You Owe Me A Beer:
This is two weeks old but still pretty interesting: a Washington Post story on the impact of the human brain's tendency to think that "easily recalled things are true." Hat tip: Frank Pasquale.
UPDATE: I should point out that the title of this post, "You Owe Me A Beer," is not accurate. If you're thinking, "hey, I owe Orin Kerr a beer," then that belief is false. I repeat: While you might be thinking that you owe me a beer, in fact you don't. You do not actually owe me a beer.
UPDATE: I should point out that the title of this post, "You Owe Me A Beer," is not accurate. If you're thinking, "hey, I owe Orin Kerr a beer," then that belief is false. I repeat: While you might be thinking that you owe me a beer, in fact you don't. You do not actually owe me a beer.
Orin, I distinctly recall that you owe me 2 beers, ergo it is true. I definiteley recall that.
At your convenience at a place of your choice.
How many people still believe that abandoned refrigerators are a danger to small children, who might crawl in them and become trapped? It was probably true with old-style positive latches, which haven't been used in the US since the advent of magnetic closures more than 50 years ago.
As an experiment, I went around telling people I planned to paint the interior of my house a flat white color. More than half protested it would look "like a hospital" -- although hospital walls haven't been white in the lifetime of anyone I asked.
I thought it was interesting that the actual article was itself full of myths and misstatements, most notably "Bush administration officials have repeatedly tried to connect Iraq with Sept. 11."
Darn, Litigator beat me to it. I think I definately owe him several for all of the entertainment (and help in law school although indirect).
There's a possibly apocryphal story about LBJ in one of his early runs for Congress, telling his campaign manager to spread a rumor that his opponent, er, had sex with pigs. His manager said, "But Lyndon, you know he doesn't have sex with pigs." And LBJ replied, "Yes, but I want to hear him deny it."
Ironically, I think the author of this piece is guilty of the very same abuse of the truth that she decries! Where and when did Pres. Bush accuse Saddam of having a major role in 9/11? I seem to remember a concerted effort to put the blame on Al Queda, not the Iraq regime.
Weird.
As I understand it, the Bush Administration has (1) repeatedly linked Iraq and Al Qaeda, and has (2) specifically denied saying that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. See, for example, here:
So to be clear, the statement "the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda," is not accurate. If you're thinking, "the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda" then that belief is false. I repeat: While you might be thinking that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda, in fact they were not. Saddam did not help orchestrate the attacks.
Only after the fact of getting the war started. Before then it was open season on conflating the two. Please see the official press release from the White House announcing the launch of the Iraq War:
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html
Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Does "including" by itself imply limited to, or could an argument be made that Saddam was part of a terrorist organization that did not commit the attack on 9/11, but still falls under (2) above?
All I can say is that, from the beginning, I, at least, understood that Saddam was not considered to have helped plan or execute the attacks. And I still supported the war.
Anecdotal, I know. But surely there are others?
- Alaska Jack