Debra Saunders - San Francisco Chronicle

The right wing commentator of the "ultra liberal" San Francisco Chronicle was on a local tv show this morning and is apparently tired of Democrats doing "revisionist" history concerning the reason for invading Iraq. "They thought Iraq had WMD also", she says. While Democrats may have and voted for it and should be ashamed let us take a real world based approach to this subject. I don't know about you but I can only take so much of this "create their own reality" crowd.

Democrats and Republicans didn't pursue this war with Iraq, the Bush administration that is full of neo-cons did and they used 9/11 and the "war on terror"as a cover for it, or as the Project For The New American Century put it, they needed a "Pearl Harbor like event" to pursue their middle east domination fantasies (control resources, dominate the world etc.) that they have had for quite some time. This war was rolled out by the White House Iraq Group as a marketing strategy to sell the public on this invasion starting in September of 2002 and as it was put by Andy Card "from a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August".

It is now coming to light about fake documents that were supposed to be from Niger were forgeries that came out of Italy and were passed on to the U.S. Naturally the pertinent question is who created these forgeries and for what purpose? Of course right wingers such as Saunders would downplay this by either ignoring it completely, saying it is irrelevant or claiming that it is just "conspiracy nuts" who believe this is important.

They would also downplay the Downing Street Memos that were leaked from our close allies the British who joined our country in this neo-con fantasy of bringing "democracy" to the Middle East by invading and killing tens of thousands of people who just happen to live on an oil rich country.

We don't hear anything about WMD or mushroom clouds anymore just that this is all part of the" war on terror" and that Saddam was a "bad" man. I agree he is a very nasty and brutal dictator and has been since he took power. We liked him just fine when he invaded Iran and started a long war with that country and we still liked him even after he used chemical weapons on his own people. We had no problem with that. We only had a problem when he did something that wasn't part of the paradigm which involved invading Kuwait and stopping the flow of the "spice", sorry I mean the oil!

If we as a country are so interested in "liberating" so many people from oppression I am sure the people of Burma/Myanmar and Tibet are waiting for their freedom any time we can get to them.

I could go on and on about this, there is plenty of information out there if you want to find out the truth as they call it, but suffice it to say a conservative apologist like Debra Saunders would never allow any of this to enter her consciousness.

Revisionist history.
Exactly right Debra, but not in the way you think.

My brother wrote to me with a very good point I forgot to mention, which is that the members of congress did not see the same intelligence that the administration did, which has been mentioned by other people also. So what was the raw data saying? Was there "cherry picking" as it is called. The answer is quite obvious.

The picture used in this blog is not from the show I saw today.