Thursday, June 05, 2008


Why is that word in the lede of the Reuters story about the Senate Intelligence Committee’s finding that the Bush administration lied us into war in Iraq, as though the many lies they told were a series of innocent errors?
President George W. Bush and his top policymakers misstated Saddam Hussein's links to terrorism and ignored doubts among intelligence agencies about Iraq's arms programs as they made a case for war, the Senate intelligence committee reported on Thursday.
Statements that Iraq had a partnership with al Qaeda were wrong and unsupported by intelligence, the report said.
Our mistake. Our bad.
It said that Bush's and Cheney's assertions that Saddam was prepared to arm terrorist groups with weapons of mass destruction for attacks on the United States contradicted available intelligence.
How embarrassing!

“Unsupported by intelligence.” “Contradicted available intelligence.” So much for all that bullshit we were fed about intelligence failures, huh?

But “misstated,” even as evidence mounts that the administration’s many, many statements about the threat Iraq posed to the United States were “unsupported by” or “contradicted” intelligence? Why is the media so afraid to call lies lies and liars liars?

Labels: , , , ,


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home