Well, in their round about way, the NYT at least acknowledges that W is not really telling us the truth:
A truly liberal paper might say something like "In a further attempt to mislead the American people about the war in Iraq Bush claimed that the ongoing civil war was actually the work of Al Qaeda terrorists rather than a clash between warring political and religious factions vying for control of the country" but I guess I'll have to take what I can get. The real question is whether Bush himself actually believes what he is saying. As always, we are left to wonder "is he lying or stupid?" (Yes, I'm fully aware that it could be both.)
The president acknowledged that there were high levels of sectarian violence in Iraq, but he put the blame for the disorder squarely on Al Qaeda.
Mr. Bush’s remarks are at odds with statements made in recent weeks both by American military commanders and by [Iraq prime minister] Mr. Maliki.
While American military and intelligence officials credit Al Qaeda’s attack on a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February with having sparked waves of sectarian violence, more recently the officials have consistently described a more complicated picture. Earlier this month, Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples of the Defense Intelligence Agency characterized the situation before Congress as an “ongoing, violent struggle for power.”
That assessment was more in line with Mr. Maliki’s declaration after the recent bombings that such attacks are “the reflection of political backgrounds” and that “the crisis is political.”