The Bush Cult and Their Weapons of Mass Destruction

The Irrational and Unreasonable Decline of the Bush Loyalists

paul angelo
"But we actually did find WMD in Iraq" - say the loyal, alternate reality Bushies, if you even dare mention the pre-invasion lies and exaggerations of the Bush administration. A study released a couple of days ago by the Center for Public Integrity - which catalogs 935 lies about Iraqi WMD and ties to Al Qaeda - has been met with this kind of reaction from conservative bloggers, message board bullies and general conservative Joe Schmos. They believe that WMD were found in Iraq in spite of the fact that Bush himself, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, determined that no WMD had existed for many years. In fact, their belief system has taken on cult-like qualities. The Bush loyalists refusal to believe what the rest of the world, including Bush, can see as fact, would appear to rank these folks as one of the most dedicated of cults.

Let's examine the claim that "we've actually found WMD in Iraq". This, sadly, is a fallacy that has leaked its way into some minds in the general public. A couple of years ago, this absurd claim was even briefly trumpeted, by former Republican Senator, certified weirdo and trained party clown, Rick Santorum. To give the Bush cultists some credit, they didn't totally conjure up this particular falsehood from thin air. The usual basis for the claims of found WMD in Iraq, are the relatively small quantity of Gulf War era chemical weapon shells found in various parts of Iraq. However, the real life existence of these shells does not constitute WMD, and certainly doesn't validate anything Bush, Cheney and company said in the months leading up to the 2003 invasion.

However, undeterred by little things like logic, common sense and their own lying eyes, the Bush cult drives forward fueled by their faith and absolute idiocy. In the minds of these people, some old chemical artillery shell, depleted to the point of uselessness and with no reliable means of delivery, constitutes, in Bush's words, a "unique and urgent threat" to, not only the US, but the entire world. Are these the weapons that Bush and Condi Rice warned us would create "mushroom clouds" over American cities?

Let us not forget another Bush cult theory - that there are massive stockpiles of WMD that were moved to and hidden in Syria. Not surprisingly, there is literally no evidence to support this. But since when has a total lack of evidence deterred conspiratorial conservatives like the Bush cult from running with baseless theories and unsubstantiated stories? Stuff like - tax cuts for the wealthy are the solution to every problem known to man - the media exhibits a liberal bias - waterboarding isn't torture - and that John Kerry joined the Navy, volunteered for combat twice in Vietnam, tricked his navy superiors into giving him various medals and Purple Hearts and magically hypnotized his shipmates into thinking he was heroic - all so he could run for president on his fabricated military honors 35 years later. Oh yeah, and that Ronald Reagan was a great president.

Honestly, there are no bounds to the conservative tendency to totally abandon reality and rationality, and even though they don't mention his name often, nearly all the Republican presidential nominees support most Bush policies wholeheartedly, and have attempted to justify the Iraq mess by using Bush cult tactics. Take Mike Huckabee for example - who demonstrates that you don't have to be some dweeb posting comments on Freerepublic.com to support illogical right wing theories. On Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer in October 2007, Blitzer asked Huckabee if the Bush administration made a mistake by invading Iraq, "knowing everything you know right now, including the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found?" Huckabee responded, "Well, you know, sometimes people say we've never found the weapons. Just because we haven't found them doesn't mean they didn't exist. We haven't found Jimmy Hoffa either, but we know he exists." He then goes on to explain why we shouldn't second guess Bush's decisions. Huckabee made this claim numerous times, even comparing the fruitless search for WMD in Iraq to an Easter egg hunt - Huckabee said during a January 25th debate, "It doesn't mean they weren't there[referring to WMD in Iraq]. Just because you didn't find every Easter egg didn't mean that it wasn't planted." After the debate, when given an opportunity to clarify during an interview by Chris Matthews, Huckabee reiterated his belief that WMD existed in Iraq at the time of invasion and added that, "there's a good chance they may have gone to Jordan".

