If the press treated the Bush administration fairly,
which they don't, they'd admit Sabri actually STRENGTHENED
the case of people who said Iraq had WMDs, not undercut
it. But CNN, like most of the mainstream media, puts
partisanship ahead of accurately reporting facts. All
you're getting when read these sort of articles from
sources like CNN is a kinder, gentler version of the
Democratic Party spin -- and they sit around scratching
their heads and trying to figure out why people don't
trust the mainstream media anymore.
Tyler Drumheller: The Latest Disgruntled Hack In A Line Of Disgruntled Hacks
John Hawkins
Right Wing News
It's like clockwork. Every few months, some disgruntled hack with an ax to grind turns up and vomits up some chunk of information, as often as not, old information, that is supposed to discredit the Bush Administration.
Then the liberals in the media latch onto it, blow it up way out of proportion, and try to bury anything might contradict the anti-Bush meme.
A few days later, after conservatives in the new media drills holes through the story, the MSM belatedly reports the new facts and slinks away from the story like craven jackals, leaving it to be gnawed upon by liberal bloggers and the MSM again, a few months later, when there isn't quite enough anti-Bush news floating news around.
Let me give you an example.
One of the hot "new" stories out there is from one of the aforementioned disgruntled hacks, former CIA official Tyler Drumheller. Now here's the latest spin that he's putting on an old story via CNN:
<<< "A retired CIA official has accused the Bush administration of ignoring intelligence indicating that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and no active nuclear program before the United States-led coalition invaded it, CBS News said Sunday.
Tyler Drumheller, the former highest-ranking CIA officer in Europe, told "60 Minutes" that the administration "chose to ignore" good intelligence, the network said in a posting on its Web site.
Drumheller said that, before the U.S.-led attack on Iraq in 2003, the White House "ignored crucial information" from Iraq's foreign minister, Naji Sabri, that indicated Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Drumheller said that, when then-CIA Director George Tenet told President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other high-ranking officials that Sabri was providing information, his comments were met with excitement that proved short-lived.
"[The source] told us that there were no active weapons of mass destruction programs," Drumheller is quoted as saying. "The [White House] group that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq war came back and said they were no longer interested. And we said 'Well, what about the intel?' And they said 'Well, this isn't about intel anymore. This is about regime change.' "
Drumheller said the administration officials wanted no more information from Sabri because: "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy."
CBS said the White House declined to respond to the charge and that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said Sabri was just one source and therefore not reliable." >>>
So Iraq's foreign minister told the White House that Iraq had no WMDs and they ignored him? Shocking! Scandalous! Wrong!
Go back just one month and you'll find a story from MSNBC on Sabri with a slightly different spin.
Here's the lede that MSNBC, of course, buried in the article:
<<< "Another key issue was the nuclear question: How far away was Saddam from having a bomb? The CIA said if Saddam obtained enriched uranium, he could build a nuclear bomb in "several months to a year." Sabri said Saddam desperately wanted a bomb, but would need much more time than that. Sabri was more accurate.
On the issue of chemical weapons, the CIA said Saddam had stockpiled as much as "500 metric tons of chemical warfare agents" and had "renewed" production of deadly agents. Sabri said Iraq had stockpiled weapons and had "poison gas" left over from the first Gulf War. Both Sabri and the agency were wrong." >>>
So according to Sabri, Saddam desperately wanted a nuke, had massive stockpiles of chemical weapons, "and had "renewed" production of deadly agents."
If the press treated the Bush administration fairly, which they don't, they'd admit Sabri actually STRENGTHENED the case of people who said Iraq had WMDs, not undercut it. But CNN, like most of the mainstream media, puts partisanship ahead of accurately reporting facts. All you're getting when read these sort of articles from sources like CNN is a kinder, gentler version of the Democratic Party spin -- and they sit around scratching their heads and trying to figure out why people don't trust the mainstream media anymore.
rightwingnews.com
cnn.com
rightwingnews.com |
