I will not be commenting or purchasing anymore, and here is why:
The New York Times doesn't cover this at all, and the relevant info is the last half of the article.
Tired of slanted, biased, and shit journalism, and that's what AmeriKa's Zionist-controlled MSM spews!
"Olmert delays Palestinian prisoner release; Cabinet support called uncertain" by Reuters September 16, 2007
JERUSALEM - Olmert is engaged in talks with Western-backed Abbas to prepare for a US-sponsored Middle East peace conference expected in November.
The estimated 11,000 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails are viewed by Palestinians as fighters for freedom from Israeli occupation in the West Bank.
Separately yesterday, the Israeli Army arrested 12 protesters at a rally near the West Bank city of Nablus after they hurled stones at soldiers and tried to force their way through a checkpoint, an army spokesman said.
Two of those arrested were Palestinians and the rest were Israelis and foreigners. One protester was slightly injured and taken to a hospital, the spokesman said, adding that about 40 people attended the rally.
An Israeli newspaper website said the protesters were demonstrating against a roadblock planned for the area.
Also yesterday, a small Israeli force pushed into the northern Gaza Strip, clashing with militants and bulldozing farmland, the army and residents said.
Local medics said a 17-year-old Palestinian was in serious condition after being shot in his stomach in northern Gaza. The army said it had no reports of injuries.
An army spokesman said Israeli forces conducted a routine operation against what it called terror threats in the north of the coastal enclave.
Militants in northern Gaza fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the Israelis and exchanged fire with soldiers, he said.
Tensions between the Jewish state and Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in June, have increased sharply after a makeshift rocket fired into Israel by militants wounded at least 35 Israeli Army conscripts last week.
The Israeli Army frequently carries out operations in border areas to curb rocket attacks from Gaza. Israel has opted against a major offensive in the territory, but last week's rocket attack rekindled calls for tougher action.
Militants from major groups said they were on high alert in case Israel launched a major incursion into Gaza, and are deploying hundreds of fighters near the border at night."
Don't be surprised if Israel goes in full bore soon.
And here is a horse shit report on the front page of the Times.
Why horse shit? Because it is ALREADY BEHIND the times!
More evidence of the PROPAGANDA FUNCTION of the shit Times!
A front-pager, of course!
"In Bush Speech, Signs of a Split on Iran Policy in the Administration" by HELENE COOPER
WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 — While scrutiny this week focused on the debate over troop strength, President Bush also used the occasion to turn up the pressure on Iran, using his speech on Thursday to stress the need to contain Iran as a major reason for the continued American presence in Iraq.
The language in Mr. Bush’s speech reflected an intense and continuing struggle between factions within his administration over how aggressively to confront Iran. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been arguing for a continuation of a diplomatic approach, while officials in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office have advocated a much tougher view. They seek to isolate and contain Iran, and to include greater consideration of a military strike.
[The "debate" is OVER, and Cheney has won -- as we knew he would over the bubble-headed War Princess Rice!]
Mr. Bush’s language indicated that the debate, at least for now, might have tilted toward Mr. Cheney. By portraying the battle with Iran as one for supremacy in the Middle East, Mr. Bush turned up the language another, more bellicose, notch. “If we were to be driven out of Iraq, extremists of all strains would be emboldened,” Mr. Bush said. “Iran would benefit from the chaos and would be encouraged in its efforts to gain nuclear weapons and dominate the region.”
[Why is the Times behind the "news," or is it obfuscating for the administration again with shit lies on its front page?]
The debate between the factions in the administration will play out soon in other ways, including the decision over whether to declare Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, or a unit of it, a terrorist organization and subject to increased financial sanctions.
Mr. Cheney and hawks in his office, however, have become increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of progress in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Allies of Mr. Cheney continue to say publicly that the United States should include a change in Iran’s leadership as a viable policy option, and have argued, privately, that the United States should encourage Israel to consider a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
[How about that, huh, reader?!
WWIII, full speed ahead!!!!!]
Iran’s “malign” influence in Iraq has also fueled the disquiet in Mr. Cheney’s office, one administration official said. Some White House officials and some members of the vice president’s staff have been pushing to blacklist the entire Revolutionary Guard.
The administration is still pressing ahead with other efforts to turn up the pressure on Iran. The State Department has asked top officials from the five other world powers seeking to rein in Tehran’s nuclear ambitions to come to Washington on Friday for a meeting in which R. Nicholas Burns, under secretary of state for political affairs, will press for stronger United Nations sanctions against Iran.
[Meetings are just P.R. poop! Already made up their minds!
It's all in the PNAC and "Clean Break" documents!]
On Sept. 28, Ms. Rice will meet with her counterparts from Europe, Russia and China to discuss the Iran sanctions issue.
Beyond its nuclear program, Iran has emerged as an increasing source of trouble for the Bush administration, American officials said, by inflaming the insurgencies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Gaza, where it has provided military and financial support to the militant Islamic group Hamas.
