Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT: Bush "plainly dishonest"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:16 AM
Original message
NYT: Bush "plainly dishonest"
Of all the ways Mr. Bush persuaded Americans to back the invasion of Iraq last year, the most plainly dishonest was his effort to link his war of choice with the battle against terrorists worldwide. While it's possible that Mr. Bush and his top advisers really believed that there were chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in Iraq, they should have known all along that there was no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. No serious intelligence analyst believed the connection existed; Richard Clarke, the former antiterrorism chief, wrote in his book that Mr. Bush had been told just that.

<snip>

This is not just a matter of the president's diminishing credibility, although that's disturbing enough. The war on terror has actually suffered as the conflict in Iraq has diverted military and intelligence resources from places like Afghanistan, where there could really be Qaeda forces, including Mr. bin Laden.

Mr. Bush is right when he says he cannot be blamed for everything that happened on or before Sept. 11, 2001. But he is responsible for the administration's actions since then. That includes, inexcusably, selling the false Iraq-Qaeda claim to Americans. There are two unpleasant alternatives: either Mr. Bush knew he was not telling the truth, or he has a capacity for politically motivated self-deception that is terrifying in the post-9/11 world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/17/opinion/17THU1.html




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. nice, when I see that or similar in the Wash Post and the WSJ
I will know its over. Right now, the NYT is too often dismissed as part of the liberal media. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amber dog democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Still, its nice to see this in print.
We may never see a WSJ concurrance until AFTER the chimp is voted out.
That is, if the next election is not stolen too.
Nice comment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neebob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. It doesn't say Bush is plainly dishonest
but that his effort to link Iraq with terrorism was the most plainly dishonest of all the ways he persuaded Americans to back the invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
4. nice that the NYTimes was willing to be the megaphone
for the whitehouse sales pitch.

And so, the grey lady attempts to preserve her tarnished reputation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Her reputation's not just tarnished
It's corroded, discolored and flaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
5. He was plainly dishonest before the invasion, too.
Not that anyone in the media will ever admit to being a mouthpiece for power, of course.

Still, it's nice to see that the obvious truth can sometimes be printed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC