The Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit center for investigative journalism, finds that in the two years after 9/11, the Bush administration made at least 935 false statements to justify military action.

Neocons like to roll their eyes and claim, in exhausted, put-upon voices, that “everyone thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.” I feel compelled to point out that it took 2 years and 935 statements (plus multiple trips to the UN) precisely because not everyone was convinced: dissenting voices weren’t limited to French newspapers and college campuses, they were also in Time and Newsweek, the House of Representatives and Houses of Parliament, and at the center of multiple high-profile firings and smear campaigns (remember Scott Ritter and Hans Blix?).

In July of 2003 President Bush submitted to a rare press conference, and The Daily Show was kind enough to cover it. It’s a wonderful clip and you should all watch it. In it, Bush explains that the lackluster economy can be blamed on journalists, who have spooked investors with their incessant, um, reporting: Bush complains that every time he turns on his television all he hears and sees is “March to War. March to War. March to War.”

Jon Stewart: “Yeah, why were they doing that? I mean, it’s not like some asshole was marching us to war….“

Tags: 9/11, Bush, Center for Public Integrity, impotent rage, iraq, Rachel Powers, The Daily Show, War

Viewing 9 Comments

Ray Robison 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

A new book shows Saddam did support al Qaeda and the Taliban:

'Both In One Trench: Saddam's Secret Terror Documents'

http://www.bothinonetrench.com

reply edit reblog flag

http://www.bothinonetrench.com

Daniel de Boom 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

"Intelligence officials had serious concerns about turning loose an army of amateurs on a warehouse full of raw documents that include hearsay, disinformation and forgery."

From a NY Times article expressing concern over the source material.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/28/politics/28in...

reply edit reblog flag

http://www.chokinghazardtoycompany.com

Ray Robison 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Yeah, I was in that article and they left out much of my background, and my coauthor who was a military intelligence analyst.

reply edit reblog flag

http://www.bothinonetrench.com

howardx 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

ray
why didnt the US govt put this info out themselves to validate their pre war story? why is it out on some little right wing press? i remain skeptical.

reply edit reblog flag

LBRez 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

The "study" was done by a very left wing group that gets significant support from George Soros--you get what you pay for and Soros knows that. You have to question a "study" that is anti-Bush that is actually questioned by the NYTimes, actually you don't have to question it but should probably just accept it as propoganda and not a "study".

reply edit reblog flag

Kelson 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

... and I thought we were questioning Soros's motivations because he was anti-Putin. It's good, though, to question left-wing organizations because nothing good ever came from their efforts, like weekends, clean air and water, worker safety, or the right to vote. Nothin' but a bunch of rabble rousers.

reply edit reblog flag

howardx 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

lbrez i should have known you'd buy into that anti soros crap, funny how no one ever mentions scaife the rw financial angel, why isnt he bad? i dont question a study about bush's lies at all, we all know he lied to us "very left wing group" or not.

reply edit reblog flag

Rachel Powers 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Soros is a distraction. The fact remains that if Bush was a Democrat the Republican party and Fox News would be SCREAMING FOR HIS HEAD ON A PLATTER. We would be subjected to endless yammering, until we were all bleeding from the ears, about how Democrats have been proven incapable of managing the economy or intelligence or foreign relations or war. Bush, if a Democrat, would be a Republican's wet dream. Admit it, Ray Robinson: we've been screwed but good, and your entire party is going to be fanning themselves in the great steambath called Purgatory for a LONG time for (1) shamelessly demonizing any opposition, and then (2) shamelessly insisting that there WASN'T any opposition after all.

reply edit reblog flag

LBRez 7 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

"a steambath call Purgatory?" Hilarious! Interesting that when it comes to who would scream from the Right Howie comes up with one media outlet, how many can you come up with for when the Left screams? NYT/LAT/Tribune/ABC/MSNBS/CNN/TIME/NEWSWEEK/PBS/WASHPOST....

The whole "Bush lied..." has me laughing so hard at this point, years and years of hatred must be so frustrating. Pool your ridiculous tax rebates and buy another ad in the NYTimes castigating generals or better yet donate them to MoveOn!

Power to "academics" who do "studies" with predefined results!!

reply edit reblog flag