It’s been said that being George W Bush over the last 7 years is like being a man in a small town who picks up his local paper in the morning.
He reads from the headline the accusation that he is a rapist.
Reading the article however, cases a completely different light and in fact reveals that he is nothing of the sort.
Rumsfeld gets that treatment in this Stuff article from Reuters.
Headline: “Rumsfeld implicated in Abu Gharib report“
“said Rumsfeld contributed to the abuse by authorizing aggressive interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay on Dec. 2, 2002.
He rescinded the authorisation six weeks later.”
So the idea that Rumsfeld had anything to do with Abu Gharib is a big stretch.
But to write that headline, you’re stretching it to breaking point – it deliberately implies something that simply isn’t true.
I’m disgusted that this level of journalism has made it’s way here. It’s bad enough to have it in America, but why do people need to use our press to dishonestly attack politicians from another country?
Don’t answer that.