Newsweek Vs The Bush Government: Let's Talk Contradictions...
I'll keep this simple...
Newsweek made some claims that were false or unprovable regarding the treatment of detainees at Guantanomo Bay. They admitted the mistake - despite the story being based on good faith - and made a retraction. The affect of the story was the loss of a few American lives. Which may sound trite, but I don't mean it to be. It is still substantial as all life is precious to those who have it.
The Bush Government made a number of claims to the UN and the world at large in regards to the reasons they felt an invasion of Iraq was necessary. The claims were found to be false. FACT: No WMDs have been found in Iraq. The affect of these claims was the loss of hundreds of thousands of lifes, both American, Iraqi, British, Austrailian, etc, etc. The Bush Government has not once apologised for mis-leading the world and continues to be in power and influences the world.
In response to the apology by Newsweek, the White House had this to say:
"The report has had serious consequences. People have lost their lives. The image of the United States abroad has been damaged," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, is he talking about the lies made by the government regarding Iraq or a legitimate apology at doing something wrong...?
The US government seems blind to the contradiction! Another case of Bush's 'Do as I say, not as I do' policy...It's a world gone mad for sure...
__________________ Come, my child...Your life begins here...
Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
It was reported that It may have been possible that the weapons might have been looted. But after people asked, "how could ALL of the WMD's be looted without a single trace of them being there" and "why are we not going to war with the people who now have the WMD's" the issue was quickly dropped.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
Re: Newsweek Vs The Bush Government: Let's Talk Contradictions...
The US government seems blind to the contradiction! Another case of Bush's 'Do as I say, not as I do' policy...It's a world gone mad for sure... [/B][/QUOTE]
yep thats Bush for you.and yes it is a world gone mad but that happened decades ago when it went mad though.
Newsweek publishing a story that wasn't solid is not a good thing, but the Bush government's response to it is outrageous considering their own behaviour.
__________________ Come, my child...Your life begins here...
your right in saying that. Bush wants you to cut him slack because he was so sure about those weapons and then the white house turns around and critisizes newsweek for printing a story they thought theyw ere sure about despite thier shotty work. hhhmmmm i do see the correlation. good thread man
makes as much sence as everything else he's tried to make us believe.
there were plenty of people who thought it was nothing but bullshit. Iraq never had the capability to have a missile they could launch from Iraq to any part of America. They wont have that capability for a long time, irrelevant of whether bush took out Saddam. I've got nothing against Bush's removal of Saddam, but i dont like the way he lied to the whole planet, lied to EVERYONE. If he had been able to find a justafiable reason for invading, i'd rest more comfortably with this whole debackle. I dont think saying "someone might attack us at some point we think, we'll get the first shot in" covers it.
__________________ If you dont like Frenzal Rhomb, your a whore!
I am aware that "your" should be "you're," and while I know I should change it as not to offend the grammar fans around the boards, school always said not to bow to peer pressure so it stays as it is
"hu hu, Well what would have kerry done? hyuck"
"yeah well saddam was abad man and bush did this for a good reason"
"go back to russia you damn communist!"
__________________ If you dont like Frenzal Rhomb, your a whore!
I am aware that "your" should be "you're," and while I know I should change it as not to offend the grammar fans around the boards, school always said not to bow to peer pressure so it stays as it is
The difficult aspect of this situation is figuring out exactly who is MORE full of shit. Bottom line, Newsweek had the burden of responsiblity. They published a story that , directly, cost the lives of "non-muslim guests" in other countries. However, the Bush administration got caught in between a rock and a hard place. In either case, both sides are full of shit.
__________________ "If I were you"
"If you were me, you'd know the safest place to hide...is in sanity!
Is the US government not burdened by a responsibility to the truth?
The number of dead Iraqis is in the hundreds of thousands. The number of dead American soldiers is in the thousands. These deaths are a direct consequence of the US' actions.
Indeed, both sides are full of shit. The problem is that one side has made itself accountable and apologised. The other continues to deny any wrong doing.
Also, Newsweek offered an apology in reference to the admission that the sources they quoted have not been corroborated. This is not the same as being proven wrong. Indeed, the Red Cross had warned the US about the desecration of the Koran long before Newsweek published its report.
This is taken from the International Relations and Security Network (ISN) website:
__________________ Come, my child...Your life begins here...
KMC Community Forums
May 20th, 2005 04:58 AM
