Anatomy Of A Lie - Op/Ed by Ted Rall

NEW YORK--On Sept. 18, George W. Bush knew that he had gone too far. A Washington Post poll showed that, thanks to his statements, 70 percent of Americans thought that Saddam Hussein--not Osama bin Laden--was behind 9/11. With the press leaning on him to put up or 'fess up, he ordered his henchmen to backpedal. Asked whether there was a link between Saddam and 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld said: "I've not seen any indication that would lead me to believe that I could say that." Bush chimed in: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th. "We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein...had either direction or control of 9/11," affirmed Condoleeza Rice.

Along with his $87 billion request to Congress for Iraq spending, his admitting the lack of a Saddam-9/11 connection caused Bush's ABC News approval rating to plummet from 58 percent in September to 47 percent in October. The truth didn't play well. Therefore, relying on H.L. Mencken's observation that no one ever went broke overestimating the stupidity of the American public, Bush has returned to the same old lies he has already admitted.

On Oct. 10, without offering a smidgen of new evidence, Dick Cheney again asserted a connection between 9/11 and Operation Iraqi Fiefdom. "Iraq has become the central front in the war on terror. Our mission in Iraq is a great undertaking and part of a larger mission that the United States accepted now more than two years ago. September 11, 2001 changed everything for this country."

Although no evidence of weapons of mass destruction has been found in Iraq, Cheney also reverted to the White House's pre-war argument for preemptive invasion: "We could not accept the grave danger of Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies turning weapons of mass destruction against us or our friends or allies." Saddam = terrorism = 9/11 but even worse.

more