Glenn Greenwald
catches Bush's "intelligence czar," Mike McConnell, in
howlingly flagrant lies in a Washington Post op-ed about
the need to "update" the secret FISA court's powers over government
surveillance. Greenwald does a masterful job of demolition
but in the end, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. All he does
is go back to Bush's own public statements after the FISA system
was, er, updated in October 2001, and show how the Dear Leader himself
contradicts every statement McConnell makes in his new piece. Greenwald
writes with his usual passion and flair; but it's a job that any
first-year journalism student could have done and a job that
Post editorial honcho Fred Hiatt should have done. For McConnell
was not simply voicing opinions, or giving his interpretation of
events; he was stating as fact things that were demonstrably false
falsehoods that could have been detected through a quick
check of the Post's own files. It is precisely as if Hiatt gave
editorial space to someone claiming that Saddam Hussein had ordered
the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Well, the strange
political proclivities of Mr. Hiatt are well known, and too banal
to merit any serious attention. The man treats anything out of the
mouths of the powerful as holy and uneditable writ,
although it's true that he also publishes the occasional "dissenting"
piece. After all, Post readers like to flatter themselves
that they are big-picture people, seeing "all sides" of an issue
and making their weighty judgments accordingly. They like to spice
up the unrelenting flood of servile gruel that Hiatt dishes out
with a bit of contrarian horseradish now and then.
What is most
important about the McConnell piece as Greenwald notes
is that it underscores, yet again, that the Bush Faction tells knowing
lies in pushing its agenda, and always has. It's not a question
of "spin," of "putting the best face on things," or being "clearer
than truth," in
Dean Acheson's sinister Cold War phrase gilding the
lily, exaggerating for effect. Nor, conversely, is it a case of
self-deception, of "true believers" unable to take off their blinders,
of "idealists" unwilling to bend their dreams to mucky reality,
or even of fourth-rate dullards too stupid to see the filth and
ruin caused by their own cretinous policies. They are not just spinning,
they are not deceiving themselves, they are not too stupid to know
what's going on.
They are lying
lying deliberately lying brazenly and cynically, as
in McConnell's case. They are lying because their causes are evil
and cannot be spoken of openly: aggressive war for loot and domination;
the callous rape and despoiling of their own nation for the profit
and power of their wealthy cronies; the construction of a global
gulag of secret prisons, eternal captives, carefully refined and
officially approved torture; the deliberate, systematic destruction
of the Constitutional system of government in favor of arbitrary,
militarized tyranny; the deliberate, systematic sowing of division
and rancor and hatred and fear among the people, to keep them disunited,
weak, scattered, unable to resist the depredations of a small, criminal
elite. If these be your gods, then of course you must lie to do
them service.
[The Post
had another
story revealing the Bush policy of deliberate mendacity this
week, a Walter Pincus piece buried in the grey sludge of the inside
pages: yet another confirmation that the Bush Administration knew
full well beforehand the kind of unbridled hell that their planned
war of aggression against Iraq would unleash. They knew months
before the invasion that it would result in a guerrilla insurgency,
in violent and vicious sectarian conflict, in increased terrorism,
in regional instability and a vast exacerbation of radical, extremist,
politicized Islam. They knew all this because their own intelligence
agencies told them, in at least two major assessments delivered
in January 2003. ]
McConnell's
lies are more important for what they represent than for their substance.
The latter is simply just one more attempt to throw dust in the
public's eyes about "regulating" surveillance while the Bush Administration
continues to do what it has obviously been doing for almost six
years: spying on whomever they please, whenever they please, and
for their own purposes, unrelated to any attempt to "protect" the
American people from the terrorism that the
Bushists themselves have so assiduously and deliberately cultivated.
We know all this already; there needs no spook come from the Beltway
to tell us that. But McConnell's lies do represent an escalation
a "surge" in the brazenness of the criminal gang's
deceptions. They are becoming so transparent that it seems obvious
that the Bush Faction no longer cares if they are caught out in
their lies or not. (See the oathsworn Congressional testimony of
Attorney General Alberto "Intensive Care" Gonzales for another recent
example of this.)
Perhaps this
is because they have taken the measure of the Democratic "opposition"
and now realize that no one is going to seriously hinder them in
the pursuit of their sinister agenda. Oh, they may have to toss
a few bodies overboard Gonzales himself is probably being
fitted for a winding sheet even as we speak but it is now
obvious that the leaders of the criminal organization are not going
to be held legally accountable for their high crimes. They are not
going to be impeached although the many causes for impeachment
cry out to the heavens. They are not going to be tried; they are
not going to be jailed. They are not going to suffer the slightest
inconvenience. They can see already that they will retire to lives
of staggering wealth and privilege.
II.
