When something that comes close to the truth appears in the ideological production complex, it is immediately registered as merely crazy:
(HuffPo)[ Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)] alleged that bin Laden was let go because "the previous administration... knew very well that if they would capture al Qaeda there would be no justification for an invasion in Iraq."Why is it easy to believe in the link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda than Hinchey's claim? The Saddam/Al-Qaeda connection is far more fantastic than the allegation that Bush did not want to capture bin Laden because it would have made his Iraq plans more difficult to enact.
[MSNBC host David Shuster], incredulous, pushed back: "You really believe that?"
"Oh, there's no question about that because the leader of the military operation in the United States called back our military, called them back from going after the head of al Qaeda because there was a sense that they didn't want to capture him."
Shuster began talking over Hinchey: "You can accuse them of malfeasance, you can accuse them of dropping the ball, of having an awful plan, and all of them would be justified, but to suggest that they would deliberately let, deliberately let Osama bin Laden get away so they could justify the war in Iraq... That will strike a lot of people as crazy."