This article appeared in the Washington Post on November 6th. The Seattle Times runs many articles from the Post, but they skipped this one.
Why did they skip the article? Could it be this message?
Forward Operating Base Sykes, Iraq, Nov. 5 -- For the U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, the war is alternately violent and hopeful, sometimes very hot and sometimes very cold. It is dusty and muddy, calm and chaotic, deafeningly loud and eerily quiet.
The one thing the war is not, however, is finished, dozens of soldiers across the country said in interviews. And leaving Iraq now would have devastating consequences, they said.
With a potentially historic U.S. midterm election on Tuesday and the war in Iraq a major issue at the polls, many soldiers said the United States should not abandon its effort here. Such a move, enlisted soldiers and officers said, would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.
Or am I just too suspicious?
(By the way, that article attracted 187 links from blogs, not counting this one. So a few people did think that the article was worth reading. (I'm one of those few.)
The Seattle Times did publish another positive piece by the same reporter, on October 31st. I'm not sure how that one slipped by the editors.)
Posted by Jim Miller at November 08, 2006 02:09 PM | Email ThisJust another way the Times and the MSM invent the public perception they want. And the evidence is in - it works!
Posted by: MJC on November 8, 2006 03:11 PMBush's announcement today to replace Rumsfeld is a good start. I wonder why our Commander in Chief waited until the day after the midterm elections to finally make this change that people from both political parties have been calling for for months, and in some cases years. Sounds like somebody is playing politics with our soldier's lives to me.
At least the change has begun... at long last.
Posted by: Splinter on November 8, 2006 03:13 PMLast I checked the Washington Post was very much a part of the "MSM".
Posted by: Stevie on November 8, 2006 03:15 PMI mean look at this stuff! They endorse Jay Inslee, who should deported to, oh, how about Cuba? And also ... well, okay, they endorsed GOP McGavick - hey, he worked with Slade Gorton,f another card-carrying Commie, cool! And also Dave Reichert, while peeing on Burner. Oh, and sure, let's repeal the DEATH TAX (play dramatic spooky music). No on renewable-energy as well, because ... well, it'll cost more. Judges? How about those that are supported by Slade Gorton? Okay, sounds good.
C'mon - if you're going to be a sore loser, I know you can find better ammo than this ... :)
Posted by: Patriot on November 8, 2006 03:16 PMWOW, MSM is at it again because they obviously must have secretly got this article from a respectable conservative journalist who wrote it, then slipped it past the ultra-liberal ivy league editors and place it on the website for all to see. Then they somehow did it again to get it in the print edition too. MSM has been beat...score a victory for conservatives everywhere!
Posted by: Cato on November 8, 2006 03:54 PMNice version: there doesn't appear to be any systematic bias at the Seattle Times towards the Democrats, and if anything the editorial staff's endorsements run heavily Republican/conservative, in several cases (e.g. McGavick) in stark contrast to their readership.
p.s. the BEST time to troll is times like these, why would we leave? ;-)
Posted by: Patriot on November 8, 2006 04:07 PMIt's quite clear to anyone watching/reading the news on Iraq in the last few months that if we leave Iraq it will turn into a free-for-all. The problem that the US faces is that by staying we're not making much progress on the whole "bring democracy to the region" thing. The Iraq PM is a tool of a militia leader, yet W backs the guy 100%. Meanwhile the senseless sectarian killings continue.
Iraq is a mess, the voters blamed George W, Rummy, and the GOP for making it such a mess. I really don't think reading this article would have changed any voters minds.
Posted by: Cato on November 8, 2006 04:57 PMYou idiotically stated: "It seems there is no way the MSM would want to get this word out!"
Let's unpack that, shall we?
Where did this story originate? That's right the Washington Post!
Is the Washington Post part of the Mainstream Media (MSM in wingnut speak)? Why yes, it is a very prominent part of the establishment or mainstream media!
Is there a shred of truth to your claim? Nope, not a shred.
Posted by: Stevie on November 9, 2006 10:02 AMIs the Washington Post part of the Mainstream Media (MSM in wingnut speak)? Why yes, it is a very prominent part of the establishment or mainstream media!
Is there a shred of truth to your claim? Nope, not a shred."
Did you even click on the link? If you had, you would have seen that it says it appeared on A13. In a newspaper, it means it's the 13th page of the news section. Get it now? The WaPo tried to bury it too.
I'm getting so tired of these damned ignorant trolls.
Posted by: ferrous on November 9, 2006 10:34 AM