Mountains Out Of Molehills

My 2-week trip to the ISIL conference in Lithuania seems to have thankfully spared me from most of the “Bush Lied” Brigade’s hysteria. It’s funny how one piece of forged evidence in support of a conclusion which is still affirmed by everyone except the CIA, the DNC, & the paleos, is enough to get them screaming “Bush lied.” It reminds me of how Holocaust Deniers base their denial upon things like how Anne Frank’s diary was tampered with by her father (to cover up stuff that had nothing to do with the Holocaust).

In fact, a good deal of anti-war argumentation is highly reminiscent of the shoddy historical methodology of Holocaust Denial: evidence consistent with the case for the War on Terror is ignored and its very existence denied, or it is said to be fraudulent, while evidence contrary to the War On Terror is exagerrated or fabricated. Sources supporting the War On Terror are impugned as being biased, while sources opposing it are lionized. For example, the anonymous (alleged) ex-CIA sources who told Frontline that Saddam was a paid CIA asset when he participated in an assassination attempt on Iraqi President Qassem in the late 1960s are taken to be noble whistleblowers by the anti-warmongers, while the anonymous sources of Youssef Bodansky which affirm Iraqi sponsorship of Al Qaeda are dismissed, and Bodansky smeared as a “Republican operative.”

The true insignificance of the “Bush Lied” brigade’s whining can be gleaned from the fact that none of its Democrat members have said they regretted their votes for Gulf War II or that they would vote differently if they had to do it again. Instead, they have tried to have it both ways, claiming that they were misled into voting for GWII, which they still think was the right thing to do. Also, does the fact that one of the pieces of evidence about Saddam’s attempts to reconstitute his WMD program turns out to have been forged invalidate all the rest of the evidence that he was trying to reconstitute his WMD programs? Nonsense. Does it mean that he wasn’t sponsoring Al Qaeda? Of course not. Does it mean he wasn’t tyrannizing his own people? Don’t be silly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *