Did Bush manipulate Iraq data?

[Occhidiangela]

To grow irate over a particular politician spinning an issue strikes me as bizarre. The Bush administration pressented the side of the issue that supported their view of the world. The Greenpeace folks tell the side of global warming that supports their view of the world. The French government told the side of the story that supported their view of the world. Go to any courtroom, and check out how a DA gets a conviciton on the perponderance of evidence, on habits, on record, on reputation. On that model, a 'good enough' if not 'perfect' case was made that something needed to be done about Saddam's regime.

This is not news.

The question is:

Was their deliberate fraud perpetrated on the US Congress? Without their support, the war don't happen, and Tony Blair would still be working the UN on what to do about Saddam.

I dont' much care about the spin provided to the media. The media, even given raw fact, spins plenty on its own, so when Secretary Rumsfeld tried to get clever with his own message, it frequently rolled back on him. (Remember the whole idiocy of the 'gee, this was tougher than expected' rhetoric? No duh, folks shoot back!) Look at what the media did with Jessica Lynch; see the LA times; see the European press, or check out the varied global coverages during the war: same war, different story being told.

But the legal issue here in America is of concrete importance: given that the Congress was presented XXXX information, there was enough support from Congress "to use force." THAT is what this is about. The rest of you all are just a bunch of spectators, deal with it.

To be frank with you, I don't give two #$%&s what foreigners opinions are regarding our administration: my own opinions suffice, thank you very much. Your own built in 'grains of salt' will provide you a greater or lesser sense of credulity regardless of the issue, be it NAFTA, G-7, GLobal warming, or the war in Iraq. And for that matter, tne 9-11 'conspiracy theories.' Everything presented in the political arena, to include every utterance of Kofi Annan, is spun.

Let's go back to an earlier post about telling "part of the truth." That is a political tool long in good standing, and used by every head of government on the planet. What matters is: was Congress presented by the Executive Branch with viable fact, or were they being BS'd from day one? If the latter can be shown, the political backlash will be immense, and heads will and should roll.

If not, then it simply does not matter, other than to mar the credibility of the current administration in the short term, and possibly, depending on the follow up, the long term.

The war is a fait accompli and a work in progress at the same time.

What matters now is getting the commitment, and the effort, and the wisdom to be as inclusive as possible of the international community, to take where Iraq is today and help make it better tomorrow, regardless of who falls, or does not fall, from power in Washington.