Media ignored, underreported NY Times disclosure of explosive Bush-Blair memoYeah, it's called telling a lie, over and over. Clinton lied about blowjobs and it was treated as if he sold five of our nuclear bombs to Osama himself! Meanwhile, this memo appears offering evidence that GW was determined to take the U.S. to war against Iraq, regardless of what was found using inspections and diplomatic efforts, and then he lies about it to this date, and yet we hear nothing. No outrage, nothing. So apparently the public considers fibs about blowjobs to be MUCH worse than fibs about going to war on false pretenses (considered treason), resulting in over 2300 dead U.S. soldiers.... Just so I understand....
Since a March 27 New York Times article confirmed that a leaked British memo appears to contradict President Bush's repeated claim prior to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq that he wanted to avoid war, media have failed to note the full significance of the document and in some cases ignored the story altogether.
Bush's positions as reported in the memo -- that U.N. inspectors were unlikely to find weapons, that military action would occur with or without the U.N.'s backing, that the war was unavoidable -- directly contradict many of his public statements in the weeks leading up to the invasion. Between that January 31 meeting and the start of the war on March 19, 2003, the president repeatedly told the American people that he was doing everything possible to avoid military action.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
From Media Matters:
Posted by Grey Matter at 6:09 AM