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

Skip to comments.

Bush: Iraq Invasion My Responsibility
Associated Press ^ | Dec 15, 2005 | JENNIFER LOVEN

Posted on 12/14/2005 2:37:48 PM PST by presidio9

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday the responsibility for invading Iraq based in part on faulty weapons intelligence rested solely with him, taking on the issue in his most direct and personal terms in the 1,000-plus days since the war's first shots.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said. "As president, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."

The president's mea culpa was accompanied by a robust defense of the divisive war.

"Saddam was a threat — and the American people and the world is better off because he is no longer in power," Bush declared, as he has before.

Democrats were not moved by Bush's speech, the last of four designed to boost his credibility on the war and the public's backing for it.

"There was no reason for America to go to war when we did, the way we did, and for the false reasons we were given," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass.

Bush offered few qualms about the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He said foreign intelligence agencies — including several for governments who didn't back his decision to invade — also believed before the war that Saddam Hussein possessed them. And he said his administration has begun making changes to the U.S. intelligence apparatus to head off future errors.

The president also contended the Iraqi president had intended to restart weapons programs.

As in the past, Bush acknowledged no regrets about launching the war despite the problems with his initial justification. He revisited a long list of other previously cited reasons, including Iraqi violations of a no-fly zone in its airspace, Saddam's invasion of Kuwait a decade earlier and Iraq's defiance of United Nations resolutions.

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said to polite applause from his audience at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a nonpartisan forum for the study of world affairs.

Bush has repeatedly noted that the decision to go to war was his responsibility. And he has acknowledged for more than a year that most of the intelligence behind the claims of Saddam's weapons programs turned out to be faulty. But he has never linked the two so clearly and so personally.

On the eve of parliamentary elections in Iraq, Bush's speech was meant to wrap up an aggressive push-back against war critics with an overarching explanation, nearly three years later, of why he went into Iraq and why he believes U.S. troops must remain there.

Bush predicted a higher turnout than in earlier balloting of Iraq's minority Sunni Arabs in Thursday's voting, which will establish Iraq's first permanent, democratically elected government. The Sunnis provide the backbone of the insurgency and largely shunned Jan. 30 elections for an interim Parliament that wrote the nation's constitution. Their participation was higher in the October election to adopt the constitution.

But the president also said that Americans shouldn't hope for violence to wane, and shouldn't even expect to know results before early January.

"We can ... expect that the elections will be followed by days of uncertainty," he said. "It's going to take awhile."

Wednesday's remarks followed a pattern of more frank talk from Bush on Iraq. Each installment in the recent round of Iraq speeches, which began last month at the Naval Academy, has included descriptions of fixes for early mistakes and sober assessments of remaining challenges.

That reflects the majority of Americans who, confronted with daily doses of bad news and rising death counts in Iraq, disapprove of Bush's policies there and question the outlook for victory. For instance, a new poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that most people see progress in areas such as establishing democracy and training Iraqi security forces but are split on whether the United States is defeating the insurgents.

Answering critics who have said he's offered no definition of victory in Iraq, Bush offered a succinct summation.

"Victory will be achieved by meeting certain objectives: when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can protect their own people and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot attacks against our country," he said. "These objectives, not timetables set by politicians in Washington, will drive our force levels in Iraq."

Still, some said they had hoped to hear more specific benchmarks.

"The American public, the Iraqi people and our brave troops still don't have any clarity about the U.S. military mission in Iraq," said Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis.

The president's approach received a warmer welcome from several House Democrats whom Bush hosted at the White House for a top-level Iraq briefing before his speech.

"There was a dose of reality that I have not heard before," said Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bush43; iraq; iraqifreedom; oif; prewarintelligence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
Geeze, isn't it just like this guy to try to grab ALL the credit for preventing any follow-up attacks in this country, eliminating a brutal dictator, and freeing 26 million people?
1 posted on 12/14/2005 2:37:49 PM PST by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"mae culpa"????

DAMN THE LIBERAL MEDIA TO HELL!

"Oh, if he would just admit a mistake every now and then, the people could relate to him more...."

B*stards!


