In an article on MSNBC regarding Dick Cheney's 'surprise' that he supports gay marriage (duh, his daughter's gay), was this tidbit from the erstwhile reporter and his razor-sharp editor:
Cheney also defended the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, despite faulty intelligence about its nuclear weapons program and links to the 9/11 attacks.
Despite. To show an act of contempt for or in defiance of something.
It is this clause that directly implies that the Bush Administration knew the intelligence about WMD was faulty and that they knew the links to 9/11 were tenuous.
Pardon me, but this clause is complete and utter bull-fucking-shit. If it is purposeful, it is a high form of deceit; if it is on accident, it is sheer editorial laziness. Neither is defensible. The only thing it is is crappy journalism that perpetuates a lie.
First of all, it was only after the invasion and conquering of Iraq that the intelligence of Saddam's WMD proved false, not before it.
As for Iraq's alleged involvement in 9/11, this was never was never high on the Bush Admin.'s list of reasons for invading Iraq. Did Saddam have terrorist connections? Absolutely. Those have been well documented. Were those terrorist groups connected to 9/11? No. And the Bush Admin. knew it, which is why when asked about those 'connections' they were very careful in how they explained them because any 'evidence' presented would be viewed skeptically by a public (and media) grossly unfamiliar with intelligence information gathering and analyzing.
So is there some grand conspiracy here? No. It's just shitty, lazy journalism tinged with the spice of bias.
Somewhere Edward R. Murrow weeps.