The cowardice
of the Democrats is one possible reason why the Bushists' lies are
growing more open, more cynical. (And let us not lay the flattering
unction to ourselves that this is because the Bush Faction is getting
more desperate. It would be very nice to think so, but as noted
above, they already know nothing bad is going to happen to them
personally; so what would they be desperate about?) But there is
one other possible reason for their brazenness: because they know
that something is brewing, something is coming that will wipe away
the memory of their present lies or else make it more dangerous
to point them out. Juan
Cole detects some tantalizing hints in the notable absence of
many of Iraq's main political players from the scene: Abdul Aziz
al-Hakim, leader of the most powerful Shiite party, has left Iraq,
going first to the United States and now to Iran for cancer treatment.
Mahdi Army leader Moqtada al-Sadr is still in hiding. And now Iraq's
president, Jalal Talabani, is going to a fat farm in the United
States for three weeks to try to lose some weight. That's right;
Iraq's head of state has left his nation in the midst of a life-and-death
struggle in order to drop a few pounds in a pricey Stateside resort.
That's the
story, anyway but as we noted above, the lies are getting
more threadbare all the time. Says the cautious Cole: "I'm tempted
to speculate that something is in the works such that someone thinks
it desirable that Talabani be out of country, since the idea that
Mam Jalal suddenly decided he needed to go to a fat farm in Minnesota
strikes me as far-fetched." Meanwhile, the ever-incandescent
Arthur Silber points us to this
piece by Alain Gresh in Le Monde Diplomatique, on the surging
military and terrorist operations by the United States and its proxies
in Iran:
Silently,
furtively, sheltered from cameras, the war on Iran has begun.
Numerous sources confirm that the United States has intensified
its aid to several armed movements with an ethnic base
Azeris, Baluchis, Arabs, Kurds: minorities that together represent
about 40 percent of the Iranian population with the objective
of destabilizing the Islamic Republic. In this context, ABC television
revealed in the beginning of April that the Baluchi group, Jound
Al-Islam ("The soldiers of Islam") which had just led an attack
against the Guardians of the Revolution (about twenty dead) had
enjoyed secret American assistance. A report by the Century Foundation
reveals that American commandos have been operating in the interior
of Iran itself since the summer of 2004.
revealed
that documentary proof has now emerged confirming the fact that
in the spring of 2003, the Bush Regime flush with its illusory
"victory" in Iraq spurned a wide-ranging peace feeler from
Iran which offered "full cooperation" on every issue that the
Bushists claim to be concerned about in regard to Tehran: "nuclear
programs, acceptance of Israel and the termination of Iranian
support for Palestinian militant groups."
The offer
was made through the Swiss Embassy, which has served as the conduit
for communication between Washington and Tehran since America's
Peacock patsy, the Shah of Iran, was overthrown in 1979. The 2003
proposal included "full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, 'decisive
action,' against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending 'material
support' for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative
for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [which
called for all Muslim states to recognize Israel]," the Post reports.
The unprecedented initiative was approved by Iran's supreme leader,
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and then-President Mohammad Khatami
the moderate whose attempts at dialogue were mocked and undercut
at every turn by the Bush Regime, helping to discredit the entire
reformist movement in Iran and leading to Khatami's replacement
by the militant hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In other
words, everything that George W. Bush says he wants from the Iranians
now, he could have had for the asking three years ago.
What then can we conclude from the rejection of this extraordinary
initiative? The answer is obvious: that the Bush Faction is not
really interested in curbing nuclear proliferation or defusing
the powder keg of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the regional
and global terror that it spawns.
But no one
heard of that offer until three years after it was made. (And with
the Post burying the story on page 16, not many have heard
of it even now.) Instead, we have been told lie after lie
about Iranian intransigence, and how Bush is tirelessly pursuing
"all diplomatic options" in a wise, statesmanlike bid to avoid being
drawn into an unwanted war by the evil mullahs.
How soon then
before we find out at last how transparent these lies have been
as well? Is this the big thing brewing, a strike on Iran, a new
and even more horrible war certain to provoke even more horrible
responses, even on American soil thus solidifying the tyranny
of the Bush Faction, sweeping away all the "petty carping" about
the law and the Constitution as the Leader does "whatever it takes"
to keep us safe? [Just by the by, Bush also
signed an order recently giving himself the sole power to constitute
the entire federal government in the event of a broad range
of "national emergencies."]
As Cole noted
in his piece on Talabani, these are just speculations. But consider:
every single lie told by the Bush Faction has masked a reality more
sinister than most American citizens could have imagined. "Compassionate
conservatism" really was a cynical scam for ruthless corporate predation,
callous disregard and a savage, ideological assault on the very
notion of a "common good" all exemplified in the Katrina
disaster. The Bushists really did lie about "weapons of mass destruction"
and al Qaeda ties in order to launch a war of aggression against
Iraq. Bush really did lie, knowingly and repeatedly and publicly,
about the mass surveillance he is conducting upon the American people,
as Greenwald has shown so clearly.