2 posted on 12/14/2005 2:41:05 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (I might be wrong, but I'm always right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This is somewhat AP Stuck on Stupid. Of course the invasion is his responsibility since he's the only person that can give authorization for invasion. AP, It's called The President of The United States for a reason. Who else would have sent us, the Hollywood Bareback Mountain Cowboys?


3 posted on 12/14/2005 2:45:51 PM PST by Wasanother (Terrorist come in many forms but all are RATS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This may be the worst, most biased article I've seen since...yesterday.

I went on Yahoo! to post my opinion.


4 posted on 12/14/2005 2:47:27 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (I might be wrong, but I'm always right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wasanother; billbears; ValenB4

So, we're in a dictatorship now? The part of the Constitution that talks about Congress declaring war was repealed?


5 posted on 12/14/2005 2:49:49 PM PST by sheltonmac (QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

My hatred of the media knows no limit. Just like those repulsive bastards have no limits to their self-sanctified, hypocritical, bigoted "reporting" of the "news".


6 posted on 12/14/2005 2:50:18 PM PST by San Jacinto (Hearing something on the network news is reason enough to disbelieve it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wasanother

Re Pres. Bush taking responsibility for Iraq, I thought only Congress had the power to "give authorization for invasion." From Section 8 of the Constitution, the following are among the powers reserved to Congress:

"To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

"To raise and support Armies, ...;

"To provide and maintain a Navy;

"To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;. . . ."


7 posted on 12/14/2005 2:52:20 PM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
The AP can spew venom to its hearts content. For now. History will judge.

A free Iraq and a brighter future for the entire middle east is Bush's legacy. Clinton's legacy is a stained blue dress.

8 posted on 12/14/2005 2:53:18 PM PST by Mad_as_heck (The MSM - America's (domestic) public enemy #1.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

I should clarify, he is the only one that can give FINAL authorization.


9 posted on 12/14/2005 2:53:37 PM PST by Wasanother (Terrorist come in many forms but all are RATS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: San Jacinto

This is a POS. Every word, every little comment, is slanted.

It reads like an editorial. I bet is shows up in my local paper tomorrow... and a lot more.


10 posted on 12/14/2005 2:57:01 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (I might be wrong, but I'm always right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hsalaw

If the rumors are true, Bush thinks that the Constitution is "just a g-dd----- piece of paper."


11 posted on 12/14/2005 2:57:11 PM PST by sheltonmac (QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

If they win a lot of seats next year... this will be part of the evidence for impeachment. Same goes for his taking responsibilty for NOLA's incompetence. Mark my words.


12 posted on 12/14/2005 3:00:28 PM PST by johnny7 (“Check out the big brain on Brett!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tony Snow; sono; sofaman; BoBToMatoE; Eric in the Ozarks; Prophet in the wilderness; AliVeritas; ...

Amazing Liberal Bias by the AP that's going to show up in your local paper ping!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1540535/posts


13 posted on 12/14/2005 3:01:09 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (I might be wrong, but I'm always right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
So, we're in a dictatorship now?

Nope, a constitutional republic.

The part of the Constitution that talks about Congress declaring war was repealed?

Nope, Congress declared war in a manner they chose by authorizing the CIC to execute war on Iraq if warranted. The CIC deemed it warranted and exercising the authoirty granted him by Congress, in turn authorized the military to wage war on Iraq.

All very constitutional.

14 posted on 12/14/2005 3:02:36 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator; Sidebar Moderator

Please post this in the sidebar so Freepers can see this example of bias. Thanks.


15 posted on 12/14/2005 3:04:14 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (I might be wrong, but I'm always right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

So, Congress can ignore their constitutional duty and pass the authority to declare war to someone else? That's like saying they can pass a law making someone king and calling it "constitutional."


16 posted on 12/14/2005 3:06:50 PM PST by sheltonmac (QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

It's a good thing he just found out about the intel, just think if he'd found this out prior to the last presidential election?


17 posted on 12/14/2005 3:08:32 PM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

"If the rumors are true, Bush thinks that the Constitution is "just a g-dd----- piece of paper."

