U.S. Department of Defense Update

Thursday, October 26, 2006
U.S. Department of Defense Update: "The New York Times has once again repeated a popular myth to mislead its readers about Secretary Rumsfeld. We ask for an immediate correction.

Today’s editorial claims: “There have never been enough troops, the result of Mr. Rumsfeld’s negligent decision to use Iraq as a proving ground for his pet military theories, rather than listen to his generals.” Whether or not the Times believes there were enough troops in Iraq, the claim that any troop level in Iraq is the result of Secretary Rumsfeld “not listening to his generals” is demonstrably untrue.



David Thomson said...

Even Marty Peretz of the somewhat liberal The New Republic can barely stand the New York Times. He admits to enjoying the Sun a lot more! If Peretz is abandoning the Times---who will soon be left to read it?

Rick Ballard said...

"The New York Times has once again repeated a popular myth to mislead its readers.."

In other news: Water remained wet today.

David Thomson said...

"What the Times is like means a lot to me. But I can't depend on it at all the way I used to. Along with tens of thousands of other readers, I now go for The Sun which covers news that the West 43rd Street publication doesn't begin to cover. I also am tired of the soporifics on the op-ed page (there are days when I even have nostalgia for Anthony Lewis) and the predictably goofy editorial politics irritate me because they don't seem to me to go beyond the belief that, if only America would behave in a more gentlemanly manner, the rest of the world would also. Even North Korea and Iran."

---Marty Peretz

Skookumchuk said...

The New York Times...hmmm. Rings a bell somehow. Walter... Walter... Duranty, was it?

At least they kept a whole bunch of people in the North American pulp and paper industries employed for many years.