New York Times September 11 2005

By ERIC LIPTON, CHRISTOPHER DREW, SCOTT SHANE and DAVID ROHDE

Paul McHale, the assistant secretary of defense for homeland security, explained that decision in an interview this week. "Could we have physically have moved combat forces into an American city, without the governor's consent, for purposes of using those forces - untrained at that point in law enforcement - for law enforcement duties? Yes."

But, he asked, "Would you have wanted that on your conscience?"

New York Time September 9 2005 Page A1 lead paragraph.

By ERIC LIPTON, ERIC SCHMITT
and THOM SHANKER Published: September 9, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 - As New Orleans descended into chaos last week and Louisiana's governor asked for 40,000 soldiers, President Bush's senior advisers debated whether the president should speed the arrival of active-duty troops by seizing control of the hurricane relief mission from the governor.

OK I understand that Mssrs Drew Shane and Rohde can't be expected to read the lead paragraph of every singly article in their own paper which concerns the story on which they are reporting, but Mr Lipton is an author of both articles. Did he read what he wrote ? Why did he allow a MCHale's claim that the governor did not "consent" to the deployment of active duty military personel pass unchallenged two days after noting that the governor had specifically requesting deployment of 40,000 soldiers ? I guess it's habit, since the same glaring contradiction between the claims of the Bush administration and reality passed unmentioned in the September 9 article.

In general the September 11 article is excellent. However, reporters should not let lies pass uncontested.