Whistleblowing

So, let's dive right into this muck, shall we?

We begin with a heart-warming story about the war from msnbc: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20430153/. Go ahead, take a gander...

Now, that's a truer picture of the Iraq war than you're ever going to get from your AM radio blowhards or the political hacks they shill for. The whole thing is a vast disaster that has attracted the most verminous elements on both sides - i.e., amongst Iraqis and Americans - and where anyone with a hint of virtue has virtually no chance of making a difference. And, when you consider that it's the Bush administration's Justice Department under his old buddy Gonzales (along with, for example, the military they control) that is protecting the vermin and punishing the virtuous, it ought to make anyone reconsider their defense of them and their policies. These people are thugs - sure, they wear suits and vacation at Kennebunkport and are feted with vomitous hagiographies on Fox News - but they are thugs, all the same, and it is largely the manipulability of the public at large that allows them to proceed with their crimes...Oh, and please spare me the "plausible deniablity" claim that is always trotted out in defense: "Well, Bush wouldn't know about this, Cheney wouldn't know, Gonzales wouldn't know - they're too far removed." Please. Cheney's old company is forcibly detaining whistleblowers (not to mention stealing millions, if not billons, in taxpayer money), and you think they don't know? Ah, but perhaps Bush apologists would say I'm putting words in their mouths. So, which is it, then: Bush and his cronies somehow don't know about the widely reported corruption and are thus unwilling to support those trying to end it (which would be yet another sign of their extreme incompetence), or, more likely, they know all about it and are ruthlessly signing off on the efforts to destroy those who speak out against their corporate benefactors/beneficiaries?