REVISIONIST HISTORY
DAMAGE CONTROL IN FULL SWING

By: Ed Henry

It is becoming more and more obvious that the government either 
controls media content or the kingpins of media have decided to fully 
support the government's position on anything that matters while 
ignoring, ridiculing, deflecting or distracting from, and minimizing 
anything that opposes the government. And, thanks to Colin Powell's 
son Michael, this situation is about to be strengthened through the 
relaxation of FCC rules and the consolidation of kingpins.  

While I was proofing this overdue article, TBRNews.org released an 
article titled "Controlling the News" that is loaded with memos leaked 
by one of the executives of a major television news network. Twelve 
pages of snippets from these memos are well worth reading. You can scroll 
past the first four pages dealing with verification, but you will eventually 
want to see how they settled the authenticity of this data.  

The real question, a question that will never be asked and can never 
be answered, is what would have happened if the United Nations 
inspections had been allowed to continue unhindered. What would have 
happened if President George W. Bush, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, 
and others had not tried to bully the UN Security Council into declaring 
war on Iraq and, having failed to win their case, went off on their own 
to invade a sovereign nation?  

Without inspectors finding weapons of mass destruction, if Iraq were 
given a clean bill of health, do you really believe that George W. Bush 
would have allowed the twelve year sanctions to be lifted?  

After the deaths of more than a half million children attributed to 
the embargo, would that have meant Saddam won? Could Bush have 
tolerated that?  

Wouldn't it mean that Iraq's Ambassador to the United Nations had 
been right all along when he repeatedly said Iraq has no nuclear 
program or weapons of mass destruction? Yes, we have no bananas, so 
how can we prove they've been eliminated? Better yet, can you prove 
that you were not the one who cut the cheese in the elevator?  

At least one UN inspector that the media vilified, Scott Ritter, 
claimed that 96 percent of Iraq's weapons had been found and destroyed 
by 1996. Has anyone seen data on the number destroyed compared to the 
amount Iraq once possessed?  

From the get-go, wasn't it President Bush's position that Saddam 
Hussein and his family must go, that we must have "regime change" 
and didn't that eventually evolve into "Operation Iraqi Freedom?"  

The justification for war changed, but weapons of mass destruction 
were always the primary reason we couldn't wait. We were told that 
Iraq could unleash these devastating weapons in 45 minutes.  

If the UN inspectors had eventually given Iraq a clean bill of health, 
would we have pushed for the disarmament of civilians as we are doing 
now and in contrast to our own Second Amendment to our own 
Constitution and rapidly disappearing Bill of Rights?  

At one time, we were told that the Iraqi people would fall all over 
themselves welcoming invading forces that got rid of a dictator who 
had so mistreated them? Didn't the man with a ranch only a few miles 
from Waco continually remind us of how Saddam had used weapons of mass 
destruction against his own people?  

In apparent contrast, were we not also told that Saddam Hussein was 
passing out rifles to every house in Baghdad and that our boys could 
expect heavy door-to-door resistance once we marched into their 
capitol, that gun shops were doing a booming business in small arms, 
even selling fully automatic weapons without waiting periods, in a form 
of freedom no longer enjoyed in our own country?  

In effect, Saddam was arming the very people who despised him and 
would probably like to see him dead, his own enemies that he had been 
keeping in check by brute force and with threats against family 
members spread all over the place. I guess they now deserve to lose 
these small arms because they didn't use them to overthrow their 
government.  

Wasn't that the reason we thought Iraq's nuclear scientists or those 
involved with the development of weapons of mass destruction would 
reveal all sorts of things if we could just interview them outside 
the country, in safety, and assure them of the safety of their family 
members? Now that Saddam is gone aren't they free from reprisal?  

Just one or two of these insiders would have been enough to tell us 
all about Saddam's weapons programs, hiding places, and even his 
connection to the al Qaeda. They certainly have nothing to lose now, 
do they?  

Most importantly, for nine months or better we were told, in detail, 
about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Experts of all sorts were 
trotted before cameras to tell us about the dangers of these weapons 
in the hands of Saddam.  

Day and night, seven days a week, major news networks like CNN and 
Fox News devoted full time to "The War on Iraq" and "Attack
Iraq" 
interviewing almost anyone who had anything nasty to say about 
Saddam and the need to get rid of him while completely ignoring 
opposing viewpoints or making fun of Hollywood protestors who used 
their camera opportunities and presence to object to the invasion 
of a sovereign nation.  

And we had a president who bounced around the country as though he 
had nothing to fear from 9/11 type terrorists and setting records as 
the only president in history to use the media for daily presentations 
of the evils of Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. An implied 
threat he deftly wove into any situation from schools to union meetings. 
Are we supposed to forget that now?  

