or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| What can we take seriously? |
Itsdb |
10/26/04 |
The Times is apparently devoting this week's headlines to boost the Kerry campaign. Yesterday, they led with the story of missing explosives in Iraq. Today they continue with the 'story', in which they quote Kerry as saying, "Now we know that our country and our troops are less safe because this president failed to do the basics...This is one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration. The incredible incompetence of this president and his administration has put our troops at risk and put our country at greater risk than we ought to be."
The Times also quoted Edwards' attack on the President, "It is reckless and irresponsible to fail to protect and safeguard one of the largest weapons sites in the country. And by either ignoring these mistakes or being clueless about them, George Bush has failed. He has failed as our commander in chief; he has failed as president."
However, last night NBC reported the weapons were missing when the US arrived at Al Qaqaa, citing their embedded reporter that was with the troops when they arrived.
NBC News Said Explosives Were Gone When US Troops Arrived
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
October 26, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - NBC News reported Monday night that 380 tons of missing explosives were already gone when U.S. troops arrived at the Al-Qaqaa weapons installation in April 2003 - one day after Saddam's government was toppled.
NBC should know. It had a reporter embedded with the U.S. troops when they arrived at Al-Qaqaa in April 2003.
While the Kerry campaign blasted the Bush administration for "stunning incompetence" on Monday, many Bush supporters questioned the timing of Monday's New York Times report about the missing explosives -- coming as it did just eight days before the presidential election.
NBC News Correspondent Jim Miklaszewski suggested a political motive as well: In his report on the missing explosives Monday night, he quoted one official as saying, "Recent disagreements between the administration and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency makes this announcement appear highly political."
According to the New York Times, the IAEA said it had warned the Bush administration about the need to secure the Al-Qaqaa facility both before and after the war.
In a follow-up report on Tuesday, the New York Times did not mention the fact that NBC had an embedded reporter on the scene when the missing explosives were discovered -- the day after Baghdad fell.
Tuesday's New York Times report -- entitled "Iraq Explosives Become Issue in Campaign" -- covers how the Bush administration "sought to explain the disappearance of 380 tons of high explosives in Iraq that American forces were supposed to secure."
Bush's aides, the Tuesday article said, "tried to explain why American forces had ignored warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency about the vulnerability of the huge stockpile of high explosives, whose disappearance was first reported on Monday by CBS and The New York Times."
The New York Times report portrayed the Bush administration as being on the defensive -- trying to "minimize the importance of the loss" of the military explosives.
The report noted that President Bush "never mentioned the disappearance of the high explosives during a long campaign speech in Greeley, Colo., about battling terrorism."
"There are certainly some questions about when the explosives were missing," Kerry campaign adviser Howard Wolfson admitted on Fox & Friends early Tuesday morning. But the Kerry campaign is not expected to let the matter drop.
In a press release late Monday night, the Kerry campaign accused the Bush campaign of trying to cover up its "failure" to secure the explosives.
"Instead of distorting John Kerry's words, the Bush campaign is now falsely and deliberately twisting the reports of journalists. It is the latest pathetic excuse from an administration that never admits a mistake, no matter how disastrous," Kerry-Edwards senior advisor Joe Lockhart said."
The NY Times failed to mention there is another side to this story. The NY Times also today published a story portraying Bush as a hypocrite regarding his faith, and 2 of their 3 editorials are anti-Bush. Has the media ever worked so hard at electing one candidate while destroying another as they have in this campaign? Will Kerry's headline and distortion driven campaign succeed, or will it backfire?
Steve
P.S. Bobby, if you need more context follow the links. |
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
