If the facts are inconvenient, if reality doesn't fit your fondest hopes and dreams, what do you do? You change the facts, you make your own reality. Can't you just hear Bush, with his legs up on the corner of the presidential desk and his cowboy boots shining, say to Cheney and Rumsfeld: "Dickey, Rummy do whatever you have to do to make it ok for me to blow that Saddam to hell...make it so, men!"
With the Downing Street memo we had the smoke, now we have the gun (from the Times of London). Hat tip to PJB.
The Times of London has just released a story detailing how UK ministers were told that Prime Minister Blair had already promised Bush the UK would support the American drive to oust Saddam, but that an "excuse" would have to be fabricated to make it all "legal", so that the UK cooperation, in any form, would not contravene international law. "Regime change", in and of itself (in other words, simply because George Bush wanted to kick out Saddam), was not enough. In fact, it was illegal. So the US and the UK had to find some legal reason to do what they had already decided they were going to do, almost a year before they actually did it.
How is it not clear that for all those months (from April 2002 to March 2003 when the Iraqi invasion began) Bush was lying about his intentions? How is it not clear that Bush was merely using this period to fix his facts? How is it not clear that Bush was lying to the American people, lying to the Congress, and lying to the world?
Bush was lying to the men and women who would eventually be maimed and die in Iraq. Bush was lying to the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians who have been "collateral damage" in a war that was trumped up, had absolutely nothing to do with fighting the war on terror, and which has created a stinking quagmire of Vietnam proportions.
READ IT HERE