[Tenchiro]

If true, you would think this sort of thing would be illegal...


Saudi envoy promised Bush a drop in oil prices ahead of election

Mon Apr 19, 4:55 AM ET


WASHINGTON (AFP) - Saudi Arabia's ambassador to Washington, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, promised George W. Bush that his country would lower oil prices before the November 2 presidential election, according to the author of a new book on the war in Iraq (news - web sites).

A drop in the oil prices would strengthen the US economy ahead of the election in which Bush will face Democratic Senator John Kerry, journalist and author Bob Woodward told CBS television.

"Bandar wanted Bush to know that the Saudis hope to fine-tune oil prices to prime the economy in 2004. What was key, Bandar understood, were the economic conditions before a presidential election," according to an excerpt of Woodward's book "Plan of Attack" cited by CBS Sunday.

The Washington Post, where Woodward works as an assistant managing editor, began running five days of excerpts from the book Sunday.

The journalist is known for his work in the Watergate scandal that led to president Richard Nixon's resignation in 1974.

Earlier this month, after meeting with Bush, Bandar said Saudi Arabia "will not allow any shortage on the world oil market."

"Oil prices should be between 22 and 28 dollars (a barrel). My government's target is 25 dollars," he added.

A barrel currently costs about 35 dollars.

Clicky

 

[BostonBullit]

God Damn dubya isn't doing anything about the economy!

God Damn dubya is doing stuff about the economy but I don't like it!



would you people please make up your minds....

 

[N8 v2.0]

And you can believe anything Bob Woodard says too!

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by N8
And you can believe anything Bob Woodard says too!

Many people do find him to be a credible source of information.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by N8
And you can believe anything Bob Woodard says too!

I know what you mean, it is hard to take the word of a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by BostonBullit
God Damn dubya isn't doing anything about the economy!

God Damn dubya is doing stuff about the economy but I don't like it!

would you people please make up your minds....

Creating a working economy through a balanced budget, and responsible leadership = Good

Running the economy into the ground, while making backdoor deals with corrput governments. = Bad

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
I know what you mean, it is hard to take the word of a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter.

Pulitzer Prize winning reporters are not exempt from fabricating/embellishing stories..... there are several recent examples if'n you do a lil' research.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by N8
Pulitzer Prize winning reporters are not exempt from fabricating/embellishing stories..... there are several recent examples if'n you do a lil' research.

I don't know what you mean, maybe you could post a little bit more about it.

 

[brenth]

what reasoning do you have to distrust woodward? ( besides the fact that everyone that says something bad about bush is obviously lying)

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by BostonBullit
God Damn dubya isn't doing anything about the economy!

God Damn dubya is doing stuff about the economy but I don't like it!

would you people please make up your minds....

i hear peter's a big fan of the "backdoor deals", if ya know what i mean

that out of the way, that's really sleazy yet doesn't surprise me all that much.

 

[BostonBullit]

Originally posted by Toshi
i hear peter's a big fan of the "backdoor deals", if ya know what i mean

you know I'll do anything for cheap gas toshi

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
I know what you mean, it is hard to take the word of a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter.

he's not just that, but also a mind-reader! Didja hear his response to the question about why colin powell made a particular remark? He read his mind! BOOYAH! He also has x-ray vision & bionic hearing, which he employed when "bush collared rumsfeld - literally - and took him back to a cubbie-hole closet and closed the door and said...". He's also an unapologetic elitist: <mike> "how deep is he" <bob>"He's not an intellectual. He is not what I guess would be called a deep thinker". Can you believe this stitch & b|tch sewing circle echo-chamber? "look at these paupers - these proletariats". And then mike gets interviewers block then starts flipping through the book having a fire-side chat. "What do you think of this 'passage'" (as if it were scripture).

Hey, didja know that if you have faith in the oval office, it's a sure sign of weakness & insanity? Nevermind the previous 42 presidents did, or the framers of our constitution, or most of the historical figures of our country.

come to think of it, didn't Walter Duranty "win" a pulitzer prize? bob's in good company, baby

 

[brenth]

Originally posted by $tinkle
He read his mind! BOOYAH!

Nice!

 

[Jr_Bullit]

After reading the article, and then reading all y'alls responses...I have a funny feeling RM Poli Forum will become a good read over coffee as the election draws nearer.

In the meantime...whether Mr. Woodward is in good company or not, he is a known journalist and writer, and while some writers are known for embellishing, to completely create a document out of their ass and publish it often means the loss of a career once it is found out.

Since he's got an entire book on the subject, I think perhaps a good read through the citations in the book might be in order. After all, no decent writer can make claims such as this without at least citing his source.

