Reuters reporter Caren Bohan made a common mistake in this report on Bush’s speech in Salt Lake City yesterday, using the word “critics” instead of “I” or “Reuters”.

Bohan makes the mistake twice:

In a speech to a convention of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Bush again linked the Iraq war with efforts to protect the United States from another September 11-style attack — a link critics say is an attempt to shift the justification for war.

Not only are these “critics” never identified, the statement is total lie. The justification for war was always to prevent another 9/11-style attack — specifically one that might occur if Saddam provided WMDs to terrorists. When was it about anything else?

Oh, and by the way Reuters, that “September 11-style attack” was a terrorist attack.

Then there’s this paragraph:

Critics accuse Bush of shifting his argument for war when he invokes the issue of terrorism to argue for staying the course in Iraq. They point out that a commission investigating the hijacked plane attacks of September 11, 2001, found no operational ties between those attacks and deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s government.

Again, these anonymous critics are not identified, most likely because “critics” is shorthand for “me”. Also, this reporter, like the “critics” who make this argument, has no concept of the bigger picture, which is that Iraq was the key inspirational cause for Bin Laden when he launched his war against America in 1996.

But, considering Reuters reporters can’t even use the word “terrorism” unless describing someone else’s remarks, I’m not surprised one would miss the bigger picture.