Absence of Knowledge - Josh
Absence of Knowledge - Josh Marshall continues to confirm Berg's Law of Liberal Commentary on Iraq (see upper-right corner of this blog) in last Sunday's edition of his blog. The left continues to believe that the war on terror is really a war on Al Quaeda.
Marshall comments about Vice President Cheney's appearances on the Sunday Morning Pundapaloozas last weekend:
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think its not surprising that people make that connection.
MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We dont know.
But in the great scheme of things, it's all more or less irrelevant, because
the war on terror is not just a war on Al Quaeda, as much as it pains the simple-minded lefties who display their "Bin Laden At Large 652 Days" counters on their Blogspot blogs. Iraq may or may not have been connected with Al Quaeda - but they're connected with Hamas, Hezb'allah, Jamiyat e' Islamiya, and the whole rogues' gallery. Drawing distinctions between one Islamofascist group and another is academically satisfying, intellectually pointillistic, and practically pointless; the intellectual link between kamikaze airliners, bombs on buses and people being fed into plastic shredders is as important as any meetings that may or may not (and most likely did) occur. And, remembering Berg's Law, keep in mind that there are all those other justifications:
- The Weapons of Mass Destruction, which everyone believed in until they didn't show up, when suddenly the whole American left lost their religion
- the vast, blood-gushing human-rights hemorrhage that was the Hussein regime
- The booklet of UN resolutions that needed to be enforced
- the large, compelling strategic reasons to have a force in being and a base in the region, whose worth is already becoming obvious to those equipped to see it, in the moderated behavior of the Iranians, Saudis, and even the mainstream PLO.
Marshall continues:
Even applying so low a standard as that by which we judge incidents with four-year-olds and cookie jars, Cheney's statement that "we just don't know" whether Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks is a lie.
Y'know what, Joshua Micah Marshall? If you want to define "we don't know the full story, in a context with many other variables (see the list above)" as a "lie", then fair enough. I'll use that standard:
Why do 69% of Americans continue to believe that Iraq may have been involved in 9/11? Many reasons. But one of the most important is that their leaders keep lying to them.
OK - and by Marshall's standard, the left is lying as well - by focusing exclusively on one single variable of the Iraq story at a time, without considering the broader context of the story; "The administration is lying about WMDs" the left will say, carefully ignoring the UN resolutions, human rights abuses, and Iraq's public ties with other terror; They'll solemnly yet gleefully intone "they lied about the Al Quaeda Connection", as if Al Quada were the only terrorists that mattered.
Do I think the Adminisration should dispel the public's notion that there's a definite link between Iraq and 9/11? Sure. And, lookie here, they're doing just that.
OK - one problem down; a list of strawmen (see above) yet to go. Your turn.
Posted by Mitch at
September 18, 2003 06:02 AM
