of deficit spending — anathema to the fiscally prudent GOP — it was necessary to start ratcheting down expectations, to help Americans get used to the idea of life without an urgent military conflict to galvanize them into civic action the way this five-year fable has done so profoundly.
With this in mind, our nation's top PR wizards fabricated tales of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, coined phrases like "IEDs," and staged the brutal hanging of Saddam Hussein.
Fear not: Saddam Hussein is alive and well, and Donald Rumsfeld was never fired. They're busily arranging more chemical weapons deals, while other former Nixon, Ford, and Reagan officials are continuing their lavish support of the Mujahideen, and otherwise stabilizing the Middle East. Same as it ever was, and happy ever after.
And for goodness sake, don't believe it when they tell you we're bombing Iran. Fool me once...

- vastleft's blog


- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
OHMYGOD
You mean the whole TV season was JR's dream?
If only.
But I do find myself waking up in the morning with the thought that Bush's win in 2000 and all that issued from it has been just a dream and when I get out of bed I have to commit myself to work even harder to get Al Gore elected. That sense of relief runs out in seconds...but it's a reoccurring waking thought.
Come to think of it, I did; and He was. We just weren't ready for the deceit and open embrace of criminality of these guys. And we should have been.
some of us were trying, and did expect it
and we got ignored. by "progressives" too- we were too shrill, too CT minded, it couldn't be as bad as all that, yadda yadda. i take no pleasure from constantly having to stop the phrase "i told you so" from coming out of my mouth/fingers.
i'm sort of in an angry mood, but i blame moderates for a lot of the problems we have today. bushism wouldn't have happened if more people had listened to the not-shrill and very mainstream molly i when it could've made a difference, for example. may she RIP.
CD, that's why I have this thing against "sacredness."
With sacredness, you get "my country right or wrong."
The likes of you and me, and Molly makes three, thought it might be a proper goal of a country -- especially a uniquely powerful one -- to seek to do right.
Those moderates sure didn't expend a lot of energy on that goal.
i confess, my mind sort of unhinged, vast
back in 2000 when i realized that the democratic response to not counting all the votes was, "that's fine." it was a bitter, grown up but oh i wish i weren't one, kind of realization. this crop of pols lives in a complete dreamworld, in which 30sec ads are more powerful than the constitution or the notion of the rule of law. although, i suppose i still don't understand what benefit the dems thought they would get out of laying down and letting the republicans install a junta. that's the most frustrating thing, how some of them still can't see how they've been stripped of meaningful political authority, because they were so concerned with being "civil."
I'm not convinced that Gore had strong cards to play re: recount
Bush's brother ran the show in the state in question, and his brethren ran the show at the Supreme Court.
The notorious footage from "Fahrenheit 9/11" was never even shown by the media, who had zero appetite for vote-fraud stories and for "suffering" through more "Clinton fatigue."
If Gore had been the one figure who stood up in the Senate and said "hey, there's been vote-fraud, elect me," one can only imagine what kind of unsupported laughingstock he would have been. Would there have been a rigorous study? Would the Supreme Court stop being in the pocket of the GOP? Methinks "no."
All it needed was one White Senator
to support the House Black caucus, as they bravely and futilely rose again and again to protest the stolen count.
Just one.
THAT day was when the future REALLY hung on the mythical 'just one vote mattered' meme.
Some of us knew it, and and have been shamelessly provocative, shrilly obscene, and fiercely angry ever since.
Hey, woody?
Not a one of those all-too-holy Senators would do stand up for the House Black caucus that day, either.
Not a black Senator.
Not a woman Senator.
Not a Yankee Senator.
Not a Christian Senator.
Not one.
Sara, i don't think there were any Black Senators in 2000
am i wrong? was Mosely Brown still seated then?
So, what would have happened if one senator (or Gore) spoke up?
What would have happened next?
We discussed this recently, but I don't recall that we got to the bottom of that.
If there'd been one voice, the Congress has to do the whole
investigative dance. Meanwhile the election is thrown into the House of Representatives, and settled by a vote there. It has actually happened (1824, I think?) at least once.
The Caucus Strategy Explained...
http://www.footnotefahrenheit.com/f911ch...
Bush would have won overwhelmingly in the House, given the GOPuke majority--to say nothing of its composition: Ney, Cunningham, DeLay, Hastert, Young and the rest./
Woody, the Senate site says
not, and Jeff Bingaman (D- NM) didn't stand up either, even though he lost his reelection bid.