Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Two Months Later, Better Than Never, New York Times Covers White House Memo | AfterDowningStreet.org
Two Months Later, Better Than Never, New York Times Covers White House Memo | AfterDowningStreet.org:
"We began making noise about the White House Memo almost two months ago. I don't know if the NY Times finally got mad at Bush blatantly lying or if their lawyers finally gave them the OK to publish without fear of being Dan Rathered, but for one reason or another, two months after citizens began clamoring for coverage, The New York Times has written about the White House Memo and recognized it as evidence that Bush was lying when he recently claimed he had wanted to avoid war (though, of course, the New York Times can't print the word 'lying' and the word 'President' in the same article).
Bush Was Set on Path to War, Memo by British Adviser Says
By DON VAN NATTA Jr., New York Times
"
Not news, of course. As Andrea Mitchell said, anybody who didn't know that the president was intent on going to war no matter what had to be deaf, dumb and blind.
The news (as sadly is so often the case) is that it's being covered by the mainstream ("liberal"????) press.
This, however, is rather startling:
"
The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein.
. . . . . . . .
"
"We began making noise about the White House Memo almost two months ago. I don't know if the NY Times finally got mad at Bush blatantly lying or if their lawyers finally gave them the OK to publish without fear of being Dan Rathered, but for one reason or another, two months after citizens began clamoring for coverage, The New York Times has written about the White House Memo and recognized it as evidence that Bush was lying when he recently claimed he had wanted to avoid war (though, of course, the New York Times can't print the word 'lying' and the word 'President' in the same article).
Bush Was Set on Path to War, Memo by British Adviser Says
By DON VAN NATTA Jr., New York Times
"
Not news, of course. As Andrea Mitchell said, anybody who didn't know that the president was intent on going to war no matter what had to be deaf, dumb and blind.
The news (as sadly is so often the case) is that it's being covered by the mainstream ("liberal"????) press.
This, however, is rather startling:
"
The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein.
. . . . . . . .
"
| |
