DEBUNK: Cheney on Meet the Press

Mylanta! This was grotesque. Honestly, it has gotten to the point where I just assume that everything Bush, Cheney, and their administration say is a lie. They could tell me that the sky is blue and I would assume it is grey. (Actually, that is a pretty good analogy for their lies about Iraq and reality in Iraq.)

I usually do one debunk per DEBUNK post, but there is too many lies and false logic in this interview to do a post for each one. This will by no means be a complete debunk of everything in the interview. There were a few particular points that I wanted to hit.

"Last Throes"

Cheney was on Meet the Press lying like it was his job. (Oh, wait... apparently, that is his job.)

On the topic of saying that the insurgency is in its last throes in 2005, Cheney said this:

I think there is no question but that we did not anticipate an insurgency that would last this long.

First of all, duh. Second, plenty of people in the military, in the media, in the government predicted a long insurgency. Cheney was just too stupid to believe them and too stubborn to even prepare for the possibility that he was wrong and they were right.

This kind of hubris and stubbornness before and after they are proven wrong is what angers me more than anything else.

Cheney grudingly admitted that he was wrong in this instance, but he has been asked about this before and, until now, has ignorantly stood by his "last throes" statement. This administration is like children with their unwillingness to admit mistakes and say they are sorry. We have to drag it out of them after months of denial, and even then, they qualify their apology with some lame excuse.

Public Opinion

The Washington Post reported on this interview:

Cheney disputed polls suggesting that a majority of people in the United States do not believe the Bush administration's claim that the war in Iraq is the central front in the fight against terrorism.

This is another example of Bush administration denial of reality, as if reality is a part of some left-wing conspriracy. Well, we liberals will be happy to have reality on our side while they claim lies for their team.

The Washington Post:

"We're here on the fifth anniversary (of the Sept. 11 terror attacks). And there has not been another attack on the United States. And that's not an accident," Cheney said in the broadcast interview.

::Sigh:: This is the most ridiculous kind of false logic. Absence of incident is not proof of security. Simply because A helps prevent B and B does not occur, that does not automatically mean A prevented B.

In fact, A (American security and intelligence) had nothing to do with preventing B (terrorists in the U.K. blowing up planes bound for the U.S.). C (U.K. security and intelligence) prevented B, but that does not stop the Bush administration from carefully parsing their words to imply that A prevented B without saying that A prevented B. When they are questioned on this, they claim they cannot talk about A. They just want us to trust them. Well, what are we supposed to base that trust on? They have lied or been wrong about everything else.

By the way, there were no attacks by foreign terrorists in our country between the WTC bombing in 1993 and 9/11, but I do not hear Cheney giving credit to Clinton for preventing terrorist attacks during that time. Also, Clinton brought those responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing to justice. When is Bush planning on bringing Osama bin Laden to justice.

On Saddam Having Ties To 9/11

I was going to do a debunk of this topic myself, but I found one on another site does a better job than what I would have done. Check out this article from Newsbusters.org.

I will say here that this administration has done everything BUT say that Saddam ordered the 9/11 attacks. Bush stated that his administration has never said that. He choose his words carefully. Yes, they never said that specifically because they knew they would be caught in a lie. They will lie, but not when they know they will easily be caught. They parse their words all the time, so while they never "said" Iraq had ties to 9/11 they implied it constantly. They never said Iraq had ties to 9/11, but they lie about, imply that, or say they cannot say whether or not Iraq had ties to al-Qaida.

They keep doing this despite the fact that the Senate Intelligence Committee's report that says that there was no link between Saddam and al-Qaida. They keep lying despite all the evidence that disproves them because 40% of the public continues to believe and support them. Who are these people and what is wrong with them?!

Saddam Would Be "Sitting On Top Of A Big Pile Of Cash"

Cheney (From the Albany Times Union):

"Think where we'd be if he (Sad dam) was still there. He'd be sitting on top of a big pile of cash, because he'd have $65 and $70 oil. He would by now have taken down the sanctions im posed by the United Nations. He would be a major state sponsor of terror. We also would have a situation where he would have resumed his WMD programs."

This is another example of flawed logic that makes me really angry.

The war in Iraq is the reason we have "$65 and $70 oil," you moron!

I really hate to call people names, but, seriously, this is so unbelievably stupid. This administration does this all the time. They claim we have to be in Iraq because of X, but X exists because we are in Iraq! This is true where X equals:

terrorists in Iraq.

our troops who have died for this cause.

weapon inspectors who could not do their job.

sectarian strife.

the need to keep Iraq from dissolving into civil war.

Iran's rising influence in Iraq.

our need to fight them over there.

the Bush administration's claim that Iraq is the central front on the War on Terror.

al-Qaida being in Iraq.

bin Laden's desire for us to lose in Iraq.

It is immoral for them to say we need to keep fighting to fix the mistakes that they created by fighting in the first place.

...And Many More

Cheney said many more dishonest and upsetting things during this interview, but this is all I can stomach for now. Many of these things have been said many times before by many others in the Bush administration, so don't worry. I will be touching upon them individually in the future.