Someone needs to tell Wolf that Saddam did not deny inspectors or refuse to disclose sites

[flpoljunkie]

Conason feels the "public is no longer fooled" but one is tempted to wonder why the Washington pundits continue to let Republicans get away with this lie.

"Saddam Chose to Deny Inspectors"

Bush repeated this bald-faced lie recently. The cowering press still lets him get away with it, but the public is no longer fooled.

by Joe Conason

And when Thomas reminded him that she had asked about Iraq, he (Bush) said, "I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose , then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it."

The official transcript notes "laughter" at that moment.

What was so funny? Were her colleagues laughing at Thomas, whose monopoly on testicular fortitude has shamed them all for so long? In the days that followed, the bully boys of the right-wing media enthusiastically abused Thomas, which was predictable enough. But have the rest of the reporters in the press room become so accustomed to presidential prevarication that they literally cannot hear a stunning falsehood that is repeated over and over again?

For the third time since the war began three years ago, Bush had falsely claimed that Saddam refused the U.N. weapons inspections mandated by the Security Council. For the third time, he had denied a reality witnessed by the entire world during the four months when those inspectors, under the direction of Hans Blix, traveled Iraq searching fruitlessly for weapons of mass destruction that, as we now know for certain, were not there.

But forget about whether the weapons were there for a moment. The inspectors definitely went to Iraq. They left only because the United States warned them to get out before the bombs started to fall on March 19, 2003. But for some reason the president of the United States keeps saying -- in public and on the record -- that the inspectors weren't there.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/03/31/bush_lies/

[Mnemosyne]

1. "monopoly on testicular fortitude' - that is an excellent

description of wonderful Helen.

Great last paragraph:

Is it necessary to mention that this falsehood again went unnoticed in the mainstream media (although I took exception)? Historians will wonder someday how a free press permitted the world's most important official to say such things without contradiction. Meanwhile we can hope that next time, Jon Stewart will play back the tape on "The Daily Show" while bugging his eyes in disbelief. Then we will be reassured that reality still exists, even when the media and the president prefer to pretend otherwise.

Even though reality is too often tough, it still beats a head up one's behind any day of the week! Most repukes are proof that the view in there causes mental incapacitation, delusions of superiority and psychotically deranged sexual repression.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Sorry, but

He can't hear us!

[Phrogman]

3. They went there to TAKE IRAQS OIL!

its a waste of electrons to write about the bullshit they gave us as a reason.

[farmbo]

4. Not only were they in Iraq...they were destroying Saddam's missiles!

Through the second week of March 2003, Hans Blix's people were busy disabling Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missiles, in addition to their search for Saddam's mythical WMD.

Bush was so eager for his war that he sent in our troops while much of the missile fleet was still operational.

[oasis]

5. All Dem candidates should emphasize this point at every opportunity. (nt)