Woodward Affirms Bush Is a Liar

[TomInTib]

I found the back-and-forth between David Corn & Bob Woodward fascinating today.

What I found most fascinating, though, is what Corn dragged out of Woodward, who defends himself by pointing out all the times in his book that he wrote that Bush was telling his close advisors and Tony Blair that we were going to war, while at the same time publicly maintaining that we were searching for peace.

In other words, Woodward defends himself by pointing out, in numerous ways, that George W. Bush is a liar.

Now the fact that Bush is a liar comes as no shock to HuffPost readers, and certainly not to the multitudes who have perused my little posts over these past months, or gone to the web site I co-founded.

But I am puzzled--you see, I read the Washington Post every single morning, and for the life of me I can't remember the big front-page headlines where the biggest-name reporter in the Western World specifically called George W. Bush a liar about the biggest issue facing America.

And if Bob Woodward called Bush & Cheney out on one of his numerous TV appearances, I sure didn't hear about that, either.

more from www.huffingtonpost.com :

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-cobble/woodward-affirms-bush-is-_b_18624.html

[JuniperLea]

1. Oh, right... it was all about you

"Now the fact that Bush is a liar comes as no shock to HuffPost readers, and certainly not to the multitudes who have perused my little posts over these past months, or gone to the web site I co-founded."

I'm getting more and more annoyed with HuffPost.

[faithnotgreed]

2. are you referring to steve cobble - the author of that blog - or

huffpost in general

thanks juniperx
just wondering what your thoughts are on huffpost

[TomInTib]

3. I was just going to ask the same thing. nt

[JuniperLea]

4. Sorry... should have been more specific

HuffPost in general is creeping me out lately, but the other comment was for the blogger... and the fact that HuffPost could post such a stupid blog snip... argh!

[Peace Patriot]

5. I don't see the harm in pushing his blog--and the OP has an important

point to make. Woodward and the rest of the war profiteering corporate news monopoly lapdogs--and probably most of the Senate and House pro-war voters--knew it was lies. WE knew it was lies. The UN knew it was lies. The UN weapons inspectors knew it was lies. The whole world knew it was lies. Yet Woodward & brethren helped create this weird little "Matrix" in the United States--this delusion that really fooled almost no one (58% of the American people opposed the Iraq war BEFORE the invasion, Feb. '03)--that there was some doubt Iraq and WMDs, that "mushroom clouds" might be coming our way, that the UN weapons inspectors shouldn't have a few more weeks to finish their job, and we just had to go in and slaughter tens of thousands of innocent people, and spend billions and billions and billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to Bush/Cheney pals and to other pet DC military-industrial corporations.

I don't think they ever intended to convince anybody--not really. I think they just go for a smooth newsstream narrative to make it LOOK LIKE somebody or other agrees. And they do what they want--whether it's war, or more tax cuts for the rich, or deregulation profiteering, or corrupting and destroying our election system.

The NYT and WaPo conspired in it. They were the chief propagandists for this phony WMD "crisis" that only slaughtering innocent people, torturing prisoners, and a few people getting very rich, could solve. But journalism isn't anything real any more. It's just a game of illusions. I knew that on November 3, 2004.

Why didn't Woodward shout the truth in headlines in WaPo? It's absurd even to dream of such a thing, isn't it? But now they'll all start making money off the scandals--so long as it doesn't seriously disturb their tax breaks.

It makes you wonder about Watergate.

[glitch]

6. I think you are correct on every point, but especially

"I don't think they ever intended to convince anybody--not really. I think they just go for a smooth newsstream narrative to make it LOOK LIKE somebody or other agrees. And they do what they want--whether it's war, or more tax cuts for the rich, or deregulation profiteering, or corrupting and destroying our election system."

[radio4progressives]

7. Well.. i just read it..

Both David Corn and Bob Woodward are agents working for the same master, and both are masters of deception.

David pretends to be the "journalist" from the Left pov, and Woodward for the mainstream pov. They are both disinformation artists.

I thought there would something incredibly revealing in that exchange and it's nothing but a lot of self congratulatory pats on each others back in between a phony sparring.. absolutely nothing of real significance was revealed by Corn that amounts to freaking hill of beans.

Both of these fucking bastards knew this administrations agenda back in 1999/2000 and the moment the Bush Crime family entered the white house - plan of attack was the PNAC plan - Woodward and Corn should have done everything in their fucking power in 1999 and 2000 to expose these this then and to keep amplifing with every single event, speech etc that revealed these plans to go to war in Iraq.

I have nothing but contempt for both of them, and yes i have Corns' Bush's Lies - big deal - he published it way too late to mean anything.