8 ms·

NYT also helped sell America into Iraq.

by jerry1979 6y ago

seppin 6y ago
Right that's who to blame not the party/President that actually executed it.
- ATsch 6y ago
  Good thing events can only ever be blamed on one single individuals actions.
  - ATsch 6y ago
    This was supposed to be a joke but it's actually how people here talk about racism.
greesil 6y ago
The op-ed page is not the same as the news, which is what I remember Bill Kristol being hawkish in.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  Judith Miller wasn't an op-ed columnist. OTOH, ISTR that she was at least accused of actively deceiving her editors.
- nostromo 6y ago
  Nope, not op-ed. This is a reference to Judith Miller, and others, that published false information in the New York Times about Iraq's nonexistent weapons of mass destruction on the front page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#The_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#The_Iraq_War
  - greesil 6y ago
    Oh no. So that's how the aluminum tube information spread. Thanks for pointing this out, I stand corrected.
    - vishnugupta 6y ago
      The two part PBS documentary[1] is a terrific source of information. From the events leading up to the war until the origin of ISIS skirmishes. They explicitly cover the aluminum tube and how the government used a news paper article to justify their stance. It also covers the famous 16 words from Bush [1]. I found it fascinating to learn about all the internal politics during this period and the war state shapes the opinion of the masses. How does one go about justifying a war that has left millions dead, maimed, and traumatized for life, that has cost (and continues to) trillions of dollars, and continues to shape the world we live in today? Highly recommended. [1] https://www.pbssocal.org/programs/frontline/frontline-bushs-war-part-1/ https://www.pbssocal.org/programs/frontline/frontline-bushs-... https://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-bushs-war-part-2/ https://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-bushs-war-part-2/ [2] https://www.factcheck.org/2004/07/bushs-16-words-on-iraq-uranium/ https://www.factcheck.org/2004/07/bushs-16-words-on-iraq-ura...
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  Op-ed is still part of the paper's message, considering they do not just publish a random sample of letters received, and editors can be fired for allowing the wrong op ed to run.
ekianjo 6y ago
Not just that, they chose to support the Bolshevik regime in Russia while their own correspondents knew about the massive starvation in Ukraine causing millions of deaths but that was not the narrative they want to push to the whole world. They wanted Communism to be a shining star and not report the facts. NYT is as biased as you can go.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  So they were wrong 20 years ago, and another 80 years before that? Even ignoring how these accusations oversell some supposedly uniform position of the the paper, that sounds like a pretty good batting average.
  - megous 6y ago
    Ignoring how these accusations oversell some supposedly uniform position of the the paper, some countries have not completely recovered from either communism or the invasion, so it's not like it's some minor thing.
IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
That one factoid, namely that two of their writers were of the wrong persuasion almost 20 years ago, seems to be the extend of criticism people can actually come up with when put on the spot. Even though they had plenty of opposition against the war on staff and on paper, and very few of their readers were likely to change their opinion on that topic. And, not being having the presidency and Congress at that point not being neccessary for a declaration of war, their mostly Democratic audience had little to no influence on events. It's noticeable that nobody ever faults the Republican Party, which actually made the decision to invade Iraq. And also to lie to the world, its citizens, and, yes, those people at the Times that were naive enough to believe them.
- brigandish 6y ago
  > It's noticeable that nobody ever faults the Republican Party 2008 brought a Democrat president along with an increased Democrat majority in both houses, so if they weren't faulted at the time (and they were) then they were certainly faulted just a few years later.
  - einpoklum 6y ago
    Both for continuing the military intervention and for not bringing anyone to trial, nor even a public accounting, for cooking up the false claims used to justify the invasion; nor for the torture; nor for the killing of civilians; nor for the use of depleted uranium and white phosphor; etc.
- jkhdigital 6y ago
  The Bush administration offered the choice, and a bipartisan majority of congress took it. No need to invoke tribalism and blame an impersonal mass of people--we know the names of the specific individuals involved.
  - creato 6y ago
    The Bush administration controlled the information used the inform congress (and the media while we're on the subject of the parent posts). Congress and the media deserve some blame for not digging hard enough... but when assigning blame here, surely we ought blame the liars and misleaders more than the lied to and the misled?
varjag 6y ago
Greenwald fully supported the Iraq War as well.
- jjk166 6y ago
  Greenwald didn't become a journalist until 2005
atmosx 6y ago
Apparently this is something that has totally stuck with the NYTimes. I respect them (for a mainstream media publication), but no one can get over the fact that they lied blatantly at the time.

