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

Skip to comments.

The Guardian Fully Retracts BOTH Powell/Straw Story AND Wolfowitz "It's All About Oil" Story
The Guardian ^ | June 5, 2003

Posted on 06/05/2003 9:21:04 AM PDT by Dont Mention the War

Corrections and clarifications

Thursday June 5, 2003

In our front page lead on May 31 headlined "Straw, Powell had serious doubts over their Iraqi weapons claims," we said that the foreign secretary Jack Straw and his US counterpart Colin Powell had met at the Waldorf Hotel in New York shortly before Mr Powell addressed the United Nations on February 5. Mr Straw has now made it clear that no such meeting took place. The Guardian accepts that and apologises for suggesting it did.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bushdoctrineunfold; ccrm; guardian; iraq; mediabias; mediafraud; medialias; oil; powell; retraction; straw; warlist; wolfowitz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 next last
From News24:

Although The Guardian earlier reported that US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz had said that the Iraq war was all about oil, the newspaper has now removed the article from its web site, and will print a full correction in Friday's edition. According to the Guardian's ombudsman, the quote, "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil," was taken out of context, and misconstrued.

1 posted on 06/05/2003 9:21:05 AM PDT by Dont Mention the War
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Maybe they can follow the lead of the NY Slime and all resign.
2 posted on 06/05/2003 9:21:48 AM PDT by jrlc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Wow....this is turning into a facinating News Day.
3 posted on 06/05/2003 9:22:41 AM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Hey Guardian, you're NOT done retracting. You still have THIS intentional misquote and story to retract. On another note, your idiotic rag isn't even worthy to wrap fish or line the bottom of a bird cage.
4 posted on 06/05/2003 9:24:08 AM PDT by Spiff (Liberalism is a mental illness - a precursor disease to terminal Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

From The Scotsman:

Caught in a trap of its own making:

ALONE in a national newspaper industry congenitally reluctant to correct its mistakes, the Guardian has an exemplary record: its famous "corrections and clarifications" column has even been turned into a book.

All the more mysterious, therefore, that it has yet to correct or clarify its Saturday page-one splash which alleged that Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, and his US counterpart, Colin Powell, met in New York’s Waldorf Hotel just before a crucial UN session on Iraq on 5 February and moaned to each other about the poor quality of their intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.

Some sort of clarification, at the very least, is surely in order because no evidence has yet been produced to show that the alleged meeting between Mr Powell and Mr Straw ever took place, much less that they said what the Guardian alleges. The Foreign Secretary denies it; the Guardian now says it might have been a telephone conversation.

The paper claims there is a transcript of the conversation - but it has yet to produce it, admits it has not seen it, but hints mysteriously that a copy of the "Waldorf transcripts" is doing the rounds of "NATO capitals". Such circulation means that, if it does exist, it will no doubt emerge soon.

The story’s provenance is not helped by the joint byline: Richard Norton-Taylor is an experienced correspondent on intelligence matters, but his name comes after Dan Plesch, who is not even a journalist but a "defence expert" who was opposed to the Iraq war and whose commentaries at the start of hostilities have not stood the test of time.

There is no question, of course, that the failure, so far, to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is a crisis of credibility for Tony Blair, the Prime Minister. I also suspect that WMD intelligence was flammed up in places to make the case for an unpopular war more powerful.

But the media lynch party currently pursuing the Prime Minister has its own agenda: anti-war papers and broadcasters given a bloody nose with the speedy and relatively simple fall of Baghdad are seeking revenge on a government which defied them by going to war and often proved their direst predictions wrong.

THE Guardian is not alone. The equally anti-war Financial Times now tells us, in grandiose terms, that it "always suspected" Iraq had no WMD. I doubt it does so now on the basis of its own search party returning to Southwark Bridge empty-handed - there is something absurd about papers making themselves sound omniscient on these matters. Curiously, the very anti-war Mirror has been less triumphalist about the Prime Minister’s WMD problems than you might expect - maybe new boss Sly Bailey now has editor Piers Morgan firmly under control.

Another dog that has failed to bark is the Daily Telegraph: it should be scrutinising the flood of WMD stories with forensic intensity, if only to justify its own pro-war stance. But it had little to say on the matter.

