November 10, 2002

silhouette3.JPG From the desk of Jane Galt:

If you want to write

If you want to write an article calling the President a liar, it behooves you to avoid weasel tricks like this:

George W. Bush does not lie about sex, I suppose--merely about war and peace. Most particularly he has consistently lied about Iraq's nuclear capabilities as well as its missile-delivery capabilities. Take a look at Milbank's gingerly worded page-one October 22 Post story if you doubt me. To cite just two particularly egregious examples, Bush tried to frighten Americans by claiming that Iraq possesses a fleet of unmanned aircraft that could be used "for missions targeting the United States." Previously he insisted that a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency revealed the Iraqis to be "six months away from developing a weapon." Both of these statements are false, but they are working. Nearly three-quarters of Americans surveyed think that Saddam is currently helping Al Qaeda; 71 percent think it is likely he was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Let's deconstruct that, shall we?

Premise:
Bush told Americans that Iraq was close to getting a nuclear weapon, and had a fleet of unmanned aircraft.

Conclusion:
Therefore, Americans believe that Saddaam is helping Al Qaeda and was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks

Assumption:
The American public are drooling idiots who have difficulty understanding the English language in oral or written form, which is why they draw a conclusion from Bush's statement that is, on its face, completely unrelated to the content of the statement

or

The readers of the Nation are drooling idiots who have difficulty understanding the English language in oral or written form, which is why they draw a conclusion from Bush's statement that is, on its face, completely unrelated to the content of the statement. . . which is also why they enjoy reading articles like this one.

Please note that I make no comment on what Bush said, or its veracity. Only Eric Alterman's, which is sadly lacking.

Posted by Jane Galt at November 10, 2002 06:57 PM | TrackBack | Technorati inbound links