I'm not suggesting for an INSTANT that Pres. Bush doesn't respect the Constitution. I'm suggesting only that he's taking a responsibility on himself that he doesn't really have to - Congress made the decision, not Pres. Bush.


18 posted on 12/14/2005 3:08:34 PM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
This is not the first time he has said this and he has always believed it.
Here is more proof that the liberal media and their followers are not that bright.
19 posted on 12/14/2005 3:09:04 PM PST by msnimje (http://weblogawards.org/2005/12/best_blog.php .. VOTE FOR MALKIN (everyday) -- DON'T LET KOS WIN!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

It's called the "War Powers Act" dilbert


20 posted on 12/14/2005 3:09:17 PM PST by MJY1288 (THE DEMOCRATS OFFER NOTHING FOR THE FUTURE AND THEY LIE ABOUT THE PAST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

My eyes zeroed in on that phrase right away.


21 posted on 12/14/2005 3:10:01 PM PST by satchmodog9 ( Seventy million spent on the lefts Christmas present and all they got was a Scooter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; rightinthemiddle
In the interest of full disclosure. I would think the AP should be required to point out that this writer Jennifer Loven is married to a DNC bigwig and Democrat Party activist.
22 posted on 12/14/2005 3:10:14 PM PST by MNJohnnie ("My job as the President is to see the world the way it is, not the way we hope it is." -GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
No, Congress can authorize war which it did. The CIC then chooses the time and manner to execute the war, which he did. He then authorizes the waging of war to begin.

It's really not a hard concept to wrap your arms around.

23 posted on 12/14/2005 3:11:19 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

What part of Comander in Cheif do you need explained to you? Perhaps it is the "authorization of force" or the "violation of 1991 Gulf War Armeistence" that so confuses the psuedo Conservatives. But that's right, don't bother you with facts, you are too busy being paranoid about your own Goverment to deal with reality right?


24 posted on 12/14/2005 3:13:30 PM PST by MNJohnnie ("My job as the President is to see the world the way it is, not the way we hope it is." -GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac; jwalsh07
So, Congress can ignore their constitutional duty

False assumption on your part not backed up by facts. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that describes how the Congress "Declares War". You contention that Congress did NOT authorize the use of force in Iraq is so childishly absurd as to indicate you are NOT interested in serious discussion of the facts. You may wander back to DU now. No one will take your absurd inability to grasp the fundamental legal lines of authority on Iraq seriously here.

25 posted on 12/14/2005 3:17:26 PM PST by MNJohnnie ("My job as the President is to see the world the way it is, not the way we hope it is." -GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

If the rumors are true, Bush thinks that the Constitution is "just a g-dd----- piece of paper."




That would fall to the members of the Supreme Court who believe in a "living" Constitution, who feel they can amend the document based on their ideology, not by the proper amendment process.

Granted, the Incumbency Protection Act (aka CFR) should have never been signed by W...nor should it have been written by Congress. But I think that's a far cry from a "g-d-" piece of paper". And if I recall, a president WAS quoted as saying "'stroke of the pen, law of the land'...cool", and his name wasn't George W. Bush.


26 posted on 12/14/2005 3:18:09 PM PST by Christian4Bush ("We've lost 2000+ of our best in three yrs. We lost 3000+ in THREE HOURS on 9-11." Matalin to Couric)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"No Plan" Are the Democrat Leaders STILL telling us they have NOT read the National Security Council's "National Plan for Victory in Iraq" despite it being available to them since 2003??????
27 posted on 12/14/2005 3:18:50 PM PST by MNJohnnie ("My job as the President is to see the world the way it is, not the way we hope it is." -GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
ASSociated Press are a bunch of biased LibIdiots with the blood of many US Troops and Iraqi civilians on their hands because from day 1 they have over blown the negative and thereby encouraged the terrorists to keep murdering more and more people.
28 posted on 12/14/2005 3:27:16 PM PST by Berlin_Freeper (ETERNAL SHAME on the treasonous and immoral Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
If the rumors are true, Bush thinks that the Constitution is "just a g-dd----- piece of paper."

