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

Skip to comments.

White House Relents Somewhat (CBS quotes Washington Post as saying Pres. Bush was informed in 1998!)
CBS News ^ | May 18th, 2002 | Staff

Posted on 05/18/2002 6:03:53 PM PDT by BJClinton

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Are we to believe that such a construct would see print if it cast a favorable misimpression of GW?

I doubt it. I was just pointing out the "writer" of this article did little to no actual writing.
41 posted on 05/18/2002 7:22:34 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
The short version is that we've all known about the possibility of using planes as a weapon since Tom Clancy wrote about it in the early 90's. It shouldn't surprise anyone that terrorists would have thought about it both before and after Clancy's book was published. In the late 90's, there were warnings. Some of them were little more that government elaborations on Clancy's story. Others were specific concerns that were ignored by the administration in power at that time. The Clinton FBI probably couldn't find the time to pass along terrorist warnings when it was so busy cross-referencing people who bought guns and Bibles and delivering Repubican files to the Clinton White House. When the time came to transition to the Bush administration, they couldn't be bothered with passing along active tips because they were too busy selling pardons and stealing the furniture.

WFTR
Bill

42 posted on 05/18/2002 7:24:03 PM PDT by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trooth
has everyone here gone insane?
No, just you. And how is that? You have not gone through deprogramming after many years of propaganda indoctrination from the acolytes of "objective journalism."

You probably think that journalism exists to tell you what's happening in the world; that is after all what journalists promise. However, you must ask yourself one question: how many journalists write boring facts?

The correct answer is: none that will keep their jobs. Because the first requirement of commercially successful journalism is entertainment value. The standard descriptions of journalism "If it bleeds, it leads" and "there's nothing more worthless than yesterday's newspaper" trace to that business fundamental of journalism.

Consequently journalism is negative and superficial, thus anticonservative. The upshot is that reporters are just as liberal as movie stars.

trooth member since May 18th, 2002

Figures . . ..


43 posted on 05/18/2002 7:25:28 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie
Calling it a typo doesnt cut it.

I did modify it with "FReudian slip?". It flowed so well in their minds they couldn't catch their mistake. I doubt they would intentionally tell an outright Gorism.
44 posted on 05/18/2002 7:25:35 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NCEaglette
Note their use of "the president";

I caught that, it is quite misleading considering how often they jump around the timeline.
45 posted on 05/18/2002 7:28:07 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Yes, they corrected it all right. They corrected it to read "the president." They clearly are hoping that the attention spans of the readers are limited enough to think that that refers to Bush.
46 posted on 05/18/2002 7:29:29 PM PDT by alnick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunshy
If I were Bush, I would demand back pay.

Especially considering how poorly we pay our governor down here.
47 posted on 05/18/2002 7:29:59 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Finally we have hard evidence against Bush. Not only did he fail to act on the 1998 briefing but there is hard evidence that he failed to send the CIA orders to deliver the air support for the Bay of Pigs.

Then there was his inaction during those harrowing days when he failed to lead the lost battalion from there redoubt in Bella Woods.

Did I mention the Second Battle of Bull Run!

Of course there is incontroverible evidence that he failed to stop the Turks at the fall of Constantinople in 1453.

Yep the Democraps have him dead to rights. However, their grade in History is F- and they are sent to the corner with a Dunce Cap! You too Hildebeast!

48 posted on 05/18/2002 7:42:40 PM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton;trooth
Did you catch trooth's posting history today? The same comment on 2 different threads about this and then a comment that Ozzy Osbourne is God, followed by a comment that conservatives 'twist words'. I think he/she is a genuine disruptor.

Note to trooth...spread yourself around a little bit and try not to be so bloody obvious next time.
49 posted on 05/18/2002 7:46:33 PM PDT by constitutiongirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: trooth
"Who are you kidding. You made up this whole story. And these suckers believe you. Yeah, some CBS leftist staffers must be watching FreeRupblic posts. And changed it instantly so only one person saw it, you. Man, has everyone here gone insane?"

