As we are getting perturbed about not finding WMD, the American media is treating this as news. And, this conclusion of Under-Fire President Waters Down Claims o­n Iraqi Weapons, from The Times UK, seems reasonable:

The President was warned of the scale of the trouble he would face if it emerged that the intelligence behind the war had been twisted. “This is the first potential scandal I have seen that could make Watergate pale by comparison,” John W. Dean, President Nixon’s White House lawyer, said. “To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based o­n bogus information, he is cooked.” The White House actions could be “a high crime” under the Constitution’s impeachment clause.

But, is this the fact, or is it more like Maureen Farrell points out in The Duping of America? She say, first of all, that the foreign press had our “news” months ago, and, for yet another layer of American mass hallucination, we don't care:

With the latest Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll showing that 79 percent of Americans believe that “the war would be justified even 'if the U.S. does not find conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction'”, it seems, for the moment at least, that we don't mind being lied to — as long as we continue to feel good about ourselves and our role in the world. Truth isn't nearly as important as is the oft-staged and contrived mythology of America saving the day. Why wouldn't we give the president the benefit of the doubt — particularly when pundits tell us it's the all-American thing to do? The mantra is readily memorized: the foreign press habitually out-scoops the US media because they are “anti-American” and Americans aren't easily and readily duped, but merely enthusiastic and optimistic. Until o­ne looks deeper, that is.

Maureen Farrell is good. She reminds me of MediaLens, the British site I keep touting for so eloquently showing the nakedness of our empire. She, too, makes everything come alive, like a Greek tragedy, where you get in your guts the nightmarish scenario that's being presented.

Her piece, that I encourage you to read in its entirety, and the cover story in the May issue of my favorite left publication, The American Prospect, The Most Dangerous President Ever: How and why George W. Bush undermines American security (ditto about reading all of this o­ne), haunt me. It's my this-can't-really-be-happening level of incredulity at the march we are o­n to hell. Blessings o­n publisher, Harold Meyerson,  author of this piece, who's another person who sounds a consistently clear voice of tell-it-like-it-is outrage:

George W. Bush has been pursuing a reckless, even ridiculous, but always right-wing agenda — shredding a global-security structure at a time requiring unprecedented international integration, shredding a domestic safety net at a time when the private sector provides radically less security than it did a generation ago. No American president has ever played quite so fast and loose with the well-being of the American people.

This is one more good overview to round out this post. Here's a laundry list that Robert Reich wrote up in a facetious end piece to that same May issue of The American Prospect.  In The Big Lesson, he has composed a fictional memorandum from Karl Rove to The President, that he sets us with this paragraph:

As the Iraq War winds down, I want to bring to your attention several important lessons. Election day is just 19 months away. While I have the highest respect for your dad, I think it fair to say he squandered his victory in the Gulf War. You do not want to make the same mistake. Take careful note of the following:

I've omitted the explanation he has o­n each point to just bring you the points themselves:

1. We didn't need the United Nations.

2. We didn't need to show a connection to al-Qaeda.

3. The war distracted the public's attention from our failures o­n terrorism.

4. The war distracted the public's attention from our failures o­n the economy.

5. The war revealed the Democrats to be comatose.

6. We split the Jews.

7. The media gave us a free ride.

This is his conclusion:

What do these lessons add up to? You need to continue this war — at least through November 2004.

There's no reason to declare victory just yet. Remember: Iran lies just over Iraq's eastern border; Syria is immediately to the west. These borders are arbitrary anyway, imposed o­n the Ottoman Empire after World War I. Both Iran and Syria are headed by tyrants and both are dangerous. Iran is close to having a nuclear bomb; Syria sponsors terrorists.

Here's the argument you can make. Our preemptive war with Iraq is really just the first phase of our larger preemptive strategy in the Middle East. In order to stabilize the Middle East, rid it of cruel despots and ensure that terrorists don't get access to WMD, we must move eastward into Tehran and westward into Damascus.

Mr. President, now is your chance. Your dad failed to push into Baghdad, and where did that leave him? Without a job.

By the way, Cheney and Rummy are in full agreement with me. Colin has some reservations but, being the good soldier he is, he's willing to cave (again). Needless to say, the RNC is wildly enthusiastic.

You have o­nly to give the nod and the speech is ready.

Follow