speakingcorpse writes:

The poll referred to in the headline Many Troops Dissatisfied, Iraq Poll Finds was conducted by the army paper, Stars and Stripes. Since when did the liberal-communist-fuckers take over the ARMY newspaper? How can they be allowed to print this shit? Even if it were true that most American "heroes" serving our "nation" in Iraq were disgusted with our Iraq "policy" and our "president," wouldn't the Stars and Stripes, as an objective journalistic news publication, be OBLIGED to find out the other side of the story? That is to say, wouldn't they be obliged to conduct another poll discovering that our troops are delighted to be being blown up daily in Iraq? Actually, they wouldn't even have to do another poll--they should already know the other side of the story--that the poll referred to in this story is "inaccurate." That's the flipside to these disheartening numbers. And, in any case, I misspoke, the fact that our troops are getting blown up daily in Iraq is clearly only one side of the story. If an objective journalistic news publication were to maintain its status as an objective source of news information, it would have to show us that every story has two sides--for every body rent into pieces by explosives, there is at least one that is NOT thus destroyed--that in fact remains fully intact, with the blood flowing safely beneath the skin! Woops! I misspoke again: the other side of the story is much clearer than that. It's that, simply, from one perspective, NO Americans have been killed in Iraq in the first place. Look--even if ALL the soldiers in Iraq were killed in one gigantic nuclear blast, wouldn't there still, theoretically, be another side of the story? Shouldn't, for the sake of balance, we be told that such an annihilating blast had not, in fact, occurred? So why were we only told last week about the bombings of the Iraqi policemen and the Turkish embassy? Isn't the other side of those stories also clear--that they did not in fact occur at all?

(And we ought to be asking why the gloomy NY press is dwelling so perversely on the Staten Island ferry "disaster." Isn't it the objective truth that, while one ferry smashed into the pier, several other ferries did NOT smash into the pier? And isn't it true that many commuters made it home safely yesterday? And, really, isn't it true that the entire affair is a matter of perspective? I've heard a lot of commentators say there was no boat-accident at all.)

With best wishes,
speakingcorpse