Tuesday, December 19, 2006

O'Reilly Presses Document-Challenged Dan Rather

O'Reilly on Fox n Friends this morning chatting with the trio about his trip to visit U.S. troops in Iraq. After giving his due respect to the troops, O'Reilly turned his attention to Dan Rather.

O'Reilly restated basically what he'd said on his The Factor last night (Monday, December 18, 2006)

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2006/12/on-oreilly-factor-tonight-bill-oreilly.html

Rather made a charge against Fox News Network, all the Fox anchors and reporters that we receive White House talking points. Produce 'em Dan.

...Dan Rather made a mistake, and he compounded the mistake by appearing on CNN.

Also see informative discussion on news hound, (see in particular posts of Garry Hall and mattm) though I take issue with 'em from time-to-time as you'll see from a review of this blog.

http://newsbusters.org/node/9706

Link from mattm leads to

Saturday, Oct. 11, 2003 2:37 p.m. EDT
Saddam's Forgotten WMD Confession

The elite media continue to insist that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. attacked in March, citing the scant evidence of any actual weapons finds by U.S. arms inspector David Kay.

But if it's true that Saddam Hussein was actually innocent on the WMD charge, then why did he confess in 1991 that his country had amassed huge stockpiles of highly toxic weaponized poisons - along with the delivery systems to take them beyond Iraq's borders?

That's right - lost in the debate over why U.S. weapons inspectors have yet to uncover the Iraqi version of the Manhattan Project is this salient fact: Not only did Saddam's regime admit to possessing thousands of tons of lethal chemical and biological agents - Baghdad also gave a detailed inventory of its WMD arsenal to the United Nations.

This week's Weekly Standard revisits Baghdad's 1991 WMD mea culpa - complete with a laundry list of the frightening weapons that the press continues to suggest were a figment of the Bush administration's imagination.



http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/10/11/145715.shtml

No comments: