The Gonzocon Terror Lie - by Martin Kelly

Excuse me if I sound irritable, but according to the gonzocons, I should by now be under a pile of smoking rubble. We're having the British general election today.

On Sept. 25 last year, gonzocon spiritual director Michael Novak gushingly reported the pearls of wisdom that the disgraced liar and now thankfully ex-prime minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar, had dropped his way. The previous morning, the "pocket-sized El Cid" had been a breakfast guest at Gonzocon Central.

Now, the consensus among the Spanish people seems to be that Jose Maria Aznar doesn't know jack, or even Juan, about anything. After his disgusting performance in the aftermath of the Madrid train bombings, one would hope that if he were to tell reasonable men the sun would shine on the hottest day of the year, they would go out and buy umbrellas. But Blessed Michael of the Dividends was lapping it up.

To quote:

"[Aznar] predicted three spectacular terrorist events in the near future. First, a major destructive action in the United States before election day on Nov. 2, possibly during the last 72 hours, for massive effect in causing confusion and commotion. Second, a dramatic escalation of action in Iraq leading up to Nov. 2, and again in late December and early January to head off the Iraqi election at the end of January. Third, a spectacular attack in the United Kingdom next May to disrupt the reelection campaign of PM Tony Blair."

So far, the only incidence of terrorism to have affected either the American or British election campaigns has been the explosion of a device so crude that no self-respecting terror fiend would want to be seen either dead or alive with it, outside the British consulate in New York City, in the middle of the night, which destroyed a flowerpot. And broke some windows.

Look at those words again: major destructive action, massive effect, dramatic escalation of action, spectacular attack. The men who first of all spoke them and then went to the trouble of writing them down are both either (a) seriously deluded, or (b) telling lies.

On the balance of probabilities, one is inclined to the latter view. Lies seem to come quite easily from the pens of some gonzocons, such as Krusty the Klown and Sideshow Bob, or The Man with the Golden Gun and Knickknack. The manipulation and distortion of reality to achieve what they want, in these cases the reelection of George W. Bush and Tony Blair, is a central tenet of the loopy Straussian guff that forms a big part of the gray goo they call their philosophy. It should come as no surprise that people who are taught to tell lies subsequently tell lies.

But why that lie, such a pernicious lie in the aftermath of 9/11? Perhaps Robb Willer of Cornell University was on to something in his seminal "The Effects of Government-Issued Terror Warnings on Presidential Approval Ratings" [.pdf], published on Sept. 30, 2004 in Current Research in Social Psychology. Willer recorded that not only did Bush's approval ratings on security jump after each warning; so did his economic ratings, although to a lesser degree.

Telling lies about the threat of terrorist attacks could have produced a handsome payback for Bush at the polls.

But gonzocons are so committed to getting and keeping power that they will recycle the same lie again and again and again. They were even at it in the May 1 Sunday Telegraph, with David Bamber and Andrew Alderson proclaiming "Police Step Up Security Against al-Qaeda Election Day Attack."

Quick, quick – hide behind the flowerpots!

There is no denying that there are Islamists out there who would be delighted to see Western democracy blown away. There is no denying that these people have a barbaric, medieval mentality that sees no harm in killing old men and lassies just to make their point. Sept. 11 was a catastrophic failure of both policy and administration that was years in the making. If credit deserves to be given to security services for foiling attacks, it is begrudged because of the habitual and cavalier disregard for ancient civil liberties exhibited by the American and British governments in knee-jerk reactions to their own failings.

The circumstances of David Kelly's death mean that the rehabilitation of the British security services will take years.

As for the Spanish, well, they committed the cardinal sin. They dumped poor old gonzocon Aznar. Olé! For their crime, they suffered the indignity of being called "cowards" and "appeasers" by a sextet of fascists, whose numbers included the ethically challenged, a Valkyrie, and a holy felon, all courtesy of the Heritage Foundation.

The gonzoconslied to the American people that they, too, would be attacked like the Spanish. No decent American should believe anything any of them say ever again. What they would have said about Americans if John Kerry had won just doesn't bear thinking about.