Friday, September 19, 2003
Media starting to pile on...
Yep, the Big Lies are unravelling.... The LA Times editorializes:
Still though...
The interesting thing about this growing media firestorm is that it is the 16 words all over again. That firestorm, too, exploded only after the administration (in this case, Ari Fleischer in his last days at the White House) admitted, well, a mistake.
It's hard for me to believe, then or now, that the admission was accidental. This administration hardly ever admits anything, let alone error.
But why did Bush say what he did? What was Rove thinking? Are they trying to make nice with the UN and the Europeans? Who would fall for that?
So Which Story Is It?
President Bush's declaration Wednesday that Saddam Hussein had Al Qaeda ties but that there was "no evidence" he was linked to 9/11 had an Alice-in-Wonderland quality. Only a few days earlier, Vice President Dick Cheney on national television had expanded the administration's claims, hinting darkly that Hussein's security forces might have been involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and that Iraq was at "the heart of the base" of the terrorist threat that culminated in Sept. 11.
Who is the public supposed to believe, Bush or Cheney? In delivering a different message depending on what day of the week it is, the administration is shredding whatever remains of its credibility on Iraq.
Still though...
The interesting thing about this growing media firestorm is that it is the 16 words all over again. That firestorm, too, exploded only after the administration (in this case, Ari Fleischer in his last days at the White House) admitted, well, a mistake.
It's hard for me to believe, then or now, that the admission was accidental. This administration hardly ever admits anything, let alone error.
But why did Bush say what he did? What was Rove thinking? Are they trying to make nice with the UN and the Europeans? Who would fall for that?