[Yup, the Iranians are responsible for everything, while the pure-as-driven-snow USrael is as innocent as can be!!!!
I love how the papers try to imply Iran is arming Sunni who would kill them!
That's a REAL LAUGHER, boy!!!!
How's that for "reporting," huh?
More like a P.R. firm carrying water!]
The American military in Iraq still has custody of several Iranian officials who were detained there on suspicion of involvement in providing aid to Shiite militias.
[But that's all right!
The U.S. can keep people in torture chambers forever, and the Zionist-controlled media couldn't give a shit!
But if it was any USraeli who was being held, oh well, we would HEAR ALL ABOUT IT!!!
Pfffffftttttt!!!!!!]
Iran’s government has denied the charges. Its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Friday that Mr. Bush’s Middle East policies had failed and that Mr. Bush would one day be put on trial for the “tragedies” he had created in Iraq.
[Oh, what a dream come true that would be!!!!
For this mass-murdering Anti-Christ to stand trial would be great!!!!]
But a belief has been growing in Iran, which administration officials have pointedly not tried to stem, that the Bush administration was considering military strikes against Iran. An Israeli airstrike in Syria last week kicked up speculation in the Iranian press that Israel, in alliance with the United States, was really trying to send a message to Iran that it could strike Iranian nuclear facilities if it chose to.
[Oh, they have gotten the message, believe me. the Iranians appear to be doing EVERYTHING THEY CAN to AVOID WAR!!!
But that will never be presented accurately by shit war dailies!!]
George Perkovich, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace:
“If I were the Iranians, what I’d be freaked out about is that the other Arab states didn’t protest [the airstrike]. The Arab world nonreaction is a signal to Iran, that Arabs aren’t happy with Iran’s power and influence, so if the Israelis want to go and intimidate and violate the airspace of another Arab state that’s an ally of Iran, the other Arab states aren’t going to do anything.”
[In other words, the Arab dictators we prop up through force and violence are SIDING with ISRAEL!!!!]
"Bush setting America up for war with Iran" by Philip Sherwell and Tim Shipman/The Guardian September 16, 2007
Senior American intelligence and defence officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.
Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.
Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action.
In a chilling scenario of how war might come, a senior intelligence officer warned that public denunciation of Iranian meddling in Iraq - arming and training militants - would lead to cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.
A prime target would be the Fajr base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in southern Iran, where Western intelligence agencies say armour-piercing projectiles used against British and US troops are manufactured.
Under the theory - which is gaining credence in Washington security circles - US action would provoke a major Iranian response, perhaps in the form of moves to cut off Gulf oil supplies, providing a trigger for air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities and even its armed forces.
Senior officials believe Mr Bush's inner circle has decided he does not want to leave office without first ensuring that Iran is not capable of developing a nuclear weapon.
[Bush is the Anti-Christ who will kick off WWIII!
There it is, right in print, telling you what this "lame-duck president" plans to do!!!!]
The intelligence source said: "No one outside that tight circle knows what is going to happen." But he said that within the CIA "many if not most officials believe that diplomacy is failing" and that "top Pentagon brass believes the same." A strike will probably follow a gradual escalation. Over the next few weeks and months the US will build tensions and evidence around Iranian activities in Iraq."
["Build evidence," huh? Like they DID WITH IRAQ, huh?!!!
OUT-FUCKING-RAGEOUS!!!!
If the AmeriKan people ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN, then DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL!!!!
Then the Amurkn people will DESERVE to SUFFER and I will APPLAUD as they WAIL!!!!!!!]
Previously, accusations that Mr Bush was set on war with Iran have come almost entirely from his critics. Many senior operatives within the CIA are highly critical of Mr Bush's handling of the Iraq war, though they themselves are considered ineffective and unreliable by hardliners close to Mr Cheney.
The vice president is said to advocate the use of bunker-busting tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's nuclear sites. His allies dispute this, but Mr Cheney is understood to be lobbying for air strikes if sites can be identified where Revolutionary Guard units are training Shia militias.
[So, Cheney wants to GO NUCLEAR on Iran!!!!!
Oh, may God forgive us!! I am so sorry world!!!]
Recent developments over Iraq appear to fit with the pattern of escalation predicted by Pentagon officials. Gen David Petraeus, Mr Bush's senior Iraq commander, denounced the Iranian "proxy war" in Iraq last week as he built support in Washington for the US military surge in Baghdad.
The US also announced the creation of a new base near the Iraqi border town of Badra, the first of what could be several locations to tackle the smuggling of weapons from Iran.
A State Department source familiar with White House discussions said that Miss Rice, under pressure from senior counter-proliferation officials to acknowledge that military action may be necessary, is now working with Mr Cheney to find a way to reconcile their positions and present a united front to the President.
