September 17, 2003

MORE BAD NEWS FOR THE BBC: They've left Gilligan out in the cold. Meanwhile, The Independent compares Gilligan's original story with what we know now in fairly devastating fashion.

On this side of The Pond, Justin Katz writes that the "Bush lied" claim is looking about as weak as the "Blair lied" claim has turned out to be. Is it a case of "lies about lying, and the lying liars who tell them?"

UPDATE: Read this, too:

The current complaint is that Bush is a deceiver, misleading the country into a war, after which there turned out to be no weapons of mass destruction. But it is hard to credit the deception charge when every intelligence agency on the planet thought Iraq had these weapons and, indeed, when the weapons there still remain unaccounted for. Moreover, this is a post-facto rationale. Sure, the aftermath of the Iraq war has made it easier to frontally attack Bush. But the loathing long predates it.

In that regard, it's like the Right's self-defeating Clinton hatred, of course.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Tom Grey sees (possibly constructive) irony in all the Bush-lied talk.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Jeff Jarvis observes:

In the meantime, Kelly is dead. The government has been weakened. The BBC's credibility has been permanently damaged. I said the blood was on the BBC's hands.

Indeed.

STILL MORE: The Iraq looting story has turned out to be an embarrassment for Big Media, too. Not that they are embarrassed, of course.