# Implicit untruths from USA Today: Iraq/Bush related
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [March 31, 2005, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101 "2005-03-31T20:16:13Z")
**Posts on this page:** 16
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@choosybeggar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choosybeggar)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2005, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/1 "2005-03-31T20:16:13Z")
The liberal media has done it again. :rolleyes:
In it’s [coverage](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-03-31-intel-panel_x.htm?csp=24&RM_Exclude=Juno)of the WMD panel’s report on intelligence failures in Iraq, USA Today states:
> [@](#):
>
> The report implicitly absolves the administration of manipulating the intelligence used to launch the 2003 Iraq war, putting the blame for bad intelligence directly on the intelligence community.
>
> “The daily intelligence briefings given to you before the Iraq war were flawed,” it said. “Through attention-grabbing headlines and repetition of questionable data, these briefings overstated the case that Iraq was rebuilding its WMD programs.”
Did this journalist read the [report?](http://news.findlaw.com/usatoday/docs/iraq/wmd33105rpt.pdf) Did they see the section detailing the scope of the investigation? Here, let me find it.
> [@](#):
>
> Finally, we emphasize two points about the scope of this Commission’s charter, particularly with respect to the Iraq question. First…snip…Second, we were **not authorized to investigate how policymakers used the intelligence assessments they received from the Intelligence Community.**
bolding mine
Either my logic is rusty or this report, which explicitly refrains from intestigating the behavior of policymakers, cannot implicitly exonerate said policy-makers.
Who edits this piece of shit, Karl Rove?
---
### Author:  [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/2 "2005-03-31T20:28:23Z")
> [@choosybeggar](#):
>
> Did this journalist read the [report?](http://news.findlaw.com/usatoday/docs/iraq/wmd33105rpt.pdf) Did they see the section detailing the scope of the investigation?
Umm… from the very next line of the news article:
> [@](#):
>
> In an implicit swipe at the Bush administration, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the report did not review how federal policy-makers used the intelligence they were given.
>
> “I believe it is essential that we hold both the intelligence agencies and senior policy-makers accountable for their actions,” Reid said.
---
### Author:  [@overlyverbose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/overlyverbose)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2005, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/3 "2005-03-31T21:14:52Z")
> [@choosybeggar](#):
>
> The liberal media has done it again. :rolleyes:
[brief hijack]I thought that, if the media were indeed liberal, it would talk about how shitty a job the Bush administration did in disseminating intelligence instead of absolving them. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your use of liberal media? Would you please set me straight? Sorry for the hijack - just wanted to make sure I understand your meaning. :)[/brief hijack]
---
### Author:  [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/4 "2005-03-31T21:23:48Z")
Liberal = Evil. Anything that is not exactly what the far-right wants, is by definition evil, and therefore must be liberal.
---
### Author:  [@choosybeggar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choosybeggar)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/5 "2005-04-01T01:05:16Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#):
>
> Umm… from the very next line of the news article:
**CS,** The line you quoted is not in the article I read this morning. And the line I quoted is not in yours. I never closed out the original article from my browser window though so I have the original and the update for side-by-side comparison. They differ in other regards besides the quoted passages. Nevertheless, they share the same URL.
I’d love to post both versions in full but am concerned about violating the copyright regulations (Mods, could a special exception be made?). I’ll post the first paragraph of both articles, though:
> [@](#):
>
> _Original article_
> WASHINGTON (AP) — In a scathing report, a presidential commission said Thursday that America’s spy agencies were “dead wrong” in most of their judgments about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction before the war and that the United States knows “disturbingly little” about the threats posed by many of the nation’s most dangerous adversaries.
> [@](#):
>
> _Later version_
> WASHINGTON (AP) — America’s spy agencies were “dead wrong” in most prewar assessments about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and know disturbingly little about current nuclear threats, a presidential commission said Thursday. “Our collection agencies are often unable to gather intelligence on the very things we care the most about,” the panel concluded in an unsparing report.
The header of the articles do state the post time and update times, and the update times differ, but IMHO, they made drastic changes to the article, yet peddle it as a simple update. Fascinating.
---
### Author:  [@choosybeggar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choosybeggar)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/6 "2005-04-01T01:08:15Z")
> [@overlyverbose](#):
>
> [brief hijack]I thought that, if the media were indeed liberal, it would talk about how shitty a job the Bush administration did in disseminating intelligence instead of absolving them. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your use of liberal media? Would you please set me straight? Sorry for the hijack - just wanted to make sure I understand your meaning. :)[/brief hijack]
Sarcasm is notoriously difficult to convey electronically. The rolleyes icon :rolleyes: sometimes helps.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/7 "2005-04-01T01:23:38Z")
So Sunny Corleone takes a Yellow Taxi over to Bruno’s Chop House looking for Don Bambino, under-capo of the Garibaldi Family, and paints the walls with his brains. Badda-boom, bada-bing, bada-splat.
Cops are assigned to investigate, but with the stipulation that they confine themselves entirely to the cab ride over.
---
### Author:  [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/8 "2005-04-01T01:25:05Z")
Oh, that’s funny! I was focused on the “The daily intelligence… WMD programs” line and didn’t even notice that the “implicitly absolves” line vanished!
At least with a real paper they can’t change the article and pretend the old version didn’t exist.
