Reuters Absurdly Links G. W. Bush With Report of Decades Old CIA Operations

Change font size:  A |  A

In a report on a recent release of decades old documents detailing CIA operations in the 1960's and 70's, Reuters seems to find it necessary to interject "criticism" of president Bush "being too secretive now" even though not one part of the story has anything to do with president Bush or any modern CIA operations. It would be like talking about the Civil War and interjecting a Bush comment, or talking of Roman times and suddenly sticking in a "US imperialism" comment into the mix where it doesn't legitimately belong.

The MSM's Bush Derangement Syndrome is so pervasive that they cannot even discuss historical information without trying to embarrass or attack this president in the midst of it all.

At issue is the CIA's recent release of decades old clandestine operations documents.

The CIA hauled the skeletons out of its closet by declassifying hundreds of pages of long-secret records that detail some of the agency's worst illegal abuses during about 25 years of overseas assassination attempts, domestic spying and kidnapping.

Ancient history, you might imagine, right? These are actions taken in the 1960's and 1970's that are long dead for implications to current security and long since gone from the control or direction of any president since before 1980. Yet, even as these documents are nothing but relics at this point, Reuters still had to use the occasion to slam president Bush for his supposed "secrecy."

CIA Director Michael Hayden released the documents to lift the veil of secrecy on the agency's past, even as the Bush administration faces criticism of being too secretive now.

What Bush has to do with stuff that happened when he was a teenager is anyone's guess. But here we have Reuters reminding us once again that THEY feel that Bush is too secretive.

Most of the stuff the rest of the report talks about makes for little else but interesting watercooler discussion, but one thing is amusing for its absence. That one thing is a name. That name is John F. Kennedy.

Reuters was pleased as punch to use the occasion of this story to throw out a dig at George W. Bush, but not one time did Reuters mention that the era that some of these CIA "dirty tricks" were played in was during the reign of John F. Kennedy. Nor do they go on to mention that many happened during Kennedy's VP turned accidental president, Lyndon Baines Johnson's terms in office.

So, if Reuters is so interested in pinning these eeeeevil actions to a deserving president, why forget to mention their faux Camelot hero, Saint JFK, and their "Great Society" charlatan, LBJ?

Should we guess that it is because Bush has an "R" in front of his name and JFK and LBJ have that teflon "D"?

What else could it be? After all Bush had nothing to do with the era in question, yet the two most prominent presidents that did remain unmentioned by the Reuters report.

Imagine that!