NYT also helped sell America into Iraq.

seppin 6y ago

Right that's who to blame not the party/President that actually executed it.

ATsch 6y ago
Good thing events can only ever be blamed on one single individuals actions.
- ATsch 6y ago
  This was supposed to be a joke but it's actually how people here talk about racism.

greesil 6y ago

The op-ed page is not the same as the news, which is what I remember Bill Kristol being hawkish in.

dragonwriter 6y ago
Judith Miller wasn't an op-ed columnist. OTOH, ISTR that she was at least accused of actively deceiving her editors.
nostromo 6y ago
Nope, not op-ed. This is a reference to Judith Miller, and others, that published false information in the New York Times about Iraq's nonexistent weapons of mass destruction on the front page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#The_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#The_Iraq_War
- greesil 6y ago
  Oh no. So that's how the aluminum tube information spread. Thanks for pointing this out, I stand corrected.
  - vishnugupta 6y ago
    The two part PBS documentary[1] is a terrific source of information. From the events leading up to the war until the origin of ISIS skirmishes. They explicitly cover the aluminum tube and how the government used a news paper article to justify their stance. It also covers the famous 16 words from Bush [1]. I found it fascinating to learn about all the internal politics during this period and the war state shapes the opinion of the masses. How does one go about justifying a war that has left millions dead, maimed, and traumatized for life, that has cost (and continues to) trillions of dollars, and continues to shape the world we live in today? Highly recommended. [1] https://www.pbssocal.org/programs/frontline/frontline-bushs-war-part-1/ https://www.pbssocal.org/programs/frontline/frontline-bushs-... https://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-bushs-war-part-2/ https://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-bushs-war-part-2/ [2] https://www.factcheck.org/2004/07/bushs-16-words-on-iraq-uranium/ https://www.factcheck.org/2004/07/bushs-16-words-on-iraq-ura...
oh_sigh 6y ago
Op-ed is still part of the paper's message, considering they do not just publish a random sample of letters received, and editors can be fired for allowing the wrong op ed to run.

ekianjo 6y ago

Not just that, they chose to support the Bolshevik regime in Russia while their own correspondents knew about the massive starvation in Ukraine causing millions of deaths but that was not the narrative they want to push to the whole world. They wanted Communism to be a shining star and not report the facts. NYT is as biased as you can go.

IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
So they were wrong 20 years ago, and another 80 years before that? Even ignoring how these accusations oversell some supposedly uniform position of the the paper, that sounds like a pretty good batting average.
- megous 6y ago
  Ignoring how these accusations oversell some supposedly uniform position of the the paper, some countries have not completely recovered from either communism or the invasion, so it's not like it's some minor thing.

IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago

That one factoid, namely that two of their writers were of the wrong persuasion almost 20 years ago, seems to be the extend of criticism people can actually come up with when put on the spot. Even though they had plenty of opposition against the war on staff and on paper, and very few of their readers were likely to change their opinion on that topic. And, not being having the presidency and Congress at that point not being neccessary for a declaration of war, their mostly Democratic audience had little to no influence on events. It's noticeable that nobody ever faults the Republican Party, which actually made the decision to invade Iraq. And also to lie to the world, its citizens, and, yes, those people at the Times that were naive enough to believe them.

brigandish 6y ago
> It's noticeable that nobody ever faults the Republican Party 2008 brought a Democrat president along with an increased Democrat majority in both houses, so if they weren't faulted at the time (and they were) then they were certainly faulted just a few years later.
- einpoklum 6y ago
  Both for continuing the military intervention and for not bringing anyone to trial, nor even a public accounting, for cooking up the false claims used to justify the invasion; nor for the torture; nor for the killing of civilians; nor for the use of depleted uranium and white phosphor; etc.
jkhdigital 6y ago
The Bush administration offered the choice, and a bipartisan majority of congress took it. No need to invoke tribalism and blame an impersonal mass of people--we know the names of the specific individuals involved.
- creato 6y ago
  The Bush administration controlled the information used the inform congress (and the media while we're on the subject of the parent posts). Congress and the media deserve some blame for not digging hard enough... but when assigning blame here, surely we ought blame the liars and misleaders more than the lied to and the misled?

varjag 6y ago

Greenwald fully supported the Iraq War as well.

jjk166 6y ago
Greenwald didn't become a journalist until 2005

atmosx 6y ago

Apparently this is something that has totally stuck with the NYTimes. I respect them (for a mainstream media publication), but no one can get over the fact that they lied blatantly at the time.