* "(Reuters) - The Pentagon's inspector general has agreed to review the prewar intelligence activities of former U.S. defense undersecretary Douglas Feith, a main architect of the Iraq war, congressional officials said on Thursday." (link)
oh boy. another can o' worms.
* i plan, one day, to watch fox all day (probably with the sound off) and write down all the text captions that they put at the bottom of the screen - im particularly interested in the captions with question marks. they are now doing a piece on iran - the text on the screen has been up for about 10 minutes "will iran cause ww3?" - then they switched to a different story with a picture of kofi with the text "what nerve!", and after that they had a presidential pic of the president - text: "war on bush: bad for america and bad for stocks?"
* yesterday i mentioned the outrageous whitehouse response to the nyt's editorial where they called Blinky a liar. dan froomkin has more: " In the cover letter to a memo ostensibly "setting the record straight," the press office wrote: "On Tuesday we were greeted by an editorial from the newspaper that gave us Jayson Blair. 'Decoding Mr. Bush's Denial' is so replete with half-truths, misstatements, and false statements that it boggles the mind, until one recalls whence it came.""
* ""On Thursday, more than a half-dozen more Bush administration officials sent word, directly or indirectly, that they had not been Mr. Woodward's source. They included Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser; Marc Grossman, the former undersecretary of state; Douglas Feith, the former undersecretary of defense for policy; and Eric Edelman, the former deputy national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, who has succeeded Mr. Feith at the Pentagon." (link)
* and froomkin also noted the headline that i mentioned yesterday: "Here's my favorite headline in ages: 'Source: Cheney Isn't Woodward's Source,' over a John Solomon story for the Associated Press." (link)
* i still dont accept the official version of traitorgate - as mendacious and vindictive as the egadmin is, the idea that they went to so much trouble to discredit a 'critic of the war' simply doesnt make sense.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment