You might remember Bob Woodward as the famed Washington Post investigative journalist, who teamed with Carl Bernstein and disgruntled FBI director W. Mark Felt (better known by the pornographic pseudonym Deep Throat) to help bring down Richard Nixon’s presidency. He has now set his sights on the Bush Administration.

Woodward surprised the publishing world when he released his new book State of Denial, the third installment of Woodward’s Bush at War series, two days prior to its scheduled release date of October 2nd. While the first two books, Bush at War (2002) and Plan of Attack (2004), provided insightful and objective reporting of the stages of the War on Terror, State of Denial is aimed at discrediting the Bush administration using wild accusations and facts that could be considered liberal spin at best and conspiracy theory at worst. It appears that, this time, Bob Woodward is collaborating with Michael Moore rather than Carl Bernstein.

In one of his most searing charges, Woodward dreamed up a July 2001 meeting between then-Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet, the CIA’s counter-terrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, and then-national security advisor Condoleeza Rice. In this meeting, Tenet and Black apparently warned Rice about an impending Al-Qaeda attack on American soil. Black even told Rice what flights were being hijacked and the specific targets. Rice then disclosed the White House’s plan of action to Tenet: A) to tell all the Jews in WTC 1 and 2 not to go to work that day. B) Attach military missiles to each plane and place explosives in WTC 1 and 2, so as to make them collapse.

As Woodward’s account continues, the reader realizes that Condoleeza intentionally disregards all of these warnings because George W. Bush wants to go to war for oil and initiate the Tenth Crusade (with the support of Pope Benedict) against innocent Muslims across the globe … or something like that. Tenet then declares, “Bill Clinton would never stand for something like this; he was a man of action!” before promptly storming out of the room in utter disgust. End Scene.

State of Denial appears to be another effort to rewrite history with the intent of shifting blame for 9/11 from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration. Woodward has joined the ranks of Richard Clarke, Michael Moore and The New York Times as the leaders in this crusade.

The most important tactic of this campaign is to make 9/11 look like Bush’s fault.

The one thing the Clinton Crusaders do not like is being questioned. This is because such questions might make the average American wonder, “Maybe the Clinton administration should have captured Osama bin Laden when the Sudanese government offered him to us in 1997,” or “Gee, maybe tying the hands of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation was not such a good idea, since those guys might need to work together to stop dangerous people … and stuff.”

Bill Clinton himself showed the American public just what happens when questions arise regarding his handling of terror in the 90’s. Below is an excerpt of his interview with Chris Wallace:

Wallace: Why didn’t you do more to stop Osama Bin Laden?

Clinton: [holds breath, stomps feet, crosses arms] Beeeeeeecause …

Well, basically. Clinton attempts to lay the blame on conservatives, who turned Clinton’s anti-terror policies into partisan politics. It was the vast-right-wing-conspiracy, of course, who turned down Bin Laden when the Sudanese offered him to us, not Bill Clinton; he really, really, reallllly wanted to get him.

Clinton interrupted every follow-up question Wallace attempted to ask, ensuring his control over the direction of the debate. He focused on menial details in the path to 9/11 like Somalia in 1993, rather than WTC 1993. He spent the majority of his response distracting viewers with condemnations of Wallace, Murdoch and neo-cons, rather than providing convincing substance.

Clinton’s camp needs men like Bob Woodward and Richard Clarke to fend off challenges to Clinton’s anti-terror credibility and instead shift the responsibility of the 9/11 tragedy on the Bush administration.

If someone questions the cut in intelligence capabilities under the Clinton administration, they respond with the 9/11 memo. If the person in question points out that said memo never warned of an imminent missile attack within the U.S., but did warn of attacks on interests overseas (as was observed under eight years of Clinton), they cry right-wing conspirator.

If someone (correctly) asserts that his strongest anti-terror tactic was lobbing a few cruise missiles into Iraq (even without the support of our allies, the blessing of the U.N. or evidence of any link between Saddam and al-Qaeda), they’ll cite Woodward’s “secret” meeting followed by decrying right-wing conspirators.

There is a reason why conspiracy theories and movies like Loose Change have garnered such a huge following among the American people; a movement that has convinced a third of Americans that the Bush administration could have prevented 9/11. The left wants to believe that the fault of September 11th falls directly in the laps of Bush, Condoleeza and Rumsfeld, not the saintly Clinton.

The famed illusionist Gob Bluth once made an entire boat disappear. The methodology behind an illusion like this is misdirection: getting the crowd to pay attention to the left hand, while you sink the boat with your right. Clinton and his supporters have adopted such an ideology. Clinton and Woodward are attempting the ultimate illusion: if they scream “eight months” long enough, they can make eight years “disappear.”

The Clintonian whitewashing goal makes such conspiracy theories necessary because, without such an illusion, Woodward (et al.) would have to use his Deep Throat to swallow his words.

Billy McMorris is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at wjm27@cornell.edu. John Manetta Once Told Me appears Tuesdays.