This story has been brewing since last week,[the link has graphic pics, enter at your own risk] as the Times apparently held the story at the request of the Pentagon, as they were also trying to sweet-talk the Pentagon into access to troops. I would hazard the guess that in addition to that it was also to allow the Administration time to get as ahead of the story as is possible, as well as a recognition of the potential fall-out of the story. One wonders what their pre-2008 position would have been. Because when Bush was in office, he and Cheney were personally responsible for things like this. Oddly enough, the story doesn't slant that way this time (Well, not
yet. We know the punditry is going to wade into that aspect of things). All that obligatory tin-foil-fodder aside, the Times appears to understand the line they walk with the article, and it just isn't realistic to expect a news organization to walk away from a story like this.
Read the complete post at http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2012/04/more_war_pr0n_v.html
Posted
Apr 18 2012, 06:19 AM
by
Argghhh! The Home Of Two Of Jonah's Military Guys..