|
Edited on Sat Jun-11-05 02:57 PM by kenny blankenship
international aggression.
Don't forget we tried and punished Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher (sp?) during the Nuremburg de-Nazification trials. I think he was hanged. And Streicher's main offense would have been fomenting war and genocide through propaganda in Die Stürmer.
Rove is the chief coordinator of neo-fascist propaganda for the GOP and the Bush Whitehouse, as well as the political advisor speaking directly into the Cornpone Furhrer's ear. According to early dropouts of the Chimpministration, like the guy who came up with the term "Mayberry Machiavellians", Bush doesn't take a crap without Rove's advice on it first.
Once we get to the interrogation phase, it should be trivial to find leads to documentary proof that Rove was part of the conspiracy to invade Iraq (as well as other places) from the very start. Seriously can you think of anyone else who would have coached Bush in how to lie us into the war? It wasn't Powell, warcriminal though he is. CIA may have gone along with it over time, but the overall strategy of deception and the exact wording for how to lie to the American people could have been supplied only by Cheney or Rove. And I doubt Chimpy would have simply taken Cheney's word for how to do this without bring Rover in on it for his opinion: you'd have to be much more demented than Bush appears to be not to be aware that what you're up to is unprovoked mass murder, an international warcrime, and thus potentially a capital offense if you're ever found out. If you re-read the 2003 State of the Union Address and examine the passages in which Bush relates the evidence that justifies war, you'll see that almost all of it is cleverly attended by qualifications, saying that "British intelligence" says thus and so. Or that UN inspectors concluded X,Y,Z back in the early 90s and so on. Defectors and informants tell us and so forth. Nothing is stated unequivocally although at first hearing it sounds very strong and as if he is taking ownership of this mountain of factual evidence. Indeed it is all cleverly worded so as to allow Bush to deflect responsibility for the truth of these statements onto other sources outside of his administration, should he ever be questioned about the veracity of these claims. Never once does he say there are at least 10,000 kilos of Saltwater Taffy Agent in Saddam Hussein's arsenal, or 20,000 forbidden donuts, or whatever, and I have seen the evidence of this and personally stake my word and honor on it. It's ALL written to give deniability in the future. THAT to me is the smoking gun, the conclusive proof he knew he was lying about the cause to go to war. It's like Hitler's aversion to referring directly to the concentration camps. He ordered the Final Solution but appeared to make sure that very little documentary evidence could link him PERSONALLY to the policy of exterminating Jews in the camps. It's inconceivable that such could have happened in Germany without Hitler's knowledge and approval and one or two orders did survive which do implicate Hitler directly and conclusively. But his pattern was to avoid references to them and what went on there--which shows that he was aware that what they were doing in the camps was wrong and apt to get him executed should foreign armies ever capture him alive. A true psychotic madman, as many have described Hitler, would have carried on about the camps in his memoranda as though there was nothing wrong with killing millions of people instead of hiding his knowledge and involvement. Likewise Bush's speech and its list of grievances against Iraq is actually written to be denied at a later time. We know Bush trusts Rove to the point that Rove is called "Bush's Brain". We have all seen and heard how George Bush's verbal skills have let's say failed to live up to Presidential standards. It doesn't seem likely Bush himself could have written the 2003 SOTU Address continually mindful of the need to weave the thread of deniability into his accusations against Iraq, while keeping it a strident declarative war-pledge. He had to have had help. Bush would have surely consulted Karl Rove and involved him in the conspiracy to invade Iraq all down the line, just as he surely practiced and spoke the speech Karl Rove gave him to read on that critical occasion.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
