i dont understand where this thread has gotten to: i dont see how it is that the question of the quality of infotainment cooked down and coalated by the administration is resolved in any way by the question of whether ace happened to believe that information or not. the information was itself false. that this false information resonated with ace's political committments is not about anything except ace's political committments.
the question of intent--which is what is at issue in the use or non-use of the category of "lie"--is obviously problematic. it will not be resolved in a space like this simply because we do not have much in the way of relevant information. here, too, the question is information: and not about whether as you watch tv you are inclined to impute motives to george w. one way or another. the question of intent would be best resolved in a proceeding--and given that the integrity of the system is at issue, i would think impeachment a healthy development--because regardless of the obvious problems that intent poses even within such a hearing, it would nonetheless function to elevate system concerns over the partisan and personal politics of this administration.
another way: insofar as ace's personal relation to the case for this debacle in iraq is concerned, it seems to lean entirely on psychological and political committments---- the argument he makes comes down to: "i cannot accept that this happened. i cannot accept that the evidence presented was false. i believed the case and so it must have been true."
that isnt much of an argument.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|