With Blood Dripping From Their Hands ... Upon further review, the editors at the New York Times think they may not have been as "rigorous" in checking out some of the administration's claims about Iraq's alleged WMD. "In some cases, information ... was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged — or failed to emerge." ... The Times is sorry. ... Good comments from Left I on the News, Daily Kos and Slate (lots of helpful links at Slate). And don't miss the incomparable Get Your War On.

Kos: The idiot establishment media is playing along with Bush (as usual) and pretending that the 'handover' date has significance beyond the shuffling of a few legal documents. Fact is, nothing much will change. The decidedly non-liberal Wall Street Journal makes this clear as day."

I'm sure the Times et al. will continue to play along with this charade and then 'round about, oh, January 2006, they publish an Editors' Note stating that now they realize that they failed to apply basic journalistic practices to their reports on the "handover" claims of the Bush administration back in the summer of 2004. And the Times will once again say "sorry" and promise to do better next time.