I did a search and I couldn't find any proof that the president said this

29 posted on 12/14/2005 3:28:56 PM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

While congress issued The "Use of force", it did not authorise "War". This is what gets the libs in their panties. Without a declaration of war we do not have to follow the Geneva Conventions, which we are anyways.

I get sick of this....Ask anyone in America now why we went to "War" and see if they mention U.N. Resolution 1441?


30 posted on 12/14/2005 3:34:51 PM PST by Normal4me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said. "As president, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."

Associate Press is biased against the president. They're twisting the president's words.


31 posted on 12/14/2005 3:36:18 PM PST by Baraonda (Demographic is destiny. Don't hire 3rd world illegal aliens nor support businesses that hire them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

how much of any public 'acknowledgement' or 'admission' will the LL use against Bush toward an impeachment? seems that is their agenda/goal.


32 posted on 12/14/2005 3:46:11 PM PST by Kimberly GG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Normal4me
While congress issued The "Use of force", it did not authorise "War". This is what gets the libs in their panties. Without a declaration of war we do not have to follow the Geneva Conventions, which we are anyways.

An authorization for the use of force is a de facto declaration of war. The US Constitution is silent on themethods of declaring war. Congress could just as easily issue a one sentence statement, to wit, "Kick Iraq's collective ass." and that would be a declaration of war as well.

I get sick of this....Ask anyone in America now why we went to "War" and see if they mention U.N. Resolution 1441?

Hey, I get sick of people reading anything they want into the constitution. Why don't you read me the prescribed methods for "declaring war" in that document?

33 posted on 12/14/2005 3:49:21 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"Victory is not a strategy." - Congressman Jack Murtha, (D-PA).

"The original means of strategy is victory--that is tactical success--it's ends, in the final analysis, are those objects which will lead directly to peace." - Karl von Clauswitz, On War, 1832.

"Victory alone is not everything — but is it not, after all, what really counts?" - Karl von Clauswitz, On War, 1832.

Clauswitz Quoted
http://www.FreeRepublic.com/focus/news/672976/posts


34 posted on 12/14/2005 3:49:24 PM PST by PsyOp (The commonwealth is theirs who hold the arms.... - Aristotle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

500 tons of uranium, 1.7 tons of enricjed uranium, illegal weapons programs all controlled by a state with torture rooms, rape rooms, condonning people fed alive into plastic shredders feet first. Taking Saddam out was the right thing to do. The Iraq War has been great success and continues to be successful.

All the attacks on the Bush Administration could prove terrible beyond belief if it causes too much delay with dealing with Iran,North Korea, or Syria (where Russian trucks took many of the WMD components and weapons they were illegally selling Iraq), think about it.


35 posted on 12/14/2005 3:52:10 PM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"The American public, the Iraqi people and our brave troops still don't have any clarity about the U.S. military mission in Iraq," said Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis.

Apparently in the mind of Mr. Feingold this is an achievement which is unattainable unless politics dictates that the Democratic party is in full majority.

Perhaps a swift slap to the face would wake him up to reality?

Anyone in WI game for helping him in his endeavors?

36 posted on 12/14/2005 3:52:24 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad_as_heck

NO! Clinton's legacy is the President of the United States trying to fix a court case and in the process denying an American citizen her day in court, Justice. Damn the blue dress!


37 posted on 12/14/2005 3:55:05 PM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mad_as_heck
A free Iraq and a brighter future for the entire middle east is Bush's legacy. Clinton's legacy is a stained blue dress.

And STILL who gets the MSM praise for effective federal governing?

38 posted on 12/14/2005 3:56:51 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kimberly GG

I think you lost me Sir on that whole nation building thing... You really blindsided me with that one...can I ask that when we wax Iran that we do not undertake another Nation Building exercise. .i.e. no American tax payer funding, lives, mindshare etc? Tired of paying people that hate us and want us killed..Its kind of an insult right?


39 posted on 12/14/2005 3:57:38 PM PST by samadams2000 (Nothing fills the void of a passing hurricane better than government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"There was no reason for America to go to war when we did, the way we did, and for the false reasons we were given," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass.

