Interesting...the above headline, (front page, top, The Oregonian, linked) and its story, comprise 33 paragraphs, of those only 11 are dedicated to the headline...including the first, the fifth, and the last nine. And only five paragraphs from the end does the author acknowledge "Iraqi authorities suggested someone had planted lies against him in a bid to stir up "sectarian sedition." " So by my pea brained analysis, I have come to the conclusion that this was an honest mistake by the US. Why does it take till five paragraphs from the end to get this point out?
A couple of other things here. First this "US Mistake" headline string is a great example of biased reporting. Did any one see front page "Newsweek Mistake"? Not me. My take is that the press takes EVERY opportunity to bash Bush, via the country, as an attack on his policies, and in the meantime, this slamming lands on the troops...regardless of how many times the press says it is not intentional...it in fact does.
It is very helpful. By overblowing the Newsweek Koran allegations, and then finally reading the Pentagon report that acknowledged five mis-handlings, the press was able to get tons of anti-American exposure out to the world. Oh, I did catch, buried in paragraph 29, that the Muslim detainees had committed three times as many Koran abuses as did US military personnel. I guess that doesn't count for much when it comes to headline space, but vindicating Newsweek with five, acknowledged examples does. Oh, and it had the desired effect....the American press was able to push the hot button of the Islamafacistterrorists for a second time, and spark dozens more anti-American protests. Nice work.
Secondly, who is "U.S." when "U.S. Arrests Sunni Leader"? "U.S." means our military, and the "military" means our troops in the field. So what the Oregonian meant to say was "U.S. Troops Screw Up, Arrest Sunni Leader, Bush Policies and Actions Suck." Look this constant finding of fault IS slamming our troops. you cannot separate our "Troops" from "U.S." when they are the ones physically doing the work in the field. Yes they are responsible for their actions, but no need to keep slamming them as they have operated remarkably well under arduous conditions. No more..."We support the troops" from the press, at the very time they are going out of their way to throw gas on every single match. The results will never be perfect, but the effort has been superb, and it deserves much more respect than it is currently getting from the press.