Bush's Lies and Simple Truths - October 28, 2002

[Guest guest]

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1028-04.htm

 

Published on Monday, October 28, 2002 by

CommonDreams.org

Bush's Lies and Simple Truths

Speech to antiwar rally, state Capitol steps, Austin,

TX, October 26, 2002

by Robert Jensen

 

 

A few weeks ago Jim McDermott, a courageous

congressman from Washington state, traveled to Baghdad

in pursuit of peace and was sharply criticized,

particularly for his comment that George Bush " might

mislead " the American public to build support for an

attack on Iraq. He got only one thing wrong -- the

" might. "

 

George Bush HAS misled the American public. He IS

misleading the American public, and we can assume he

WILL continue to mislead the public. In fact, the

entire Bush administration has been misleading the

public, sometimes by misdirection, sometimes by

fudging the facts, and sometimes by straightforward,

outright lies.

 

Remember when Donald Rumsfeld told a congressional

committee that Iraq kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors

in 1998? That's a lie. The head of the inspection team

pulled the inspectors out after being informed that

the Clinton administration was going to proceed with

Operation Desert Fox, its illegal bombing of Iraq.

 

Fudged facts? Well, remember Rumsfeld's declaration

that the U.S. had " bulletproof evidence " of a

connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda? For a

bulletproof story, there certainly are a lot of holes,

including a report from Czech President Vaclav Havel

that suggests there is no evidence, at least of the

long-rumored meeting between one of the 9/11 hijackers

and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague.

 

Some lies are not lies, of course, but just

" alternative interpretations. " Take the so-called

no-fly zones, in the north and south of Iraq, where

U.S. and U.K. planes patrol the skies and bomb Iraqi

targets at will. The U.S. claims these zones are

authorized by U.N. Security Council resolutions. That

the rest of the world disagrees and sees it as a

violation of Iraqi sovereignty is of little concern to

the U.S. Power means your alternative explanation

can't be challenged.

 

Misdirection is helpful, too. Take Bush's assertion

that if Iraq could " produce, buy, or steal an amount

of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a

single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in

less than a year. " Yes, that's likely true, but it is

the equivalent of saying, " If Iraq had a nuclear

weapon, it would have a nuclear weapon. " Creating the

other components of a nuclear bomb would be relatively

easy; the fissile material is the issue.

 

The question isn't whether Saddam Hussein is a nice

guy or not; in case anyone isn't clear on that, he's

not. The question is whether he is a real threat.

Given that none of his neighbors feel threatened and

are adamantly against war, that Iraq is far weaker

than in 1991, and that all the world thinks renewed

weapons inspection and diplomacy is the proper course,

it leaves the Bush administration only a few choices

for dealing with other countries (mainly threats and

bribery, what one British journalist called

" diplomatic kneecapping " ) and only one choice for

dealing with the U.S. public -- propaganda. They know

that the only way they can get the American people is

to frighten us with nightmare scenarios, no matter how

implausible.

 

Well, on this one point, I actually agree. I am

frightened, but not for the reasons Bush is pushing.

International terrorism is a serious problem that

requires serious attention, and there are reasons to

be afraid of future attacks in the U.S. And if the

U.S. goes to war against Iraq, the likelihood of such

terrorists attack will increase dramatically. That's a

real reason to be afraid.

 

But beyond that, I am afraid of other threats.

 

I am afraid for a country that protects the greed of

the few over the needs of the many, the United States.

 

I am afraid for a Middle East flooded with weapons

sold by the the #1 arms dealer in the world, the

United States.

 

And I am afraid -- I am terrified -- for a world

dominated by an empire that has acquired such a

massive destructive capability, and a demonstrated

willingness to use it. I am afraid of the empire in

which I live, the empire of which I am a citizen. I am

afraid of the men sitting in Washington -- of Rumsfeld

and Cheney and Wolfowitz, and of George W. Bush -- who

are planning the lives and the deaths of people all

over this planet.

 

But I hope that I am not afraid to resist this

madness. I hope I am not afraid to speak out. That is

always easier if one's voice is not the only voice.

So, today I hope we can all find our voices and come

together to speak as one.

 

--A voice that says no to an illegal and immoral war,

and says yes to international law and diplomacy.

 

--A voice that says no to an economic system that

enriches the few at the expense of the many, and says

yes to an economy that puts need above greed.

 

--And, most important, a voice that says no to

imperial America, and yes to a truly democratic

America, a democratic America that becomes part of the

world, not a ruler of the world.

 

We must not only say yes to the vision of a truly new

world order based on justice, but we must commit to

the struggle that is necessary to make that world

real. We must be willing to risk our own comforts and

our own privilege, to be impolite when necessary, to

agitate, to cause trouble.

 

In 1857, the great Frederick Douglass made it clear

that:

 

" If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those

who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate

agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up

the ground, they want rain without thunder and

lightning, they want the ocean without the awful roar

of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one;

or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral

and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power

concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it

never will. "

 

Let us not be unrealistic about this struggle. We have

to ask, who is on our side in this struggle? Is the

media on our side? No. Are the corporations on our

side? No. Are the politicians on our side? No.

 

Who is on our side? Take a minute and look to the

person at your side. That is what we have. We do not

have the power of money; we have the power of people.

Many voices into one, not denying our differences but

uniting in our strength, the strength of people of

conscience who will not abandon the struggle.

 

With that voice, we can confront Cheney and Rumsfeld

and Wolfowitz and George W. Bush with our demand.

 

We all have many demands for justice, and over time we

will press them all. But today we come together to

say, in one voice, that at this crucial time in our

nation's history, in the world's history, the best

traditions of humanity -- the political, moral and

spiritual traditions that have led us here today --

demand that we say, in one voice, loud and determined,

proud and resolute:

 

NO WAR.

 

Robert Jensen is an associate professor of journalism

at the University of Texas at Austin, a member of the

Nowar Collective, and author of the book Writing

Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the

Mainstream and the pamphlet " Citizens of the Empire. "

He can be reached at rjensen.