| About | |
| Contact Us | |
| Articles | |
| Topic Index | |
| Reports | |
| Quotes | |
| On the Web | |
| Links | |
| TW Tracker | |
| Support | |
Times Watch for
October 7, 2004
"Prewar Assertions…Bore No
Resemblance to the Truth."
The Times on Thursday runs a two-column lead story by Douglas Jehl, "U.S. Report Finds Iraqis Eliminated Illicit Arms in 90's," on Charles Duelfer's report on Iraq.
Jehl's summary is fairly matter-of-fact: "Iraq had destroyed its illicit weapons stockpiles within months after the Persian Gulf war of 1991, and its ability to produce such weapons had significantly eroded by the time of the American invasion in 2003, the top American inspector for Iraq said in a report made public Wednesday….The findings uphold Iraq's prewar insistence that it did not possess chemical or biological weapons. They also show the enormous distance between the Bush administration's own prewar assertions, based on reports by American intelligence agencies, and what a 15-month inquiry by American investigators found since the war."
But the Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti found that the early online version of Jehl's story went after the administration in harsher terms: "The three-volume report, totaling more than 900 pages, is viewed as the first authoritative attempt to unravel the mystery posed by Iraq during the crucial years between the end of the Persian Gulf war in 1991 and the American-led war that began in 2003. It adds new weight to what is already a widely accepted view that the most fundamental prewar assertions made by American intelligence agencies about Iraq -- that it possessed chemical and biological weapons, and was reconstituting its nuclear program -- bore no resemblance to the truth."
Perhaps an editor found Jehl's "no resemblance to the truth" conclusion too harsh, for a cleaned-up version of that paragraph appears in Thursday's print edition: "The three-volume report, totaling 918 pages, represented the most authoritative attempt so far to unravel the mystery posed by Iraq between 1991 and 2003, beginning with the point after the Persian Gulf war when Iraq still possessed chemical and biological weapons and an active nuclear-weapons program. The conclusions suggest that the main war aim cited by the White House in March 2003 -- to disarm Iraq, which American intelligence agencies said possessed chemical and biological weapons and was reconstituting its nuclear program -- was based on an outdated view of Iraq's weapons stockpiles."
For the rest of Jehl on the Duelfer report, click here.
• George W. Bush | Duelfer Report | Saddam Hussein | Iraq War | Douglas Jehl
Bush "Out of Touch" With Iraq Realities?
Thursday's front-page story follows Bush to Michigan in "Stump Speech Retooled, Bush Goes on Attack," by Richard Stevenson and David Sanger -- and again takes a
selective interest in polling data, now that polls show Kerry narrowing the gap against Bush: "In a retooled and highly combative stump speech delivered on the day when a new report raised questions about his rationale for going to war, Mr. Bush seemed to be trying to make up ground that polls show he lost during last week's debate."
They pile on the negative reactions to Bush's first debate performance and point out (as if it was somehow surprising) that Bush failed to mention comments from other members of his administration that appear to take issue with his beliefs: "But the speech also gave the president a chance to break the cycle of news articles about his performance in the last debate and to accomplish in a controlled setting what many Republicans have said the president failed to do as forcefully as he needed: draw sharp, compelling differences between his position and record and those of Mr. Kerry. But Mr. Bush was silent on the weapons report. And he made no mention of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld's statement on Monday that he had seen no firm evidence of a link between Mr. Hussein and Al Qaeda, or of the statement by his former top official in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer III, that the United States had not put enough troops into Iraq to secure the country."
Later, Sanger and Stevenson tee-up a Democratic talking point: "The result, many around Mr. Bush concede, is that the president is taking a considerable risk in the next 27 days that he will appear out of touch with the realities on the ground in Iraq -- and indeed Mr. Kerry's campaign quickly sought to exploit that vulnerability on Wednesday."
For the rest of Sanger and Stevenson with Bush on the stump, click here.
• George W. Bush | Campaign 2004 | Iraq War | Polls | David Sanger | Richard Stevenson
"Conservatives" vs. "Independents"
There's a bit of labeling disparity in Sheryl Gay Stolberg's story on a House decision to admonish Majority Leader Tom Delay: "Already, two outside groups -- Democracy 21, an independent watchdog group, and Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest group -- have called for Mr. DeLay to step down as leader."
Stolberg didn't label Democracy 21 as a "liberal public interest group," even though Fred Wertheimer's group has long pushed liberal campaign finance "reform" and received funding from Bush-hating billionaire George Soros.
For the rest of Stolberg's report, click here.
• Rep. Tom DeLay | Labeling Bias | Sheryl Gay Stolberg
E-mail TimesWatch Director, Clay Waters, with TimesWatch feedback at cwaters@mediaresearch.org