As the National Security Council meetings intensified, so did the 
rhetoric. It got to the point that we were presenting evidence obviously 
fabricated and sending UN inspectors on errands the foreign press 
reported as "wild goose chases." Even some of the UN inspectors said 
that the intelligence they received was "garbage."  

At several stages, it got to the point where I personally felt that if 
I heard the words "weapons of mass destruction" one more time I
would puke.  

And where are we now?

It's been more than two months since 250,000 troops overran the 
pipsqueak nation without being gassed, nuked, booby-trapped, bombed, 
hit with scud missiles, drones, sand-bagged, or greeted with anything 
now called "unconventional weapons" other than the depleted uranium 
we left behind last time. DU that both we and the British used again 
during this new invasion and is believed to be the cause of Gulf War 
Syndrome with some 30,000 U.S. soldiers that the Pentagon refuses to 
acknowledge.  

No weapons of mass destruction found. Nothing whatsoever, not even 
in Donald Rumsfeld's roadmap to places he assured us held huge caches 
of these deadly devices and Bush enumerated by the ton.  

Military strategists who once warned us that when backed into a 
corner Saddam Hussein would probably unleash everything he had 
in his secret arsenals are now conspicuously silent. Maybe the 
Iraqis didn't know we were coming.  

The Internet and foreign news is loaded with accusations of an 
illegal war and lies about weapons of mass destruction, even the 
possible impeachment of George W. Bush. But the American media 
is still supporting the old story.  

The infamous polls, usually used to sway elections, are now claiming 
that sixty or seventy percent of the American people believe it was a 
just war and weapons of mass destruction will eventually be found.  

It may take years, but eventually we'll be shown documentation other 
than a few birthday cards from Osama bin Laden and more probably a 
"drop gun" documentary produced by George Lucas and Steven Spielberg 
students. Americans will probably believe it, but not many in the 
rest of the world.  

Perhaps sending 1,400 new Pentagon inspectors into Iraq will speed 
things up, but wasn't that what the French suggested before the 
invasion and before the media started ridiculing and vilifying them 
as a bunch of sissy wimps?  

We always said that Saddam Hussein was an expert at hiding things. 
Maybe, the Iraqis spent so much last minute time and energy hiding 
their chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction that they 
didnAEt have energy left to fight off invaders. Or maybe Saddam stuffed 
all these weapons in his pockets when he and his family disappeared.  

When the American media does talk lightly about the uproar raging in 
the rest of the world it's usually in the context of our entering an 
age of confusion and no one knows who to blame, even that our highly 
funded intelligence forces are more or less efficient depending on 
which political party is in power. And the Emperor has no clothes.  

Suddenly, FBI, CIA, NIA, and other agents are popping up with claims 
that they tried to warn the administration that there wasn't any direct 
or conclusive evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, a 
nuclear program, or any connection to the al Qaeda. But that doesn't 
mean Saddam wasn't a bad ass that needed to be overthrown.  

Paul Wolfowitz now claims that "weapons of mass destruction" was 
nothing more than a campaign slogan. Nothing more than the one thing 
everyone in the inner circle could agree would be acceptable justification 
for a pre-emptive strike. In other words, as long as it sells it doesn't 
matter if it delivers or if it's true. Run it up the flagpole and see if 
anyone salutes. Promise anything, but give her Arpege (oil).  

It's actually getting Kafkaesque. When Germany refused to enter the 
"coalition of the willing" Colin Powell warned they were "isolating 
themselves." Who is isolated now?  

With the looting, vandalism, pockets of resistance, tribal differences, 
lack of infrastructure, general chaos and non-acceptance of democracy 
that seems to be increasing rather than diminishing, it looks like the 
Iraqi people have merely traded one oppressor for another. We are 
imposing the same rule by military force that Saddam imposed and 
causing the same problems Israel created in Jerusalem and the West 
Bank.  

Now we're supposed to just sit back, shut up, and wave our flags as the 
CIA attempts to incite insurrection in Iran as another regime change. 
And if that doesn't work, we are already being told that the "last 
resort" of military intervention may be necessary. Hail the Empire.  

In response to a world demanding to know where the "weapons of mass 
destruction" are, our President recently responded with; "Now there are 
some who would like to rewrite historyurevisionist historians is what I 
like to call them." We should all be asking who tried to rewrite history 
and no one should settle for glib answers.  


"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this  
notice and hyperlink intact."

Ed Henry is the founder of TUFF, the Taxpayers Union, and a regular
columnist for Ether Zone.

Published in the June 23, 2003 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright (c) 1997 - 2003 Ether Zone. 

                           -==-

Source: Ether Zone - http://etherzone.com/2003/henr062303.shtml


Cheers, Steve..

---