About a week, the Wash Post produced an article summarizing how little we thought of the evidence of a nuclear program. of course, with the recent revelation of the NYT and its tendancies to create news, no one seriously believes it anymore, but the Wash Post is still clean, isn't it? the article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Oct25.html
includes this scathing summary of the progress:
Quote:
|
Most notably, investigators have judged the aluminum tubes to be "innocuous," according to Australian Brig. Gen. Stephen D. Meekin, who commands the Joint Captured Enemy Materiel Exploitation Center, the largest of a half-dozen units that report to Kay. That finding is pivotal, because the Bush administration built its case on the proposition that Iraq aimed to use those tubes as centrifuge rotors to enrich uranium for the core of a nuclear warhead.
|
okay, good investigation by the Wash Post, and some very revealing news, Bravo! but wait. Problems! Problems! Problems! the people quoted call bullshit.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...9199-2003Oct31
when we say NYT'd should it mean biased, or fabricated? Ty, where is your "who's misinformed" chart.
