Eleven years on: how the Washington post helped give us the Iraq war

[MindWars]

Eleven Years On: How ‘The Washington Post’ Helped Give Us the Iraq War
In the months before the war, The Washington Post ran more than 140 stories on its front page promoting the war.
writing about for, oh, the past decade or so—the media’s sad, tragic performance during the run-up to the US attack on Iraq—never gets old, at least for me. It provides such a revealing glimpse of, and warning about, how leading media outlets usually cave to the “official narrative” from the “serious” policymakers and pundits. Howard Kurtz, now at Fox, calls it, aptly, the media’s “biggest failure of modern times.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------
It's a shame the WP has come out being part of the huge lie media. Most people saw them as a very credible source. Now however they are seen about as fake as CNN, and whatever other so called fake news the liberals think are fake.
They have a bad reputation and are getting caught lying away ............... They should have ended up on the fake news list for sure.

 

[MisterBeale]

I really can't say which is worse, WaPo, or HuffPo. I think WaPo because it is more influential among the Washington elite, but HuffPo is more influential among the liberal University Elite.

Either way, both should be regarded as fake news.

 

[rdean]

Eleven Years On: How ‘The Washington Post’ Helped Give Us the Iraq War
In the months before the war, The Washington Post ran more than 140 stories on its front page promoting the war.
writing about for, oh, the past decade or so—the media’s sad, tragic performance during the run-up to the US attack on Iraq—never gets old, at least for me. It provides such a revealing glimpse of, and warning about, how leading media outlets usually cave to the “official narrative” from the “serious” policymakers and pundits. Howard Kurtz, now at Fox, calls it, aptly, the media’s “biggest failure of modern times.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------
It's a shame the WP has come out being part of the huge lie media. Most people saw them as a very credible source. Now however they are seen about as fake as CNN, and whatever other so called fake news the liberals think are fake.
They have a bad reputation and are getting caught lying away ............... They should have ended up on the fake news list for sure.

I'm pretty sure it came from Bush and Cheney before it came from the Washington Post.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I really can't say which is worse, WaPo, or HuffPo. I think WaPo because it is more influential among the Washington elite, but HuffPo is more influential among the liberal University Elite.

Either way, both should be regarded as fake news.

The media is your source of information. To immediately say something is fake is ridiculous. No doubt what the WT wrote, Fox would put on their news program too. So... it's all about using your brain, looking at the information, looking at other media outlets and seeing what you come up with.

 

[Penelope]

I am sure Fox talked non stop about Iraq, and now they talk about Obama, Clinton, and Iran.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Really ?

Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001