However, he does not take sides with his country, the USA, in its conspiracy. Although the President releases a statement Wilson’s investigation, these are contrary to Wilson’s findings. Wilson does not accept the president’s misinterpretation of the findings. He therefore, goes ahead to publish his own account of the investigation, making it available to the public. This therefore, conflicts with Bush’s statement. Wilson was courageous and stood for the truth, not letting anything to compromise his truth. He refused to sit back and watch how the truth was being violated publicly. Therefore, he acted.
By coming out publicly to make the truth available to the people, through publishing this article, I compare Wilson to the philosopher W.D, Ross, who developed a moral system called “intuitionist,” which claims that individuals are inherently aware of their moral obligations (Plaisance 10). Therefore, when Wilson came out fearlessly and published the article, no one had forced him to do so. Deep down, he knew he had the responsibility of performing his moral duties. Ross’ philosophy also holds that a person has a responsibility of honoring their moral standards and principles (Plaisance 10). Therefore, one of Wilson’s moral values must have been truthfulness, which is why he had to honor it by publishing the article to bring out the truth. In this philosophy, Ross also believed that the moral values one must honor include fidelity, justice, not harming others, and self-improvement (Plaisance 10). The values of fidelity, justice, and not harming others coincide with Wilson’s actions. He was against Bush’s propaganda of war with Iraq, since he knew this would cause harm to the Iraqis, as well as the US soldiers, who would die in the war. Wilson upholds justice, because he did not want the USA government to accuse Iraq falsely. Finally, he shows fidelity when he investigates the case, presents truthful findings, and ensures false statements