If The White House wrote the Petraeus Report, wasn't it a "phony" report?

Question

Did Petraeus really betray us (betray: to lead astray per Merriam-Webster dictionary) if he stamped his name on a White House report and called it his own?

[ Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government. ]
"Top general may propose pullbacks"
The Los Angeles Times
08/15/2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pullback15aug15,0,4840766.story

Answer 1

Petraeus is a toady for the White House, we all know that. And, yes, the white house wrote his report. That was well known and was admitted by the White House and Bush. Listen to the words of his report. It's all right there. They are Bush's words and homilies that only Bush uses. Come on people use your brains. The report he gave were Bush's words not Petraeus' words. It was so obvious and I listened to the entire speech. And, please don't hand that stupid line to me that generals don't lie. That is the biggest bunch of B.S ever propagandized. Rumsfeld lied ALOT, that's been proven. Petraeus lied in 2004, 2006 and this last month about how it has been going in Iraq. The reason that September was lower in deaths of soldiers and citizens was because of Ramadan. When in fact the months prior to September were record months of deaths since the war started. I wish people would do their homework and get real about this war. They are so numbed and dumbed down it's really embarrassing. i honestly feel embarrassed for them and I pity them for refusing to do their own homework on this matter. They just take Rush's, Oreilly's, Coulter and Hannity's word for it. They truly are pathetically undereducated and in their chosing to stay ignorant they come across pathetic.

Answer 2

Everything since the report on the suspected WMD, which have been proven to be untrue and subsequently led to the invasion of Iraq, is the fruit of a poisonous tree. Once a lie is told nothing but honesty can change the course. Justifying a "myth" can never be the truth.

Answer 3

The "report" was not "stamped" by Petreus. He gave his statments to the White House through the Department of Defense who then established a report for Congress.

Petreus testified to Congress regarding his evaluations of the activity in Iraq (his report to Congress). He did not testify as to the validity or accuracy of the White House report.

Answer 4

That's easy. A congressional inquiry found nouthing. But you cons just go right on spitting on the dead body of Ambassador Stevens.

Answer 5

In the real world (you might not know much about that) people can attest that something states their opinion even if it is written by another party. Petraeus is a General in the US armed forces, and if he says that report reflects his views, I have no reason (or right) to call that into question.

Answer 6

This is part of your problem, getting your news from a wako left-wing newspaper parading itself as an actual news source.
WISE UP

Answer 7

Yo bozo, the President is the commander and chief of all the military!it is his report submitted by the general and approved by the Pres.what is your silly point?? learn how our gov. works !!!!!!!

Answer 8

If you actually took the time out of your busy schedule posting stupid questions on Y! Answers and listened to General Patraeus' report, you'd have heard him say that he was personally responsible for the report. But, you wouldn't believe him so just crawl back in your hole, put your helmet on, and keep beating your head up against the wall of FACTS

Answer 9

No.
What is wrong with you.
Do you Hate America?

You need to get a job. Quit just laying around and thinking up childish things.

Answer 10

Oh give us a break. Waa Waa Waa. Leftist whiner.