Now then, if'n there are other Pulitzer Prize winning journalists known for embellishing or falsifying their reports, I'd be curious to know what history Mr. Woodward has in that area? Anyone know? If we're going to sit here and slander a writer, perhaps we oughtta have some history on the subject?

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
In the meantime...whether Mr. Woodward is in good company or not, he is a known journalist and writer, and while some writers are known for embellishing, to completely create a document out of their ass and publish it often means the loss of a career once it is found out.

i should clarify: my gravamen is more with 60 minutes than with bob woodward. He's rather credible, & to try & crucify him would be nothing short of partisan. Mike didn't do his journalistic duty & challenge him in the least, which marginalized mike, and therefore 60 min.

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Since he's got an entire book on the subject, I think perhaps a good read through the citations in the book might be in order. After all, no decent writer can make claims such as this without at least citing his source.

he actually has quite a few books out.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by $tinkle
Hey, didja know that if you have faith in the oval office, it's a sure sign of weakness & insanity? Nevermind the previous 42 presidents did, or the framers of our constitution, or most of the historical figures of our country.

Personally I think we shuld do like the Spartans did withtheir leaders. When an official left office, he was immediately put on trial for his actions. I think that would go along way to prevent impropriety.

 

[Spud]

Have to credit with Fark with pointing me to this great quote from Colin Powell in response to Woodward's book

Powell also disputed Woodward's contention that he and Cheney were so estranged by their differences over the war that they barely speak, insisting that his relationship with the vice president is "excellent."

"When the vice president and I are alone, it's Colin and Dick," he said.

Dude, too much information...

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by Spud
Have to credit with Fark with pointing me to this great quote from Colin Powell in response to Woodward's book


Dude, too much information...

Better than Dick 'n Colon...

 

[Spud]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Better than Dick 'n Colon...

I think CNN was giving him the benefit of the doubt with the spelling....

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by Spud
I think CNN was giving him the benefit of the doubt with the spelling....

Oops, Typo. My bad. :devil:

 

[N8 v2.0]

USA TODAY Editor Karen Jurgensen resigned Tuesday, one month after former USA TODAY reporter Jack Kelley was found to have fabricated numerous stories and lifted material from other publications over many years.

More: http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+USA+TODAY+editor+retires+in+wake+of+reporting+scandal&expire=&urlID=9985393&fb=Y&url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-04-20-statement_x.htm&partnerID=1660

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by N8
...

Just because one reporter was recently exposed as a fraud, does not make any other reporter any less honest.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Just because one reporter was recently exposed as a fraud, does not make any other reporter any less honest.

yes, for it's also this kind of thinking that makes all DH/FRers look like hippie stoners who destroy wildlife, when in reality, it's only just most of us.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Just because one reporter was recently exposed as a fraud, does not make any other reporter any less honest.

USA Today reporter, Kelley, was a 2002 Pulitzer Prize finalist.

There there's New York Times reporter Jayson Blair...

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by N8
USA Today reporter, Kelley, was a 2002 Pulitzer Prize finalist.

There there's New York Times reporter Jayson Blair...

are you seriously arguing that most reporters fabricate stories?

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Toshi
are you seriously arguing that most reporters fabricate stories?

Not all, but it does happen... even to ones who have been nominated 5 time for a Pulitzer.

The question of this thread is, did Woodard embelish..?

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by Toshi
are you seriously arguing that most reporters fabricate stories?

Just those that slander Bush apparantly.

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by N8
Not all, but it does happen... even to ones who have been nominated 5 time for a Pulitzer.

The question of this thread is, did Woodard embelish..?

i think it's a valid question, but your little tales about various reporters who have fabricated stories are completely irrelevant. furthermore, attacking the credibility of the source rather than investigating whether the allegations are true is not going to sway many minds...

edit: eh, why am i even posting here..? n8 believes that the media is out to get bush so is beyond reason.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

Originally posted by N8
Not all, but it does happen... even to ones who have been nominated 5 time for a Pulitzer.

The question of this thread is, did Woodard embelish..?

Looking at his track record ... I would say "probably not".

Your not still mad at him over Watergate are ya N8?

 

[Just Lookin'...]

Easy: Cast aspersion (without demonstrable basis) on the veracity of a journalist you disagree with.

Difficult: Offer proof from reliable sources that refute the posits of said journalist.

Impossible: Me saying anything of interest.
oy.

 

[Spud]

Hmm. I never heard any outcry from the Right when Woodward wrote the shrub lovefest Bush at War in 2002. Ah, but with a book that paints George the Lesser in a less desirable light, Woodward's objectivity and integrity have clearly dropped.

I have my own opinion on who is zooming who.