Over the past few days, I have been troubled by a number of breaking stories. I wanted to revisit a few that I saw as part of a larger narrative that perhaps someone with a bent toward investigative journalism could either try to confirm or deny.
From this interview with Bush's former ghostwriter, we learn that Bush was fixated on invaded a small push-over country like Iraq to boost his approval ratings, even before he became President. Secondly, we know from this calendar that the Bush Administration started drafting their apparently politically expedient Iraq invasion just as our armed forces were about to capture Osama bin Laden. The implication so far is that through gross negligence and misplaced priorites, we allowed bin Laden to escape.
Now, generally I won't ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence. Unfortunately, we have reports that the current administration refused to fight a known terrorist because it would undermine the support for their desired Iraq war.
What truly worries, frightens, and aggravates me is that these revelations place a small seed of doubt that maybe, just maybe the man who launched the attacks of September 11, 2001 was allowed to escape not because of our negligence, but instead as a calculated move to bolster political support for the war in Iraq.
I realize that this is treading over the conspiracy theory line. While I doubt that any readers here have any first-hand knowledge that can refute this hypothesis, I would be somewhat comforted by evidence that negligence and not politics are responsible for bin Laden's continued freedom.