Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Please. I have posted to accounts here that make it clear that PP officials were doing more than you concede. It's not an "automatic 'he lied'" thing -- it's the emerging picture that that's what happened. Do you think Financial Times just assumes that Aznar lied? Or perhaps their reporters actually know what they're writing about.
|
The IHT says:
"The government's chronology indicates that it was not until the police searched a suspicious white van late on the afternoon of the attacks and discovered an Arabic-language tape and several detonators that investigators began to suspect Islamic militants.
.
At an afternoon press conference, with some information apparently pointing to ETA's culpability and the tape still not translated, Acebes held a news conference and reacted angrily to the suggestion of an Al Qaeda connection. But 90 minutes after the tape had been translated, Acebes appeared at another news conference in which he announced the discovery of the tape. While he still emphasized that ETA remained the chief suspect, Acebes also said that investigators had been ordered to open a "new line of investigation.""
So, they acknowledged it maybe was someone else shortly after translating the tape.
But Drum starts his blog like this:
"BOMBING DECEPTION EVEN WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT?....It's pretty well established by now that José María Aznar's PP party did its best to mislead the Spanish people about who was responsible for last Thursday's bombing . . ."
At least now I know where you got that phrase "it's pretty well established . . ."
Threaded Mode