Would someone please let me know when the NYT admits Bush is a War Criminal

[NNN0LHI]

Because that is what he his. And until Americas "paper of record" admits this truth...well there will be no truth. Nothing is ever going to get any better until that happens. These half assed "were kind of sorries" and "Bush is a bad man" and "its all Judith's fault" crap is just not going to get it for me. And that is just the way it is.

And I know they will never do this too. They can't. They were part of it. Their SADDAM HAS NUKES stories didn't end up on their front page by accident. They are War Criminals too.

Don

[electropop]

1. Pretty close here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5296954

[zbdent]

2. You might want to crawl into the cryogenic pod

to wait . . .

[NNN0LHI]

3. Its nothing new

http://hnn.us/articles/10903.html

How the NYT Missed the Story of the Holocaust While It Was Happening

<snip>The articles in the Times and elsewhere described the propagation of anti-Semitic laws in German allied countries; death from disease and starvation of hundreds of thousands in ghettos and labor camps; mass executions in Nazi-occupied Russia; and mass gassings in Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek. The articles also indicated that these were not isolated incidents, but part of a systematic campaign to kill all the Jews in Europe.

And yet, at the end of the war and for decades afterward, Americans claimed they did not know about the Holocaust as it was happening. How was it possible for so much information to be available in the mass media and yet simultaneously for the public to be ignorant?

The reason is that the American media in general and the New York Times in particular never treated the Holocaust as an important news story. From the start of the war in Europe to its end nearly six years later, the story of the Holocaust made the Times front page only 26 times out of 24,000 front-page stories, and most of those stories referred to the victims as “refugees” or “persecuted minorities.” In only six of those stories were Jews identified on page one as the primary victims.

Nor did the story lead the paper, appearing in the right-hand column reserved for the day’s most important news – not even when the concentration camps were liberated at the end of the war. In addition, the Times intermittently and timidly editorialized about the extermination of the Jews, and the paper rarely highlighted it in either the Week in Review or the magazine section.