Monday, June 13, 2005
Our Letter to the New Public Editor of the NY Times
Dear Sirs,
Re: "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made" By DAVID E. SANGER Published: June 13, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/13/politics/13downing.html
Does the Times really contend that the phrase "no political decisions" in a briefing document written July 21, 2002 in anticipation of a July 23, 2002 meeting erases and supersedes what was said at the actual meeting itself on the 23rd? A meeting in which the head of British Intelligence told Prime Minister Tony Blair that in "his recent talks in Washington" he'd discovered that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy"?
A meeting in which the British Defense Secretary reported that "he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections"?
A meeting in which one of the military options being planned was a U.S. "continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli"?
A meeting in which the British Foreign Secretary said "it seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin"? And went on to suggest "an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors" to "help with the legal justification for the use of force"?
Yet the Times trumpets "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made"?
We have truly entered the Twilight Zone.
Regards,
Editor
www.201k.com
Re: "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made" By DAVID E. SANGER Published: June 13, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/13/politics/13downing.html
Does the Times really contend that the phrase "no political decisions" in a briefing document written July 21, 2002 in anticipation of a July 23, 2002 meeting erases and supersedes what was said at the actual meeting itself on the 23rd? A meeting in which the head of British Intelligence told Prime Minister Tony Blair that in "his recent talks in Washington" he'd discovered that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy"?
A meeting in which the British Defense Secretary reported that "he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections"?
A meeting in which one of the military options being planned was a U.S. "continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli"?
A meeting in which the British Foreign Secretary said "it seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin"? And went on to suggest "an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors" to "help with the legal justification for the use of force"?
Yet the Times trumpets "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made"?
We have truly entered the Twilight Zone.
Regards,
Editor
www.201k.com
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Thanks for the bitter laugh, and for the attempt to deliver a good slap upside the head of Sanger et editors.
Is the NY Times having a little hissy fit because the WaPo beat them to this story? Good god, it was only lying around for a month or so before any mainstream outlet deigned to touch it. Sheesh.
Post a Comment
Is the NY Times having a little hissy fit because the WaPo beat them to this story? Good god, it was only lying around for a month or so before any mainstream outlet deigned to touch it. Sheesh.
Links to this post:
<< Home
