Oct 21, 2005 15:45
I’m reading a book entitled Eyewitness to a Genocide, in which the author makes the argument that the bureaucratic culture at the UN contributed to the lack of commitment to the conflict in Rwanda. (Whether or not I agree with this argument will be addressed in a later entry.)
I was reminded of this argument as I read an article in the New York Times earlier today. Karen Hughes, sent on a mission by Bush to clean up the US image abroad, was in Jakarta, Indonesia where she was asked by university students why the US tried to “police” the world. She also faced questions about Iraq and Afghanistan, leading students to ask, “Who’s the terrorist? Bush or us?” Hughes responded with the standard Bush fare: The US acted to protect its citizens after 9/11, Sadaam Hussein was a security threat, blah blah blah. I merely skimmed her flawed, progandized reasons because I have heard them all and clearly don’t believe them. But then I went back and read them again.
The Bush administration has been telling these lies for so long that those working under the administration probably believe the untruths by now. Karen Hughes may actually believe that what she stated is truth because she is surrounded by these propagations. Just as UN workers may have sincerely believed that they were making the correct decision of nonintervention in Rwanda, it is probable that Bush cronies believe that they are actually protecting American citizens. I’m not sure which frightens me more: a lying administration or a lying administration that believes its lies.