NYT says Saddam had clear plans for making nuclear weapons, but it’s George Bush’s fault that these plans were irresponsibly made public… refuting the NYT’s false claims that Bush lied (oops! the article forgot to actually say that—and besides, Bush lied about Saddam being a threat, anyway, right?).
Well, that’s pretty much the way the article actually reads, when one reads for the facts and throws out the propagandizing.
The Hivemind is showing signs of schizoid behavior. Paraphrasing/encapsulating: “Bush lied about WMD/nukes, etc.” vs. “Saddam close to making a nuke in 2002.”
Of course, the Hiveminded NYT can’t seem to make its “November Surprise” even that clear. Instead, it tries to dress up the facts in “It’s all Bush’s fault” clothing in order to distract from the nuclear weapons plans not hidden behind the nonexistant curtain. (Oh, and the simple fact that the Iraqi plans and capabilities were revealed is an awful crime in and of itself, too, ya know… “threatens security”–riiiight. The security of the NYT’s lies and distortions.)
The article bloviates about how dangerous these Iraqi documents are… while never mentioning that the very existence of these documents reveals that the NYT (among others) is guilty of falsely accusing Bush of “lies” bout WMD (and particularly about Iraq’s nuclear capability development).
The Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind is so large and clumsy it can’t even tell it’s trying to eat its cake and still have it, too.
The psychosis just keeps getting more and more pronounced, doesn’t it?
Surprise, surprise!
Not. I’ve given up trying to make sense of the Hivemind’s arguments, apart from taking passing notice of how easily it’s distracted by bright, shiny objects.
