This anti-Iraq invasion right-winger thinks that is a very fair question. Anyone familiar with the extraordinary disparity between what happened on Vietnamese battlefields during the defeat of the Tet Offensive in February 1968 and the way Tet was reported in the United States knows this is not a new phenomenon. HRS

Never does the media show this treasonous bent more than in their coverage of immigration issues. They may be even worse when it comes to racial preferences.

I think that it is unpardonable that the only major news that comes from Iraq at the moment is on fatalities (even casualties are ignored). I have been disturbed at how hard it is to get information on actual reconstruction. Of course, unlike the author, I would like to see more about what is happening with the new Iraqi government rather than photo shoots of soldiers dedicating new schools. And I would very much like to see news on Iraqi efforts at rebuilding. The most important question I would like to see reporters asking is: How much are the Iraqis accomplishing for themselves? That question is the main indicator of how well we are doing in Iraq.

Speaking of the treasonous media, I just came upon this e-mail I wrote on November 14, 2001:

——
On Nightline and Charlie Rose on Tuesday night, all the news guys and commentators, such as Charlie Rose and the creepy Michael Gordon of the New York Times, were grim, concerned, worried, unhappy. This extraordinary success in Afghanistan—when just a week ago many of these same people were saying things were going very badly and maybe we should stop the fighting!—and instead of celebrating this success they are finding a whole new set of things to worry about, e.g.:

- Are the Northern Alliance killing Taliban prisoners? (Oh, how shocking.)

- How will the U.S. handle the more difficult Pashtun areas in the south? (Hey, just a few days ago we didn’t even think we’d be able to break through in the North!)

- Will there be (in the words of the grim-faced Chris Bury on Nightline) a “diplomatic nightmare” as a result of taking Kabul? (His guest replied, “No, but it may produce diplomatic problems.” Gosh—diplomatic problems! Things really ARE going bad, aren’t they?)

And on and on it goes.

I never saw until this moment how truly treasonous the liberal media are. In their hearts they want America to fail, they want America to be defeated. They are unhappy when America is successful against its mortal enemies.
——

It almost makes one long for the WWII days, when the media and even Hollywood were very much behind the war effort and trying to help toward that end.

What happened?

More media disconnect: Examine the latest Reuters story from Baghdad:

http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=030930&cat=news&st=newsiraqfrustrationdc

If this link does not work, go to http://www.att.net/ and you will see their news stories for today.

Now for a little contrast: An extensive Gallup Poll of residents of Baghdad found that, by a 2-1 margin, they believed that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was worth whatever hardships the war has brought them (URL offers only a summary for those not subscribing to Gallup’s service):

http://www.gallup.com/subscription/?m=f&c_id=13919

As Ann Coulter pointed out, when we had embedded reporters during the war, we got some opinions straight from the Iraqi people. Now that all stories are passing through the news desks in New York, all we hear is negative.

Iraqis may be happy with the war by a 2-1 margin, but all Reuters has to do is find the one-third minority and interview only them. This is called “journalism” today.

Some more Iraq news you will not see on CBS, NBC, ABC, or CNN any time soon:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34841

It tells about the Iraq-al Qaida links in some detail.