Many Freepers saw it trooth; the CBS.com article was reproduced many hours earlier on Free Republic at:
96 Hint Of Suicide Hijack Scheming [see Bush frame-up bolded in article]

After several e-mails and feedback complaints, CBS.com wiped the egg off their lying face and changed their article.

50 posted on 05/18/2002 7:50:53 PM PDT by Hipixs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
SeeBS exclusive: Bush seen holding bowl while Pilate washes hands.
51 posted on 05/18/2002 7:51:31 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NCEaglette
The document, known as the President's Daily Briefing, underscored that bin Laden and his followers hoped to "bring the fight to America," in part as retaliation for U.S. missile strikes on al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan in 1998

Those missile strikes were ordered to cover his ars, fighting impeachment after he got caught diddling the intern. He then said he just wanted to go and do "America's business".

That briefing was "America's business".

52 posted on 05/18/2002 7:55:53 PM PDT by NJJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
The media will also report that Bush was on the grassy knoll in Dallas and was driving the car that sideswiped Princes Diana in the tunnel in Paris.
53 posted on 05/18/2002 7:57:52 PM PDT by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Incredible, now the commie press is trying to bend time! Where is Uncle Albert (Einstein) when we need him.

The commies are coming out of the woodwork in a maniacial frenzy as never before. They are also showing their collective a$$es...........good job! They are so incredibly arrogant as to believe that the American people suck up their pond scum. They are soooooo wrong! In fact, the American people are wraping their fish in the NY Slimes, and the Wash. compost. As for the Socialist media, TV ratings are in the tank, can you guess why? There is a huge majority of good old American people that see through this crap, and they are not being propaganized, they are getting pi$$ed!

54 posted on 05/18/2002 8:00:35 PM PDT by timydnuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: constitutiongirl
I think he/she is a genuine disruptor.

No question about that. Obviously some stoner who has a hard time with logical debate. I really wish JR would let them hang out and post. They're quite fun to beat up.
55 posted on 05/18/2002 8:01:44 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Betteboop
This whole thing is Media Bias On Parade! There was a long LA Times article today that explained about the 1999 information, and it never mentioned who the president was at the time. (If it had been Bush, they would have said the name so often it would sound like Monty Python's Spam sketch!). On LA's KFI radio today, the news (taken from wire services, certainly) went out of its way to say the Executive Branch knew about it in 1999 - the word Clinton never was uttered.
56 posted on 05/18/2002 8:01:57 PM PDT by Moonmad27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hipixs
Dang it! I searched but that didn't come up. Oh well.
57 posted on 05/18/2002 8:04:14 PM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Someone needs to inform the communist that under our Constitution, the people elect a president every four years! Now frankly, I'm not going to tell CBS anything. How could I, they already know everything according to them!
58 posted on 05/18/2002 8:08:05 PM PDT by Voyager2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
I did modify it with "FReudian slip?". It flowed so well in their minds they couldn't catch their mistake. I doubt they would intentionally tell an outright Gorism.

The way I look at it is this: the first cut named Bush erroneously, probably a Freudian slip made in their gleeful haste to publish damaging info about the President. However for the second cut they clearly knew they had made a mistake. They could easily have solved it by changing one word: "Bush" becomes "Clinton". They didnt. Instead they restructured the entire article to put all the presumably damaging Bush stuff up front and then after that they threw in the reference to the 1998 breifing. Still they should have changed it to "President Clinton" and left it as an example of how this information had been around for years. Instead they changed it to "the president". I have a hard time beleiving that in an editorial correction to an error they made ANOTHER error. No, they thought they had a smoking gun (it was the lead in the original story!) and couldnt bring themselves to acknowledge that it had really been Clinton involved in that incident. So they changed the focus around and then removed Bush's name but chpse to leave Clintons name out of it. I cant see that as even a Freudian slip anymore. Thats a decision made wilfully with full awareness.

59 posted on 05/18/2002 8:08:38 PM PDT by pepsi_junkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Bump
60 posted on 05/18/2002 8:11:51 PM PDT by Kay Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

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