If Putz Had Gutz, He'd Drop the Question Mark

Ahem.

CAN AMERICA TRUST THE BBC?

Let's review the record:

Putz didn't question the accuracy of reports on Iraqi atrocities that would, naturally, gin up support for invasion. He didn't even mind when the BBC sourced a story to al-Jazeera (!), nor when the venerable news agency ran Tony Blair's Hussein "dossier." (That was the one in which he said, "In recent months, I have been increasingly alarmed by the evidence from inside Iraq that despite sanctions ... Saddam Hussein is continuing to develop WMD...") The Beeb was just peachy so long as it gave the 2nd Amendment a tonguebath, and when they wrote, "Iraq 'preparing for chemical war'" -- that, of course, was fine too. He even had the gall to write

NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION HERE! And we'll use them if you attack!

Uh huh. He didn't complain when the Beeb said, essentially, that France sucked for not backing the invasion.

Nor did Putz complain when the BBC interviewed him, not once, but twice.

This is but a drop in the bucket. The answer appears to be, "Maybe not, but Putz does!"

UPDATE: Just for kicks, check out this Mark Steyn piece from June '03. Wrote Putz: "MARK STEYN HAS BEEN IN IRAQ, and reports that things are actually going pretty well..." The Telegraph editors, who kinda jumped the gun, put it thusly:

There's no dysentery or cholera, no sign of a human catastrophe, the roads and medical centres are empty and the countryside charming. Yes, writes Mark Steyn, there's no place like Iraq for a holiday