Yesterday’s editorial in the Times brought some much-needed balance to the current WMD feeding frenzy, arguing there should be no official inquiry (for which much of the media are now baying) until "a comprehensive search is completed". Fair enough: but that search will need a cut-off date, and if it produces nowt, Mr Blair will face a press in full cry against him like he never has before.
5 posted on 06/05/2003 9:25:40 AM PDT by Dont Mention the War
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
BWAHAHAHAHA

Whatta news day...

Howell Raines gone

Garofalo's sitocm is canned

Martha Stewart indicted

and now this...
6 posted on 06/05/2003 9:25:52 AM PDT by finnman69 (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Garofalo's sitocm is canned

What? When did this happen?

7 posted on 06/05/2003 9:28:51 AM PDT by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone; Stultis
Yoooooooooooo-hoo....
8 posted on 06/05/2003 9:29:21 AM PDT by hellinahandcart (Stop Unnecessary Excerpting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
I didn't even know she had one!
9 posted on 06/05/2003 9:33:40 AM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: finnman69; Grampa Dave
Stultis gets credit for this he/she nailed the Guardian!

HERE!

10 posted on 06/05/2003 9:35:10 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
Take your bow!
11 posted on 06/05/2003 9:36:05 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Although The Guardian earlier reported that US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz had said that the Iraq war was all about oil, the newspaper has now removed the article from its web site, and will print a full correction in Friday's edition.

Here's a thread on this:

The Guardian Pulls a "Dowd" - Falsely Attributes War for Oil Claim to Wolfowitz w/ Misquote

And the thread with the now yanked al-Guardian story:

Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil (RUH ROH!!)

12 posted on 06/05/2003 9:37:14 AM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog
There is some weird stuff going on.
13 posted on 06/05/2003 9:38:03 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
This is amazing. The Guardian has retracted the story, yet CNN Headline news was running the story on their 'ticker line' at the bottom as recently as 1214 EST 05 June 2003. I don't have the time or contact info for them, perhaps some of you can Freep them as well.
14 posted on 06/05/2003 9:38:17 AM PDT by BlueNgold (Feed the Tree .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart
They're gonna have to find another jew to misquote quick or Monday's corrections column will be a let down.
15 posted on 06/05/2003 9:38:50 AM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I think we have the liberal side on its heels....:-)
16 posted on 06/05/2003 9:38:58 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
...anti-war papers and broadcasters given a bloody nose with the speedy and relatively simple fall of Baghdad are seeking revenge on a government which defied them by going to war and often proved their direst predictions wrong.

Sounds so very familiar...

17 posted on 06/05/2003 9:39:54 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dog
I think it was due to that call they got from the DOD, politely asking for their GPS coordinates.
18 posted on 06/05/2003 9:41:10 AM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Those Pigs will be flying by any minute now :-)
19 posted on 06/05/2003 9:42:14 AM PDT by MJY1288 ("4" more in "04")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
So, when do the journalists actually tell the truth?

Yesterday the LA Times described a former Iraqi chem/bio expert as "wiry".
The photo of the same guy (well, at least the same name as used in the article)
showed a guy with a decent sized gut hanging over his belt.

Maybe the text editors and photo editors don't look at each others work.
20 posted on 06/05/2003 9:42:48 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
Did liberal-bashers cost Garofalo her sitcom?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/923698/posts
21 posted on 06/05/2003 9:42:51 AM PDT by finnman69 (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
When are the editors of the Guardian going to resign? :)
22 posted on 06/05/2003 9:44:53 AM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
I'm serious......the news business will never be the same.....because of this thing called the internet.

You took the time to flesh this out for us........Freepers rock!

23 posted on 06/05/2003 9:45:03 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Howell Raines, call your office.
24 posted on 06/05/2003 9:49:12 AM PDT by Petronski (I"m not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Fair enough: but that search will need a cut-off date

Why?

25 posted on 06/05/2003 9:51:38 AM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (http://c-pol.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War; Stultis
Bravo Stultis,

one really can make a difference.
26 posted on 06/05/2003 9:53:02 AM PDT by PeoplesRep_of_LA (Press Secret; Of 2 million Shiite pilgrims, only 3000 chanted anti Americanisms--source-Islamonline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Check this out! Never thought I would see the day when both stories get retracted and Raines out at the NY Times.

Something is going on!
27 posted on 06/05/2003 9:54:46 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Whatta news day... Howell Raines gone Garofalo's sitocm is canned Martha Stewart indicted and now this...

