NY Times falls short

[abcdan]

The NY Times Op Ed piece today correctly concludes that Bush misled America in the run-up to war when he said there were links between Iraq and Al Qaedea, and Saddam and Sept. 11. They also said, "either Mr. Bush knew he was not telling the truth, or he has a capacity for politically motivated self-deception that is terrifying in the post-9/11 world".

Their response is they want Bush to apologize to the American people. How can they come to the conclusion that Bush misled America in going to war and only ask for an apology? They should have demanded his impeachment.

[sangh0]

1. They'll do anything to avoid saying "Bush lied"

"Mr. Bush knew he was not telling the truth..."

Newspapers try to save room. It would have been shorter to say "Bush lied", but for some odd reason, they chose a longer way of saying it.

[senseandsensibility]

2. The same way

that they could publish and encourage Judith Miller's lies all the way up to the war, and NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR THEM TO THIS DAY! They're as guilty as *. The NY Times as watchdogs? Don't make me barf.