There you have it. On a certain level, some of what Huckabee says makes sense. Sure, certain things exist but haven't been found yet - like Huckabee's example of Easter eggs we hide with our own hands a half hour before the kids search for them, or Jimmy Hoffa, a man who's actual existence is undisputed. But, what Huckabee is ignoring, just doesn't know, or is purposely taking out of context, is that the very existence of the Iraqi WMD was in dispute from the start. The weapons inspectors themselves disputed many of the Bush administrations claims about stockpiles of WMD in Iraq, such as Hans Blix and Scott Ritter, as well as many in the intelligence community. Contrary to Huckabee and the Bush cultists claims, it was not a given that the WMD existed at that time.

Furthermore, there is zero, zilch, zippo evidence that the weapons were hidden or transported anywhere - much less American ally Jordan - and there was no time in which Saddam would have had an opportunity to do so. These sentiments are expressed clearly in the widely accepted Iraq Survey Group's Duelfer Report. Given that Iraq was probably the most surveilled location on Earth in the months before the invasion, and that inspectors were on the ground, simple common sense dictates to any rational person that it would have been impossible to hide or move large amounts of world threatening weapons without anyone noticing. For the record, the Duelfer Report also judged that Iraq had destroyed its chemical and biological weapons in the 90's, and stopped its nuclear program in 1991.

Honestly, it is disturbing that a major Republican presidential candidate would take the absurd Bush cult position Huckabee has taken on the Iraqi WMD issue. But it is useful in demonstrating just how far off the board many conservatives have fallen. In the Bush cult, conservative fantasy land, up is down, down is up, 2 + 2=5, black is white, war is peace and WMD exist in Iraq because we haven't found them. These people have simply become unreasonable and irrational.

12 Comments

Post a Comment
  • dons ink7/26/2010

    you ppl are very ignorant.u too paul.u keep pressing left wing falshoods u know u got from some other wing nut as truth. its all about what you have not read as opposed to what others have.there were many ways sadaam was connected to terrorist "and" al qaida.there were lots of proof of wmds and almost all dems knew of them and tried to urge clinton to do something physical,BEFORE BUSH WAS EVEN IN OFFICE.i could go into great detail about it...but that would prove fruitless cuz your cult will "never"accept reality if its not your agenda.even if proven to you.

  • paul angelo2/7/2008

    Sure Marquis--this coming from a man who thinks conservatives, not liberals, did more to further civil rights. I've got three words for you Marquis--KNOW YOUR ENEMY. Also, I would go back and take some extra english courses or something, because your articles are full of incomprehensible crap

  • paul angelo2/7/2008

    That is what you were implying when you wrote "despot loving". You see, you prove the point of my article for me--You are being irrational and unreasonable, and frankly, dishonest. Within the context of our discussion, there is nothing else you could mean when you write "despot loving", other than to suggest that people who opposed the all out invasion of Iraq have some affection for dictators like Saddam. How can you deny that? Either be honest or don't write idiotic comments.

  • Tony Vega2/6/2008

    I never said that. You are an angry young man, Mr. Angelo....

  • paul angelo2/6/2008

    Right, because opposing the invasion means you love Saddam. You're a moron.

  • Tony Vega2/6/2008

    I'm just glad the people of my ilk out number the anti-American despot loving crowd.

  • paul angelo2/4/2008

    ... and no, I don't agree with Master Po. Iraq had "WMD" prior to the gulf War--no one ever has disputed that. But that was well before the certified destruction of its stockpiles in the 90's. The question before the latest invasion was over unaccounted for weapons. Before the invasion weapons inspectors were on the ground, and Hans Blix and teh UN were trying to tell the US that "unaccounted for doesn't mean weapons exist". Scott Ritter tried to tell people also--as were some people in Congress. The idea that "everyone thought there were weapons" is a total myth.

  • paul angelo2/4/2008

    The general you speak of has no personal knowledge of the alleged hidden weapons. It's all just stories. There is just no crediblity to this story if you take into account the level of scrutiny being placed on Iraq at the time. It is not even widely believed by people of your ilk

  • Tony Vega2/4/2008

    You wouldn't consider a top general in Saddam's military as credible regarding their own weaponry? And to stay with your theme(about lying)the Dems that said the same thing as Bush are liars as well? So you agree with MaterPo that Saddam possessed and used WMDs ?

  • paul angelo2/2/2008

    Master Po--Just to follow up, March 1988 is when Saddam gassed the Kurds. Maybe do some research before wasting your time.

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.