The Two Most Essential, Abhorrent, Intolerable Lies Of George W. Bush's Memoir

[kentuck]

Long article. Read if you have the time. This evil person walks amongst us without retribution or remorse.
=================
<snip>
And that's why the two most essential lies -- among the many -- in his new memoir are that he had a legitimate reason to invade Iraq, and that he had a legitimate reason to torture detainees.

Neither is remotely true. But Bush must figure that if he keeps making the case for himself -- particularly if it goes largely unrebutted by the traditional media, as it has thus far -- then perhaps he can blunt history's verdict.

<snip>
George W. Bush has managed to duck the ignominy he deserves for launching this policy of cruelty. He has done so in part by framing the debate as one solely about waterboarding -- and counting on a lazy, amnesiac press corps to neither confront him on that count nor call him out for the wider moral breach for which he is responsible.

Back in 2004, as soon as the photos of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib went public, Bush and his collaborators launched a high-stakes disinformation campaign to prevent the American people from linking the White House to the pervasive, inhumane treatment of detainees -- many of whom were utterly innocent -- at prison facilities such as Abu Ghraib, Bagram, and Guantanamo. Being associated with the waterboarding of three top terrorists was at least a defensible position. Being responsible for widescale violations of the laws of war was not.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/22/the-two-most-esssential-a_n_786219.html

[DavidDvorkin]

1. Does he say that he was elected President in 2000?

That would be the worst lie of all. The foundational lie, you might say.

[kentuck]

3. George W Bush is an evil, despicable person...

...who has done irreparable damage to our country. It will take history a long time to unwind the true story of George W Bush.

[gratuitous]

2. Why would the traditional media rebut those lies?

They were instrumental in the dissemination of those lies, and absolutely vital as the conduit for the self-serving justifications for those lies. The cover is for war crimes and crimes against humanity, some of what used to be the most serious charges anyone could bring against a nation's leadership. Personal graft and corruption is so ho-hum anymore that the jaded courtiers in the media insiders barely report it (unless they decide to, usually at the urging of one of their political favorites). But even the blasé media recognized that crimes against humanity still have a resonance with the consumers. So, it pleased them as it pleased their political overlords to lie about the invasion of Iraq and the widespread torture of anyone they could get their mitts on.

So, after being such active connivers with the Bush administration, why would the traditional media folks suddenly decide that the truth about their nefarious activities should be told? The risk is far too high, and the truth just isn't a valuable enough commodity to take that risk. It's a pretty easy cost/benefit analysis, and so we're not going to be hearing about these lies any time soon, if ever.

[kentuck]

4. Good point gratuitous..

Very good point.

[the redcoat]

5. 2001-2008 Never forget. nt