Man, I go out to run a few errands and come back and find out all of this at once. I've got some catching up to do. :-)

28 posted on 06/05/2003 9:56:47 AM PDT by alnick ("Never have so many been so wrong about so much." - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dog; Stultis
Stultis gets credit for this he/she nailed the Guardian!

"Stultis whacked their pee-pee! Stultis whacked their pee-pee!"

Job well done!

FMCDH

29 posted on 06/05/2003 10:00:11 AM PDT by nothingnew (the pendulum swings and the libs are in the pit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288; Howlin

30 posted on 06/05/2003 10:01:04 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (. . . there is nothing new under the sun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Pigs are flying!


31 posted on 06/05/2003 10:03:14 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Yes yes yes. Its a glorious day indeed.

The Guardian can't be trusted.

And the upheaval over at the liberal voice of record, the NYSlimes, is a grand thing to witness too. I luv it!

32 posted on 06/05/2003 10:03:18 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Check this out! Never thought I would see the day when both stories get retracted and Raines out at the NY Times. Something is going on!

The times, they are a'changin'.

33 posted on 06/05/2003 10:08:52 AM PDT by alnick ("Never have so many been so wrong about so much." - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
HERE
34 posted on 06/05/2003 10:09:28 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dog
ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!

That is hilarious!
35 posted on 06/05/2003 10:09:49 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Maybe today's the day to buy a lottery ticket since the stars seem to be in some fortuitous alignment.

Either that or I need to go put on my skates since h*ll seems to have frozen over.
36 posted on 06/05/2003 10:09:59 AM PDT by iceskater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
What a day this is turning out to be. Our local radio had the hillary publisher threatening to sue AP over quotes they obtained illegally too!

Just gets better and better!
37 posted on 06/05/2003 10:10:49 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BlueNgold
This is amazing. The Guardian has retracted the story, yet CNN Headline news was running the story on their 'ticker line' at the bottom as recently as 1214 EST 05 June 2003. I don't have the time or contact info for them, perhaps some of you can Freep them as well.

You can contact CNN about this here

38 posted on 06/05/2003 10:11:34 AM PDT by alnick ("Never have so many been so wrong about so much." - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: alnick
Think we should put the Washington Post in our sights next?
39 posted on 06/05/2003 10:11:51 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
The Dowdian Age sure had a short lifespan for some. ;-) Does it really hurrrrt when liebrals write about truths? po' babies...
40 posted on 06/05/2003 10:13:20 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi .. Support FRee Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: iceskater
Would go buy a lottery ticket if they were sold locally -- almost feel like a trip down to Gainesville, TX, is in order today for a Texas lottery ticket.

What a day so far!
41 posted on 06/05/2003 10:13:50 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Anybody believe this, "oh, so sorry, we misquoted" baloney? They know others will use their original story, come election time, and never be corrected - not by journalists anyway.
42 posted on 06/05/2003 10:18:32 AM PDT by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War

"You incompetent Limey layabouts shouldn't have brought the Waldorf into it. Now where's my screwdriver?"
43 posted on 06/05/2003 10:22:22 AM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
I hope they print the retractions on the front page instead of burying them on the back page of the home and garden section.

I know, I'm a dreamer....
44 posted on 06/05/2003 10:22:37 AM PDT by iceskater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Won't stop the Bush haters from making the claim.
45 posted on 06/05/2003 10:25:16 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
sitcom canned? Huh?
46 posted on 06/05/2003 10:26:11 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Irrelevant..........

Now marking the Guardian down in my (now long) list of obviously BIASED (towards the left) media sources.

At least they're honest though. I'll give 'em that. If this were the Slimes, or CBSABCNBC we were talkin about, there'd be NO retraction I'm sure.
47 posted on 06/05/2003 10:29:17 AM PDT by FourtySeven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
There is some incredible BS on this thread?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/923727/posts
48 posted on 06/05/2003 10:30:55 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (What left wing lies of the media, the DNC and other enemies will we expose today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
If you want, I'll buy you one when I buy mine!
49 posted on 06/05/2003 10:32:15 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch (Freedom is not Free - Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
This is how it's supposed to work but rarely does over here. Front page screw-up = front page retraction. It might have something to do with Britain's lack of "First Amendment" protection and much more stringent libel laws.
50 posted on 06/05/2003 10:32:32 AM PDT by katana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 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