So, it appears that Iraq didn't have Weapons Of Mass Destruction after all. And that Donald "Two Faces" Rumsfeld says that there was no new intelligence that formed the basis of the justification of going to war, just "a dramatic new light" of looking at the old intelligence. i.e. they saw what they wanted to see, after putting on a post September 11th spin. A charge supported by a high level Intelligence chief in the State Department who has recently retired.
So,... we've been conned. What a surprise. The US and UK can't even agree on their fake evidence.
Isn't it great that after all the accusations of being cynical and naive in equal measure for saying that Iraq didn't pose a threat and it was all a front for justifying the opening of Iraqi oil fields, all the evidence (and indeed, the lack of it) points precisely to that conclusion?
The goalposts have been consistently moving throughout this affair, from WMD, to the Moral Case (How can *war* ever be moral? What fucking planet are these people on?), and now from Blair being confident of finding evidence of WMD, he's confident of finding evidence of WMD Programmes. So they want to find documents now rather than weapons. Great. What "clear and immediate danger" does a document present?
Not much, certainly not enough to go to war over, and yet you feel that Bush and Blair are going to get away with it, and won't be held accountable. Saddam is gone, and the Iraqi people are "free" - free to get steamrollered by American corporations, that is. Who cares if we exaggerated a little about the threat? The ends justify the means, right? BULLSHIT. *ALL* OF IT.
Michael Moore is right - these are fictious times - where those that speak the truth are pilloried as naifs and subversives - and being a liberal is the moral equivalent of being a Terrorist Sympathiser.
What a fucking world we live in.