More on confirming your worst suspicions

[ProfessorPlum]

As if in some bizarre hurry to prove my recent point about wild conspiracy theories evolving into received GOP wisdom quite quickly, we have had two examples of this in just the last 48 hours that illustrate the case nicely (and another historical example).

First, the historical example of Michael Moore claiming in Fahrenheit 911 that of the dozens of Bin Laden family members in the US on September 11th, the vast majority were hustled out of the country on flights during the ban on international flights and most left without even being interviewed in a cursory way by authorities. When Moore first made this claim, the howls of outrage by Bush supporters were scary. How dare Moore make such a scurrilous claim? The episode is widely regarded as completely true nowadays, and was confirmed by the 9/11 commission. (thanks to zbdent).

And now, on to the more recent examples. Remember when Bob Novak revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent whose job was to track nuclear weapons in foreign countries? After that, the administration made the completely incoherent argument that Joe Wilson was obviously lying because his wife was an undercover CIA agent whose job was to track nuclear weapons in foreign countries. Therefore he definitely wouldn’t know anything. (I never have understood that argument very well).

At that point, logical people put together that someone had disclosed a state secret and endangered our intelligence networks to reveal this “damning” fact. Since Wilson’s wife’s job status was being presented by the Bushies as something that helped Bush’s argument for war, and since nobody in the administration seemed at all upset that her status had been disclosed, those of us who weren’t braindead came to the conclusion that Bush or Rove or Cheney had deliberately disclosed the information. This conclusion was treated by the conventional media as wild-eyed conspiracy theory.

Fast forward to this week. Patrick Fitzgerald reveals that Libby claims that Cheney claims that Bush declassified the contents of the NIE before he released the information to Judy Miller, bypassing the actual legal method for declassification. Does the White House deny this? No.

A senior administration official, speaking on background because White House policy prohibits comment on an active investigation, said Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done. The official said Bush authorized the release of the classified information to assure the public of his rationale for war as it was coming under increasing scrutiny.

You see? This is exactly what us wild-eyed conspiracy theorists suspected years ago. Bush outed a CIA agent to make sure he could rush us into war. Now that the White House is admitting it, Bushco will claim that it was the patriotic thing to do (though before the White House admitted it, anyone making that exact claim was labeled a terrorist sympathizer).
And there is another example. First Bush claimed that he was getting a warrant to wiretap anyone. When that lie was no longer operable, he admitted that he was spying BUT ONLY on international calls between Al Qaeda and American phones. Now, of course, it is not hard to speculate that this collection of criminal thieves has long been doing domestic spying without warrants on the media, on members of Congress, and on their political opponents. After all, with all of the justification they’ve been doing for all of their other crimes (“warrantless wiretapping is good for Merika!"), it would be easy for them to justify spying on, say, John Kerry. After all, Bush claims that Kerry’s election would have been bad for the War on Terra, so it’s only righteous and prudent that he should protect America by spying on his political foes. And with every drip, we are moving relentlessly towards that conclusion. The latest not-so-surprising revelation? That Alberto Gonzales “wouldn’t rule out” that this administration could decide to spy on purely domestic calls if they thought Al Qaeda was involved. Whatever. Remember, the ONLY reason the FISA court exists is to prevent abuse of government spying. This administration has been sidestepping that court for years and, QED, is abusing their power. How long until the fact that they’ve been wiretapping (and probably blackmailing) the media and Democratic politicians comes to light, followed by the earnest justification that they had to do it to protect the country from terra-ists? My guess is not long now.

Remember, if you have a bad, awful suspicion about something this criminal enterprise might be doing, that soon the GOP will be claiming that of course they are doing it, and thank god, because it's the right thing to do.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Apply your formula to 9-11. nt.

[havocmom]

5. Absolutely! The less likely the believability, it seems the more likely

they will pull a particular event off. They are counting on the tendency of people to just not believe how bad others can actually be. THAT is how evil triumphs; evil people know most decent people just won't believe some are not inhibited by conventional limits.

So far, this junta has managed to exceed most of my wild ass conspiracy theories. The theories I have not yet proved correct just haven't had time to reach fruition.

[tatertop]

2. Why bush does what he does: Because it's gosh darn good for 'murika!

He can't talk about it because
it's all part of fightin' terra.
All we have to know is: it's gosh darn good for 'murika!

[KoKo]

3. Our tinfoil hats were working overtime .....some folks thought..

But, it seems that we were just ahead of the information that would eventually come out.

So many of us knew it was coming when the Supremes installed him....How did WE Know....and why didn't everyone else including most of our Senate and House members who gave him everything he wanted even though they had to know more about these people than we average citizens did.

It will be a long time if ever before we find out the answer to that question....

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Exactly!!!

[MADem]

6. Let's go back a ways, this is a long article, but WORTH READING

This article touches on the FAKING of relationships to lie us into war. Osama and Saddam, two sides of the same coin...oh really????

http://www.vanityfair.com/commentary/content/printables/060109roco01?print=true

It is hardly surprising that the American public believes that there was an al-Qaeda–Saddam alliance, since Bush-administration officials constantly touted that supposed alliance as a pressing reason to go to war against Iraq. In September 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said there was "bulletproof" evidence of an Iraq–al-Qaeda connection. In his January 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush said, "Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda." However, the historical record demonstrates that bin Laden has, in fact, been a passionate opponent of Saddam Hussein for more than a decade and a half—especially ever since Saddam invaded Kuwait, in 1990.

Osama bin Laden in 1999: A year before Hussein entered Kuwait, I said many times in my speeches at the mosques, warning that Saddam will enter the Gulf. No one believed me. I distributed many tapes in Saudi Arabia. It was after it happened that they started believing me and believed my analysis of the situation.

Khaled Batarfi recalls talking to bin Laden on the subject: Last time I saw was 1990, six months before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It was in Mecca, in a friend's house, where a group of intellectuals meet every Friday. And he came and talked about jihad in Afghanistan and told us then that he'd speak to us about Saddam. He said, "We should train our people, our young, and increase our army and prepare for the day when eventually we are attacked. This guy can never be trusted." He doesn't believe a Muslim. So he never liked him or trusted him.

Gee, kinda screws up the theory that Saddam Bin Laden, er Osama Hussein, were swell pals, partners in crime, acting in concert, dunnit? Ah, but wait, there's more!

Abdel Bari Atwan, the Palestinian editor of Al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper, interviewed bin Laden in 1996: The Palestine Liberation Organization used to be considered an atheist organization by Osama bin Laden because they sided with the Soviet Union. He considers Arafat a traitor. And a secularist. He hated his guts. He also didn't like Saddam Hussein. And he still considered Saddam Hussein as a man who is a secular, but he didn't actually insult Saddam Hussein the way he insulted Yasser Arafat. He didn't like him, and he told me he wanted to kick him out of Iraq, as he considered the Ba'th regime to be an atheist regime. He considered Saddam Hussein an atheist, and he hates an atheist.

Hamid Mir, bin Laden's Pakistani biographer, spoke to him in 1997: He condemned Saddam Hussein in my interview. He gave such kind of abuses that it was very difficult for me to write, socialist motherfucker. , "The land of the Arab world, the land is like a mother, and Saddam Hussein is fucking his mother." He also explained that Saddam Hussein is against us, and he discourages Iraqi boys to come to Afghanistan.

The entire article is incredibly instructive, and in their OWN WORDS.

[Neil Lisst]

7. chalk another one up for us chronic conspiracy theorists!

I start with the proposition that if anything good happens for Bush, it's probably contrived and created by Bushistas.