---
### Author:  [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/9 "2005-04-01T01:53:54Z")
I find it troubling that all the previous reports, from many sources had already said No WMD. This includes the UN reports, CIA reports, and now this one. They all said no WMD. However, now in addition, this new report says the administration was “misled”. I don’t buy that one bit. I also still remember Bush and Powell insisting they knew where the WMD were, had evidence, etc. How could they, if there were none? My only conclusion is that they were cherrypicking woatever tidbits supported their goals and discarded the rest. To me, this “report” is not much more than a whitewash, once it gets past the no WMD part. I am well aware of the culture in which you are “gently guided” in a way that your conclusions are what the higher ups want to see, or at least are worded in a way that lets them interpret in the way they want to.
---
### Author:  [@choosybeggar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choosybeggar)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/10 "2005-04-01T02:17:07Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#):
>
> Oh, that’s funny! I was focused on the “The daily intelligence… WMD programs” line and didn’t even notice that the “implicitly absolves” line vanished!
>
> At least with a real paper they can’t change the article and pretend the old version didn’t exist.
Does it mean that online publications have no obligation to accurately word, edit, and fact check before “going to press?” The articles evolve in realtime?
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/11 "2005-04-01T02:55:58Z")
[Put an End to the Well-Founded Rumors Surrounding GWB Admin’s Use of Intel re Iraq](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=242238)
Ask you senators why the [second report of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence](http://roberts.senate.gov/02-13-2004.htm) on Iraq intel, (the one that deals with these issues: whether public statements and reports and testimony regarding Iraq by U.S. Government officials made between the Gulf War period and the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom were substantiated by intelligence information; prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq; any intelligence activities relating to Iraq conducted by the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG) and the Office of Special Plans within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; and, the use by the Intelligence Community of information provided by the Iraqi National Congress (INC)) the one that investigates what Senator Kyl described as " close to an allegation of treason" has been pushed to the back burner.
I know I am.
I’m a voter and I pay my taxes damnit, and I want some fucking answers posthaste.
I’m not putting up with this shit anymore.
I want a government with some fucking personal fucking accountability. Character counts goddamnit!
I encourage you all to do the same.
If you think the report’ll clear Team Bush great, but let’s get it published and set the record straight.
---
### Author:  [@Muad\_Dib](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muad_Dib)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/12 "2005-04-01T04:02:32Z")
> [@SteveG1](#):
>
> Liberal = Evil. Anything that is not exactly what the far-right wants, is by definition evil, and therefore must be liberal.
And vice-versa.
---
### Author:  [@overlyverbose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/overlyverbose)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/13 "2005-04-01T12:17:39Z")
> [@choosybeggar](#):
>
> Sarcasm is notoriously difficult to convey electronically. The rolleyes icon :rolleyes: sometimes helps.
The reason I didn’t use the rolleyes icon was because I actually _wanted_ to know and wasn’t being sarcastic. I hear the term “liberal media” bandied about quite often here and in other forums and decided I’d ask what it means. While I do realize this is the Pit, I’d like to make sure I fully understand you.
However, since I asked a simple question and got a smart-assed response back, now is probably the appropriate time for that icon. :rolleyes: There. Happy?
---
### Author:  [@choosybeggar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choosybeggar)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/14 "2005-04-01T15:48:59Z")
> [@overlyverbose](#):
>
> The reason I didn’t use the rolleyes icon was because I actually _wanted_ to know and wasn’t being sarcastic. I hear the term “liberal media” bandied about quite often here and in other forums and decided I’d ask what it means. While I do realize this is the Pit, I’d like to make sure I fully understand you.
>
> However, since I asked a simple question and got a smart-assed response back, now is probably the appropriate time for that icon. :rolleyes: There. Happy?
I had no idea you were asking why the media is berated as being overly liberal. Thought you asked why I’d label the media liberal in the context of their editorializing for Bush. The answer to the second question is that I was being sarcastic (and not smart-assed in my response to you). For the answers you seek, check out some decidely right-leaning news sources like [newsmax.com](http://newsmax.com) for their opinion og the major media outlets.
---
### Author:  [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/15 "2005-04-01T16:00:33Z")
> [@PatriotX](#):
>
> I’m a voter and I pay my taxes damnit, and I want some fucking answers posthaste.
> I’m not putting up with this shit anymore.
>
> I want a government with some fucking personal fucking accountability. Character counts goddamnit!
>
> I encourage you all to do the same.
> If you think the report’ll clear Team Bush great, but let’s get it published and set the record straight.
We all want answers. We just won’t get any from that bunch.
We’ll never see accountability. Look at Bush’s record. Anything that goes wrong is always someone else’s fault, not his. He’s always been that way. To him accountability means having a fall guy to pin it on.
It’s time to clean house. It’s time to start voting agains EVRY incumbent, regardless of part. Fire them ALL from the local dog catcher or sheriff on up to the president, and start fresh. maybe that would get some attention and some action. But I won’t hold my breath. Maybe you’re not putting up with this shit anymore, but unfortunately, too many others eat it up and ask for more.
---
### Author:  [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2005, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implicit-untruths-from-usa-today-iraq-bush-related/297101/16 "2005-04-01T16:28:55Z")
> [@SteveG1](#):
>
> We all want answers. \
> Maybe you’re not putting up with this shit anymore, but unfortunately, too many others eat it up and ask for more.
I encourage you not only to write to your senators, but to encourage others to do the same. You can even email them. They provide links on their home pages. Tell you friends.
As members of the electorate, this is one of our obligations. To make America work, we have to live up to our end ofthe bargain too.
> [@SteveG1](#):
>
> It’s time to clean house. It’s time to start voting agains EVRY incumbent, regardless of part. Fire them ALL from the local dog catcher or sheriff on up to the president, and start fresh.
Welcome to my world.