Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYTs: A Bad Leak (*Co becomes "Mr. Bush" and gets slapped down)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-16-06 09:48 AM
Original message
NYTs: A Bad Leak (*Co becomes "Mr. Bush" and gets slapped down)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/opinion/16sun1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

President Bush says he declassified portions of the prewar intelligence assessment on Iraq because he "wanted people to see the truth" about Iraq's weapons programs and to understand why he kept accusing Saddam Hussein of stockpiling weapons that turned out not to exist. This would be a noble sentiment if it actually bore any relationship to Mr. Bush's actions in this case, or his overall record.

Mr. Bush did not declassify the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq — in any accepted sense of that word — when he authorized I. Lewis Libby Jr., through Vice President Dick Cheney, to talk about it with reporters. He permitted a leak of cherry-picked portions of the report. The declassification came later.

And this president has never shown the slightest interest in disclosure, except when it suits his political purposes. He has run one of the most secretive administrations in American history, consistently withholding information and vital documents not just from the public, but also from Congress. Just the other day, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the House Judiciary Committee that the names of the lawyers who reviewed Mr. Bush's warrantless wiretapping program were a state secret.

<snip>

Since Mr. Bush regularly denounces leakers, the White House has made much of the notion that he did not leak classified information, he declassified it. This explanation strains credulity. Even a president cannot wave a wand and announce that an intelligence report is declassified.

To declassify an intelligence document, officials have to decide whether disclosing the information would jeopardize the sources that provided it or the methods used to gather it. To answer that question, they closely study the origins of the intelligence to be disclosed. Had Mr. Bush done that, he should have seen that the most credible information made it clear that the Niger story was wrong. (In any case, Iraq's supposed attempt to buy uranium from Niger happened four years before the invasion, and failed. The idea that this amounted to a current, aggressive and continuing campaign to build nuclear weapons in 2002 — as Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney called it — is laughable.)

...more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-16-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. Ouch! Poor George!
:rofl:


:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keopeli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-16-06 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. The NYT: too little too late
It's going to take a lot more than simply pointing out the obvious to repair the damage done by supporting the fake and disastrous Iraq War.

But, I guess this is a start...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-16-06 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
3. Wait till they dont bother
with even Mr. and just plain Bush or bush
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC