FWIW. You used an article in the June 23 Washington Post as an example of a reporter using the Military's press release as gospel. In all fairness, yesterday (6/29) the Post ran an article (by the same reporter) about the BBC's report calling the Military's version of the incident into question.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/28/AR2007062800447.html

The "correction" follow-up is part of the pattern:</>

The WaPost followed up with an article about the BBC report

FWIW. You used an article in the June 23 Washington Post as an example of a reporter using the Military's press release as gospel. In all fairness, yesterday (6/29) the Post ran an article (by the same reporter) about the BBC's report calling the Military's version of the incident into question.

This has been going on since the beginning of the war. Of course, by the time the "questions" arise, everybody has moved on.

The initial report did its job as propaganda. The follow-up is ass-covering and means nothing in the bigger scheme of things.

Of course it did. But that's my point. The BBC ran the same information that the Washington Post did based on the the same press release: (from the June 26 BBC article Glen highlighted) "On 22 June the US military announced that its attack helicopters, armed with missiles, engaged and killed 17 al-Qaeda gunmen who had been trying to infiltrate the village of al-Khalis, north of Baquba, where operation "Arrowhead Ripper" had been under way for the previous three days.

The item was duly carried by international news agencies and received widespread coverage, including on the BBC News website.").

The BBC, to it's credit investigated and published it's findings three days later. By that time the damage had been done. The real culprit here is the Military.

As a matter of fact, when I contacted the POC on that press release and pointed out that the BBC article differed greatly from the info in press release, the reply I got read:

"Sir,

All indications are that we were correct in our assessment. We are still pressing forward with an investigation to dispel reports of killing civilians. Until our investigation is complete, we will not be able to provide any further information. However, we have and are still currently diligently investigating these claims."

(Almost certainly a canned answer specifically written for incidences like this.) I hope someone follows up on this, but I'm not sure how you can prove the military wrong in cases like this. It comes down to a "he says"/"she says" situation. I would first check to see if, in fact, the Army really is investigating this further. If they aren't then the Army, in the person of the Sgt who sent me the email, lied.

What strikes me about Glenn's post today is the fury in his words. It mimics my feelings exactly. I have a political blog which I find harder and harder to post to because I have almost nothing rational left to write. Like most of us here, no matter how bad things got, I always believed that eventually the truth would win out and force the ugly, slathering, power-hungry, lying neo-cons and their enablers back under their rocks. This has been the bedrock of my belief in America, the bedrock of my sanity.

In the past month, however, something has happened to that belief. When the Democrats quickly caved on the wiretap legislation as they scurried away on vacation, something seismic hit me. These were the Democrats, not the despised Republicans. These were the people we reached deep into our pockets and funded, the party we worked so damn hard to elect. They. Betrayed. Us. They betrayed the American People! Is it possible we've been totally and irreversibly screwed?

With this seismic hit on our once-solid confidence in the power of Truth, we now see "respected, serious, experts" all spinning the truth to insure our continued occupation of Iraq. Why, for God's sake? How much more of this shit must we take? If our government has betrayed us, if our "serious" experts and their enabling press has betrayed us, if the Democrats(!) have betrayed us, what recourse is left? Are we being pushed to the almost unthinkable last resort: revolution? Yes, that has crossed my mind. I feel that fury in Glenn's post, and in my gut.

Yes, it's true that no Democrat should have joined the Republicans in official condemnation of the ad. But this attitude "My party, right or wrong," has its limits too.

I'm confused. on one hand you say no Democrat should have joined the Republicans, and on the other you say the concept of "my party, right or wrong" has its limits. Which is it? Did the MoveOn ad cross a line the Republicans themselves haven't crossed many times before? Hell no! This wasn't about the content of the ad, and everyone knows it! This was a chance for the Republicans to show the country that the Democrats are still the party that bends over and grabs their ankles when they're told to.

MoveOn.org is the most public face of the left's netroots, the loose organization of liberals and progressives who were largely responsible for the energy and money that helped the Democrats take back control of Congress. And like Judas, the Republicans got the Democratic Party to Petraues.

Mission Accomplished!