Read other letters about this article

• Wednesday, December 3, 2008 04:48 PM

  Joan Walsh's slam-dunk editorial (nevermind that the basket is chest-high)

  The only reason I won't praise Walsh's editorial more than I am about to is that Bush is such a sad-sack, easy target, who is inviting this criticism like a dog in heat.

  But Walsh hits each point exactly right. How can anybody take Bush remotely seriously? Is he being deceptive, or just deluded?

  "I wish we'd had better intelligence"? What does that question even mean, in light of Bush giving CIA head what's-his-face a Medal of Freedom?

  Or in light of the fact that Bush used the "yellowcake uranium in Niger" argument in his State of the Union speech long after it had been thoroughly debunked?

  Or in light of revelations that the Bush administration forged letters, doctored evidence, ignored expert recommendations, and based conclusions on the singular testimony of informants they knew were unreliable, or who had a vested interest in giving false information?

  Bush wasn't just the victim of bad intelligence work, he had a willfully poor intellect. Reports from the likes of Bob Woodward and Seymour Hersh suggest Bush didn't even know the difference between Shia and Sunni at the time of invasion.

  There is a very strong case to be made against the entire Bush administration for war crimes. I strongly suggest everybody try to see the film "Taxi to the Dark Side," along with "No End in Sight." Those two films should be MUST VIEWING for every citizen of the United States. There are many other good documentaries on the subject, but those two especially stand out. See them even if you're sick to death of hearing information about the Iraq war, or even if you think you know how bad everything is. They're compelling!

  —Xrandadu Hutman Read Xrandadu Hutman's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel