Bush Lied, Does Anyone Care?

I have a question, with the exception of those of us that have been crying foul since day one, does anyone else find the proof that George W. Bush lied to the American public about his justifications for war disturbing?

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The release of these high level minutes in the Times of London Sunday have yet to garner a response from the White House but it has created quite a stir in the U.S. Congress. According to CNN 89 Democratic members of Congress have written a letter to President Bush asking for an explanation of the letter. But when all you can do is write a frickin’ letter and hope for some kind of response does it really matter?

I do a lot of preaching to the choir here and so I would like to hear from some of my conservative readers as to your thoughts on this development. Now that it would appear the testimony of Richard Clarke, Paul O’Neill, and countless others is being proven true, what are your thoughts about the conflicting testimony given by administration officials, under oath, to the contrary? Is it your opinion that it was ok to lie in order to remove Saddam (ends justify the means)? If so, at what point do you feel it is ok the throw out the rule of law in favor of furthering your agenda?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Connect with Facebook