'news' --> no new news here, folks
'bio' ---> dissipated, hedonistic, neer-do-well blacksheep red-headed step child of robber baron family extraction
'voting record' --> yellow dog democratic leftist liberal

Nothing to see here, folks! Move along, now.

40 posted on 12/14/2005 4:03:22 PM PST by IonImplantGuru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samadams2000

50 millions lives were lost because after WW I the nation of Germany was not rebuilt. That mistake was not made after WW II, and it should never be made again.

Iraq will be one of America's and Freedom's strongest ally. As would Iran or any people that are enabled to successfully live in Freedom.


41 posted on 12/14/2005 4:04:24 PM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

If this is Rove's genius, I'd let him go.


42 posted on 12/14/2005 4:15:35 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

It isn't Bush's fault. The intelligence agencies were guessing wrong, but they were guessing in favor of defending this country's person.

Notice how people have forgotten about UN Resolution 1441?

The event leading into the war are complex and intertwined. It isn't the just a coin flip.


43 posted on 12/14/2005 4:18:24 PM PST by Loud Mime (Bad Lawmakers = Bad Law = Infinite Lawyers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HankReardon

As that Iraqi lady said, anybody who doesn't appreciate what our nation has done, and President Bush, can go to hell.


44 posted on 12/14/2005 4:23:03 PM PST by Loud Mime (Bad Lawmakers = Bad Law = Infinite Lawyers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
Don't worry about it. The Constitution goes right out the window as long as a Republican as in office because 'we' are in control or some nonsense.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said.

How long did that take? Three years?

45 posted on 12/14/2005 4:25:17 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

I was actually agreeing with you.....been a long day. Sorry if you mistook my post. Merry Christmas.


46 posted on 12/14/2005 4:26:21 PM PST by Normal4me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Normal4me
My sincere apologies.

I wish you and yours the very best Christmas.

God bless ya and get some rest. :-}

47 posted on 12/14/2005 4:36:13 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Just to remind everybody. Throw away the intelligence and let's go to what's reported in the papers. Before the war Saddam was shooting at our planes everyday in the no fly zone. He had thrown the UN Inspectors out of Iraq. Why? When they went back in, Saddam could not account for his Weapons of Mass Destruction. Also, after 911, were we going to let Saddam exist? A physcopath with a history on mass executions and a documented (PBS Frontline) lust for WMDs. I have complained about President Bush before but he was right to take us into Iraq, and Congress was right for voting to do it as well.
48 posted on 12/14/2005 5:14:51 PM PST by jackieaxe (English speaking, law abiding, taxpaying citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackieaxe

Ask anyone today why we went to war. The usual answer is "Bush lied"....."WMD's".....blah blah blah. Then tell them that it was because of UN res 1441 in which ALL 15 Security council members votes yes on it. We "Rushed" to war taking only 16+ months to do so and we went in "Unilateraly" with only 40+ countries backing us.

How is it possible that you can "Invade" a country and take it over for more than 2 1/2 years and lose 2150 soldiers? Can you even IMAGINE what would have been said if President Bush would have predicted this before the start of this?

Look at the facts, ignore the media.


49 posted on 12/14/2005 5:34:48 PM PST by Normal4me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: San Jacinto
"President George W. Bush took the blame for going to war in Iraq over faulty intelligence but said he was right to topple Saddam and urged Americans to be patient as Iraqis vote."

-Reuters

Holy connotations. That's not what he said!

We have to do something about these people. I have some hope, though. Fox news radio has replaced CNN radio and ABC radio on many stations I listen to. The NYT and LA Times and Tribune Co. are in the toilet. CNN TV is hurting. Capitalism, as long as we still have it, is our best weapon. Reuters seems to go untouched, and they are one of the worst.
They control most of the headlines it seems, and, at least in this country, most people don't get past the headlines.
It is time to bring them down.
How? Maybe launch a campaign to let the news providers know that if they use Reuters, they will share the fate of CNN etc.
Email FOX, MSN, Yahoo, your local media etc. and demand they bag Reuters.
50 posted on 12/14/2005 6:12:23 PM PST by jgophel (OBL is too obvious of an Antichrist. Dems are the true wolves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 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