Another day has passed with no word from The Telegraph on the welfare of the nation. We suppose Obama is still on vacation and all is quiet on the war front. Or maybe, just maybe, The Telegraph can not figure out how to twist things in a believable way.

If this had been the last administration the fact that all was quiet on the war front and Bush was on vacation would have been front-page news, second page any way. We could have read about how he was not doing his job and something like how he was dragging out the war. And there was always that old faithful about how the War was about the oil or to avenge his father, etc, etc.

It can’t be because they do not know how to play the card called the “Big lie”. Reasonable people can easily conclude that they have extensive experience in the use of it.

The late Dodson even wrote about it and he used it. We recall Dodson who used Charles Richardson’s “How did we miss the clues?" On August 30, 2007 in what reasonable people could consider aid and comfort to the enemy. Dodson invoked “The Big Lie” hypotheses. In his “Continuing ‘The Big Lie’” Dodson opposed ads about the war, which Vice President Biden is now claiming credit for. (As one of the greatest achievements of this [Obama] administration) Dodson tells the reader, “These ads are disingenuous; three of the four TV spots are based on a continuation of The Big Lie, that there really is a connection between Iraq and the Sept. 11 attack by Islamic Terrorists.”

Dodson then cast aspersions on anyone who would doubt him. We have to remember he has a record of this. He tells the reader that “Well I’m sorry, but that just isn’t so, and anybody capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time should know this by now.”

I will not go into “The Big Lie” hypotheses other than to say this was the brainchild of Adolf Hitler and used extensively by Joseph Paul Goebbels his propaganda chief. In this respect, reasonable people could conclude the staff of The Telegraph would make both of them proud.

In Charles Richardson’s “How did we miss the clues?” on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 he made accusations that he could not prove then and he can not prove them now. For that matter no one on The Telegraph’s staff can provide original documentation to prove the truth of the accusations. I grant you as the now Editorial Page Editor Charles E. Richardson did in his little flim flam you can reach out to the web and Lexus Nexus. There you can find where numerous people attempt to make this claim, but you can not provide a creditable source that says Bush and or Cheney made it. (The connection between 9/11 and Iraq)

There is ample documentation to refute the assertion that the Bush administration ever made the claim that the 9/11 attack was linked to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. What the rest of the so-called main stream media and The Telegraph did here was dishonest and disgusting.

In a news conference held on Thursday, June 17, 2004; at 11:32 AM when President Bush met with the media following a cabinet meeting. There is a transcript of the meeting, which can still be found at the Washington Post web site. It tells us that in response to a question, President Bush responded: “The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda, because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.” This was followed by the sentence telling us that: “This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda.”

We would think that Dodson’s “Is rumor good enough?” Feb. 01, 2007 is another example of how the editorial page staff and The Telegraph will pick something up and run with it without doing their research.

The source of the material, which aroused so much of Dodson’s envy, was what reasonable people could assume was a very misleading editorial by the Chicago Tribune. (“Anatomy of a false story”- 01-27-2007) Reasonable people can assume the only purpose of the editorial was to slam Fox News Channel.

The first sentence in the “Anatomy of a false story” was a dead giveaway. The editorial begins with “For quite some time, media critics and those on the left have argued that Fox News is an ideologically driven propaganda network.”

Then the editorial went on to twist things around to suit them and they published it. What the Insight on line Magazine reported was what the Clinton camp told them. And the rest is history.

Odds are that Dodson never looked beyond the “Anatomy of a false story” before he went off on his rant.

A copy of the Chicago Tribune editorial “Anatomy of a false story” (01-27-2007) and the material listed below was sent to then President and Publisher P.J. Browning. Displaying no concern, they let the misrepresentations stand.

 (1) "Is rumor good enough?" by Phil Dodson, which appeared in the Feb. 1 edition.
[a] Insight's "Hillary's team has questions about Obama's background
[b] Insight's" Last word: What insight reported and what it did not"
[c] Chicago Tribune's "Reporting on falsehoods, slurs"
[d] Chicago Tribune's "Anatomy of a false story"
[e] The Telegraph's " Is Rumor good enough"
[f] Fox News' Hillary Clinton Drops Madrassa Bomb on Barack Obama"
[g] Fox News' "Obama Debunks Claim About Islamic School"
[h] Fox News' "Obama Gets Taste of Campaign Coverage"

Have a nice day.