Feb. 22, 2009 - Why you always should read to the very end of a NY Times article.
Unlike some of my conservative brethren, I do believe the NY Times can contain useful information. But you must read all the way to the very end of an article. The NY Times seems to bury the lead more often than not, particularly when said lead would show that Bush statements were true and its policies sound.
To that end, from the very bottom of a piece in today's Sunday Times:
He (Obama) also ordered a review of whether conditions there meet the standards of humane treatment required by the Geneva Conventions, and a review of what could be done with each of the 245 detainees who remain at the prison.
On Friday, government officials said that a Pentagon official had completed the Guantánamo report, concluding that the site complies with the Geneva Conventions’ requirements for humane treatment
The full article can be found under the headline Obama Upholds Detainee Policy in Afganistan. The main point: the Obama administration agrees with the Bush administration position that military detainees in Afganistan have no legal right to challenge their imprisonment.
Which is a very bad thing for the Move On and Code Pink crowd, but a very good decision for our country. I suppose it is too much to ask that Obama and his people apologize and recognize Bush was right on some of these critical issues? Or am I the only one put off by Obama's not subtly hidden attacks on Bush during Obama's inaugural address and then his quick embrace of many of the Bush policies that helped keep us safe since 2001? Still, if that's the way he has to talk so that his base doesn't desert him, I suppose that's ok, as long as he continues to act in the sane manner of one hears the daily threat reports.
Blessings, Holly
