Patterico's Pontifications

10/28/2005

L.A. Times Allegedly Tells a Whopper

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Scum,War — Patterico @ 11:06 pm



The L.A. Times runs a story about the Scooter Libby indictment titled Libby Allegedly Told a Whopper. It contains this curious sentence:

On July 6, Wilson wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times that cast doubt on President Bush’s statement that Iraq may have purchased yellowcake uranium from Niger.

(My emphasis.)

I am unaware of any such statement by President Bush. Perhaps you readers can enlighten me? I know the article is not referring to the phrase commonly known as the “sixteen words,” from Bush’s 2003 State of the Union speech:

The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

See? That can’t be it. Saying Hussein “sought” uranium is not the same as saying he purchased it, or even that he “may have purchased” it. This fact has even been noted by factcheck.org, an outfit that The Times has seen fit to cite on occasion — when it suits the editors’ purposes. (Also, there are other African countries besides Niger that sell uranium — such as the Congo, for example.)

So, The Times cannot have been referring to the 2003 State of the Union.

Do you have any idea what they’re talking about?

14 Responses to “L.A. Times Allegedly Tells a Whopper”

  1. I once sought to win the favors of my high school’s prom queen. This does not mean that they were actually bestowed upon me.

    Nor does it mean that I paid for them.

    See Dubya (6004eb) — 10/28/2005 @ 11:13 pm

  2. […] UPDATE: Patterico now catches the LA Tims doing the same bullshit. by Tom Dunson , Tuesday 25 October 2005 at 7:24 am […]

    The Trigger » LIARS! (e72e64) — 10/29/2005 @ 1:01 am

  3. I noted the Washington Post doing the exact same thing a few days ago. Reporters have been known to say that some stories are too good to check. That doesn’t explain this one, which has been debunked too many times. I guess some lies are too good to correct, too.

    Tom Dunson (149cde) — 10/29/2005 @ 1:03 am

  4. Journalism schools at least used to teach that writers proofread their stories before the editors ever see them, and they check all of their statements of fact. Journalism schools at least used to teach that editors should never accept statements of fact without verification. Apparently the writers and editors of the Los Angeles Times attended a different journalism school from the one with which I am familiar.

    Or, perhaps, it is more of a manifestation of what I have seen in journalism for a long time: sheer laziness. A writer and an editor believe something, and are just too freaking lazy to actually proofread and check for factual accuracy.

    That’s one reason that the blogosphere has made such strides in catching up to the mainstream media: we uninitiated heathens, who are paying for our own sites and who don’t have someone handing us a paycheck to write have taken what we do write far more seriously than some of the people actually working for the media, actually getting paid for what they write.

    Dana R. Pico (a9eb8b) — 10/29/2005 @ 8:24 am

  5. The WSJ also perpetuated this lie (link from Instapundit):

    It reads like this (paragraph 13)

    In January 2003, Mr. Bush claimed that Iraq had purchased uranium — a key ingredient in nuclear weapons — from Niger.

    I’m almost convinced that the writer is Maureen Dowd with Paul Krugman’s editors. This isn’t the NYT is it?

    Dave S (235ca8) — 10/29/2005 @ 8:50 am

  6. Scooter-gate Indictment: initial reactions

    A few initial thoughts upon reading the indictment of “Scooter” Libby:
    First, it’s important to recognize that these indictments are for actions relating to the investigation, none of them address any underlying crime. The left and…

    The Unalienable Right (7a057a) — 10/29/2005 @ 9:10 am

  7. Yeah, the old ‘Bush said Iraq bought yellowcake from Niger to make nuclear weapons to blow up US cities’ meme is back in full force. If it ever left that is.

    It all over the place, in my home town paper, all over the blogs’ comment sections. Blah, blah, blah. They’ll never get it right Patterico – clearly they don’t even want to get it right.

    Dwilkers (a1687a) — 10/29/2005 @ 9:22 am

  8. The story obviously was referring to the Bush speech in an obviously sloppy manner. I assume your question is rhetorical and sarcastic.

    Neil J. Lehto (77bed1) — 10/29/2005 @ 9:42 am

  9. See Joe Wilson’s Commentary in today’s LAT.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-wilson29oct29,0,4988049.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

    Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/29/2005 @ 9:42 am

  10. wash post did the same thing:

    http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2005/10/niger-uranium-charge-washington-post.html

    reliapundit (5deaa4) — 10/29/2005 @ 12:22 pm

  11. The Senate Intel report footnotes–where they’re not redacted– suggest that Iraq sent delegations uranium shopping in Congo and Somalia as well. So “Africa” is quite accurate.

    See Dubya (6004eb) — 10/29/2005 @ 12:39 pm

  12. True. But I also think there has been some debunking of those reports. Also, the Bush Administration seemed to have hung its hat on Niger. So I noted the “Africa” point but didn’t hammer it too much.

    Patterico (4e4b70) — 10/29/2005 @ 1:11 pm

  13. […] making up at the LA Times. Is this the worst newspaper in the country or what? […]

    PrestoPundit » Blog Archive » FACTS ARE FOR (d881ce) — 10/29/2005 @ 9:50 pm

  14. Nope, I’ve got no idea what they’re talking about.

    Unfortunately, neither do they.

    Greg D (dfbcf3) — 10/31/2005 @ 10:24 am


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0692 secs.