A rant found on Moveon.org? Excerpt from a
Ted Kennedy speech? It could be either, but this is from
Wikipedia's entry for 2003 invasion of Iraq. Just as Google
has emerged as the world's digital information traffic cop, Wikipedia
has pretty much succeeded in establishing itself as America's digital
history book. It's important then that careful
consideration be given to just what goes into this ''historical
record.'' But, I submit, any 10th grader doing a typical social
study assignment for Ms. Pastyface - ''Should Bush be impeached and
then imprisoned for his war on Iraq'' - will trot over to Wikipedia and see Pasty's (what the kids call her) leftwing classroom diatribes validated. End of
discussion.
Somewhere I would expect to see in any honest accounting some mention of (and these are just a smattering) ...
- .... the U.N. Security Council's 15-0 vote in favor of
Resolution 1441 - which supported the U.S.'s threat to go to war
against Saddam Hussein.
- .... polls showing the American public's increasing annoyance with Bush's compliance with UN delaying tactics
- .... names of the UN factotums who were on Saddam Hussein's payroll.
- .... naysayers in Great Britain, France, Germany, and Russia who were similarly being paid off by Saddam.
- .... the nearly unanimous recognition that Saddam's WMDs were a global threat.
- ... speech transcripts of nearly every democrat in congress
as they condemned Iraq for violating UN resolutions, and recognizing
the threat Saddam's WMDs posed to world peace.
I suppose it would be way too much to hope for any mention of Sen. Rockefeller's Zimmerman Telegram-
like plan for destroying Bush's credibility- and the nation's with
it. Sheesh. Who the hell is behind Wikipedia, The History
Channel?
|
