shotbanner.jpeg

June 25, 2004

Oh, You Mean That Collaboration...

The NYTimesThe New York Times > Washington >is suddenly onto a contact between Al-Quaeda and Hussein:

Last week, the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks addressed the known contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda, which have been cited by the White House as evidence of a close relationship between the two.

The commission concluded that the contacts had not demonstrated "a collaborative relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. The Bush administration responded that there was considerable evidence of ties.

The new document, which appears to have circulated only since April, was provided to The New York Times several weeks ago, before the commission's report was released. Since obtaining the document, The Times has interviewed several military, intelligence and United States government officials in Washington and Baghdad to determine that the government considered it authentic.

My bet - and it's a completely uneducated one - is that the Times sees where the story is going, and wants to have a story out there before it blows open elsewhere.

Posted by Mitch at June 25, 2004 07:08 AM
Comments

What was remarkable was the Strib piece was the most gun neutral of the three newspaper articles

Posted by: rick at June 25, 2004 08:04 AM

So the Slimes had the document for several weeks, but STILL ran the story saying that the commission refuted the Administration?
Priceless.

Posted by: the markman at June 25, 2004 10:23 AM

Before I stopped reading the Times altogether, I would habitually skip to the end of a major article, then count back 7 or 8 paragraphs. That's where the NYT would hide inconvenient facts and quotes, which would sometimes negate the entire article.

The editors would be able to maintain, at a later date, that they had indeed printed the facts, and it wasn't their fault that nobody bothered to read that far. They could preserve their reputation for truth-telling without actually telling readers the truth.

Posted by: lyle at June 26, 2004 12:35 AM
hi