Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'A Slam-Dunk Case'(Bob Woodward refutes the claim that Bush "lied" about Iraq.)
Opinion Journal ^ | Saturday, May 1, 2004 | Unk

Posted on 05/01/2004 7:55:32 PM PDT by Kaslin

A funny thing has happened to the accusation that President Bush "lied" or "misled" Americans about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bob Woodward's new book, "Plan of Attack," blows the charge away, not that you've read about that in many other places.

Instead, we've all heard mostly about the book's report that Colin Powell wasn't keen on going to war. This we already knew. The real news is what Mr. Woodward tells us about the President's state of mind concerning Iraq's weapons when he ordered American troops into battle: His Director of Central Intelligence had assured him that the WMD case was a "slam dunk."

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bobwoodward; planofattack
I did a search and have not found this posted yet
1 posted on 05/01/2004 7:55:32 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Thank God for the Wall Street Journal. Practically the only "mainstream" paper in the country that prints the truth.
2 posted on 05/01/2004 8:01:56 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Thank God for the Wall Street Journal.

Agreed. A shame they have to be pissy about it and make us excerpt. Ya gotta register to read the article, something I'm not inclined to do.

3 posted on 05/01/2004 8:11:42 PM PDT by upchuck (Message to Senator John F'ing sKerry: Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I don't have a subscription to the Wall Street Journal. If one needs a subscription it would be appreciated if you posted the entire article. WSJ charges for their subscriptions online.
4 posted on 05/01/2004 8:27:49 PM PDT by Kath (Luvya Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
Agreed. A shame they have to be pissy about it and make us excerpt. Ya gotta register to read the article, something I'm not inclined to do.

I have Opinion Journal from The Wallstreet Journal in my favorites in IE. You can read most of the articles there w/o having to register

Opinion Journal

5 posted on 05/01/2004 8:33:20 PM PDT by Kaslin (N.O.B.B.F.P!!! No one but Bush for president)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kath
See my reply to Upchuck, Also just click on the link you can read the article. While Wall Street Journal does want you to subcribe Opinion Journal makes most aricles available
6 posted on 05/01/2004 8:37:00 PM PDT by Kaslin (N.O.B.B.F.P!!! No one but Bush for president)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Sorry but Bob Woodward is nothing but a pantload IMO. If I wanted some truth, Bob would be the last person I'd turn to. After he went after Nixon the way he did 'for the good of the nation', I said to myself this had nothing to do with 'the good of the nation'. It had everything to do with Katherine Graham wanting to take Nixon down. The proof for me came when Woodward and Bernstein both appeared on a Larry King Live, to say that nothing Clinton ever did remotely approached the criminality of the Nixon White House. Yeah Bob, Carl, you two were the most promenent frauds of the last half of the 20th century.

When real witnesses to real crimes came forward under Clinton, your buds in the media trashed them and said they had an axe to grind. Your only witness never came forward, never faced the public and the complicit media never demanded that this person be known or his information discounted.

After taking Nixon down, by hook or by crook, some thirty years later, your sterling witness still hasn't faced the public. So much for even handed reporting and justice.

There are a number of standards used by you two. One set ot them for democrats and one set of them for republicans. I can't stomach either of you.
7 posted on 05/01/2004 8:37:50 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
aricles=articles
8 posted on 05/01/2004 8:37:55 PM PDT by Kaslin (N.O.B.B.F.P!!! No one but Bush for president)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson