OMG! I can't believe WAPO is slamming the * Administration AT LAST!!!!!

[BigBearJohn]

Once again, the Sunday Times scooped the U.S. press on a big Iraq war story. "US 'in talks with Iraq rebels,'" the London newspaper reported this weekend.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld quickly confirmed the story and downplayed it, suggesting it should not be surprising that U.S. officials were secretly negotiating with battlefield enemies. Rumsfeld and U.S. commander in Iraq Gen. George W. Casey Jr. made an important distinction: The U.S. was talking to Sunnis violently opposed to the occupation, not foreign fighters linked to Abu Musab Zarqawi.

But the Arab News in Saudi Arabia, among others, was surprised and didn't make the distinction. "US Officials Held Talks With Terrorists" was their headline.

As with the Downing Street Memo, the Times was quicker than any American news organization to document the gap between rhetoric and reality of U.S. policy in Iraq.

SOURCE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/28/AR2005062800442_pf.html

[Independent_Liberal]

1. Nice going WAPO!

:)

[Just Me]

2. I couldn't believe I missed it.

I mean, DAYUM!!! Was that pushed down or what?

BigBearJohn, I believe we are finally turning a corner, my friend. :hug:

Naturally, we must be ready for the retaliation. But, together, we can make a difference for our fellow Americans and fellow human beings across this great world.

Together.

[Jacobin]

3. Don't get too excited

WaPo wants to 'win' the war, they don't want to see any moves toward concession, which is clearly what Rumfilled is up to.

WaPo will hold BushBot's feet to the fire. They are Warmongering Motherfuckers of the first degree, and they will not allow ANY moves away from total victory....for reasons that are not politically correct to say.

[LiberalEsto]

4. Maybe it was our torrent of angry emails

about reporter Dana Milbank's dimwitted column of June 17.

[geckosfeet]

5. I don't know,,, reading that does not sound like a slam. More like

hesitant reporting of some facts. I read it as,, hey,, if you want us to report the positive things in Iraq, there has to be some positive news coming out of Iraq!

Seems like they went out of their way to avoid any appearance of being critical while at the same time "reporting" the fact that the Iraqi news agencies cannot find any good news to report on.

How much can you spin 4-6 hours of electricity a day and 40% unemployment rates? Is it a newsworthy event that there were no car bombs or small arms fire on you block today? WAPO seemed to take particular pains to appear neutral on the subject of "negotiating" with terrorists.

To me,, it seemed like one big open handed shrug in news print. They could have drilled them on at least three points.

First of all, not all the insurgents are terrorists although they may have allied themselves with terrorist organizations. I know, a distinction without a difference. But who are they going to ally with? The British? The Italians? The Iranians? Maybe Syria.

Secondly,,, who the fuck did the BushCo theocons think they were going to eventually have to negotiate with? Their mothers? China? North Korea? Their tough guy cowboy take no prisoners I am gonna kick your ass attitude got them exactly nowhere. They should have sought out real diplomatic ties on day one with an eye toward an end game. They would be far ahead of where they are now in terms of working out a negotiated solution.

Third. Did the Bush theocon cabal really think they were going to jail and kill all the bad-guys? Did they really think that Iraqis would just roll over for a tummy scratching? Did they have ANY reality based planning and management for fighting and ending a war??

No, wapo did not slam anyone. They just shrugged their shoulders and went home.

[cosmicdot]

6. "the gap between rhetoric and reality of U.S. policy in Iraq"

can we shorten that phrase to one word: "lies"?

the WaPo writes that the Sunday Times scooped the U.S. press on a big Iraq war story and (a)s with the Downing Street Memo, the Times was quicker than any American news organization to document the gap between rhetoric and reality of U.S. policy in Iraq."

well, WaPO, get with it ... wake up and smell your tabloid/corporate media/echo chamber Journalism; and, your failures as the 4th Estate ...

just think, WaPo, it could be you scooping and documenting the gaps between rhetoric and reality of U.S. policy ...

... BOTH foreign AND domestic ...


you've been missing the gaps between rhetoric and reality in your coverage of dimSon from day one


that being said, it's nice to see the WaPo write this sentence without quoting the London Times:


With persistent criticism in Iraq, ongoing violence and talks with insurgents so far yielding little results, President Bush has some explaining to do.