Washington Post defends Bush, Iraq war against Paul O’Neill’s exposures

[IndianaGreen]

Washington Post defends Bush, Iraq war against Paul O’Neill’s exposures
By David Walsh
16 January 2004

The transformation of the Washington Post into a servile propaganda organ of the most rabid warmongering faction of the Bush administration reflects in a particularly sharp manner the degeneration and degeneracy of the American press. This is the newspaper of the Watergate investigation, after all, during which process its reporters were obliged to grill government officials about Richard Nixon’s crimes against the American people. One can assert without hesitation that the present incarnation of the Post would have fired Woodward and Carl Bernstein before they ever got started.

O’Neill’s account, as far as it goes, rings absolutely true. One has the external activity of the administration—the stealing of a national election, the preparation of an illegal and brutal war that has already cost tens of thousands of lives, the wholesale attacks on democratic rights—with which to compare its “internal” life as presented in O’Neill’s comments. Is there a single aspect of his story—including his vivid descriptions of Bush’s cluelessness—that one has reason to doubt? On the contrary, the situation is far worse and far more advanced than a respectable bourgeois like O’Neill, albeit possessed of a certain honesty, could ever imagine or describe.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/wash-j16.shtml

[PROGRESSIVE1]

1. The Washington Post has become a Neo-Con rag! The NY Times...

at least is half way decent unlike this P.O.S paper. But then, the NY Times is a P.O.S compared to the foreign papers!

[indepat]

5. Surely Kathryn Graham turns over in her grave

[young_at_heart]

6. I used to do their political discussion boards

After Kathryn Graham died I began to notice a major shift and when I was scolded by the moderator (for a very tame rebuttal to a neo-con), I gave up and haven't been back since.

[Thistle42]

2. I agree with you about what has happened with the WP...

I live in the Washington, DC area and have been extremely unhappy with the way it has become a trumpet so to speak for Bush, the war, and the administration. Perhaps I wasn't paying attention,(I lived away for 6 yrs) but it truly is not the same newspaper it once was. Bob Woodward has become "fat" and successful and very much apart of the "establishment" vis a vis his insider reporting of the war. Did anyone really think he was the old Bob Woodward there? I believe Paul O'Neill...there is too much evidence on his side.

[DrBB]

3. When you look up the term "sell-out"

...you'll see a picture of Bob Woodward. And I'm amazed at how far right the editorials (as opposed to the op-eds) have gotten in the WPost. It's a joke. Though they did publish an anti-Perle letter of mine back a year or so ago.

B.t.w., welcome to DU :toast:

[Thistle42]

4. Thanks!

I am happy to have found DU!:hi:

[kclown]

7. Welcome to DU!

The more the merrier.

[fjc]

8. It would be nice if that article contained a link or two...

to the editorials it's complaining about. You'll pardon me if I don't take their analysis at face value.