The source said: "When you go down there and see the body language, you can see that Cheney is still The Man. Condi pushed for diplomacy but she is no dove. If it becomes necessary she will be on board. Both of them are very close to the president, and where they differ they are working together to find a way to present a position they can both live with."
[But can the rest of the world live with what these Neo-Con Fascist Madmen have planned?]
The official contrasted the efforts of the secretary of state to work with the vice-president with the "open warfare between Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld before the Iraq war". Miss Rice's bottom line is that if the administration is to go to war again it must build the case over a period of months and win sufficient support on Capitol Hill.
[Shouldn't be a problem with Congress under the control of the Israeli lobby, and with the shit War Dailies in their pocket as well!]
The Sunday Telegraph has been told that Mr Bush has privately promised her that he would consult "meaningfully" with Congressional leaders of both parties before any military action against Iran on the understanding that Miss Rice would resign if this did not happen.
The intelligence officer said that the US military has "two major contingency plans" for air strikes on Iran: "One is to bomb only the nuclear facilities. The second option is for a much bigger strike that would - over two or three days - hit all of the significant military sites as well. This plan involves more than 2,000 targets."
And the coverage of the anti-war protests, by the PRO-WAR PAPERS!
"Thousands march in D.C. war protest" by Matthew Barakat/Associated Press Writer | September 16, 2007
WASHINGTON --Thousands of protesters marched from the White House to the Capitol yesterday to demand an end to the Iraq war, leading to the arrests of at least 150 people.
Many of the protesters were arrested without a struggle after they jumped over a barricade near the base of the Capitol. But some grew angry as police attempted to push them back using large black shields and a chemical spray.
Before arriving at the Capitol lawn, the demonstrators marched on Pennsylvania Avenue, and they held banners and signs and chanted, "What do we want? Troops out. When do we want it? Now."
At the Capitol lawn, some protesters lay down with signs on top of their bodies to represent soldiers killed in Iraq.
The protesters gathered earlier Saturday near the White House in Lafayette Park with signs saying "End the war now" and calling for President Bush's impeachment. The rally was organized by the ANSWER Coalition and other groups.
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan told the crowd is was time to be assertive.
"It's time to lay our bodies on the line and say we've had enough," she said. "It's time to shut this city down."
Army veteran Justin Cliburn, 25, of Lawton, Okla., was among a contingent of Iraq veterans in attendance.
"We're occupying a people who do not want us there," Cliburn said of Iraq. "We're here to show that it isn't just a bunch of old hippies from the 60s who are against this war."
About 13 blocks away, nearly 1,000 counterprotesters gathered near the Washington Monument, frequently erupting in chants of "U-S-A" and waving American flags.
Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson, speaking from a stage to crowds clad in camouflage, American flag bandanas and Harley Davidson jackets, said he wanted to send three messages.
"Congress, quit playing games with our troops. Terrorists, we will find you and kill you," he said. "And to our troops, we're here for you, and we support you."
Representative Duncan hunter, Republican of California, made a surprise visit to the counterprotest, which was organized by Gathering of Eagles, a nationwide nn-partisan organization founded this year by Vietnam war veterans.
"We're a people of faith, courage, and fidelity," said Hunter, a 2008 presidential candidate. "It's for this generation that we will win this war on terror."
The number of arrests by Capitol Police on Saturday was much higher than previous anti-war rallies in Washington this year. Organizers estimated that nearly 100,000 people attended the rally and march. That number could not be confirmed; police did not give their own estimate."
"Thousands march in antiwar protest; More than 160 arrested in D.C. demonstration" by Tina Marie Macias/Los Angeles Times September 16, 2007
WASHINGTON - In the first major antiwar demonstration in the nation's capital since January, several thousand protesters marched from the White House to the Capitol yesterday, carrying signs and chanting slogans demanding an end to the war and the impeachment of President Bush.
A smaller group of people who support the president and the war conducted a counterdemonstration, leading to some heated confrontations.
More than 160 protesters were arrested on the steps of the Capitol when they jumped barriers around the base of the building. Most were taken into custody without a struggle.
Before arriving at the Capitol lawn, the demonstrators marched on Pennsylvania Avenue. Counterprotesters lined the sidewalks behind metal barricades.
Organizers estimated that more than 100,000 people attended the rally and march. That number could not be confirmed; police did not give their own estimate.
The antiwar rally was organized by the ANSWER Coalition, which stands for Act Now to Stop War & End Racism. It was timed to follow last week's congressional testimony by Army General David H. Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, and Bush's speech about Iraq on Thursday.
"We wanted to have as much impact on the congressional debate as possible," ANSWER Coalition volunteer Ann Wilson said .
The day's events began in front of the White House with a morning rally, which included a man dressed in a Santa Claus outfit holding a sign that read "Coal for Bush and Cheney," a fake coffin for a fallen Marine, and several speakers, including former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan, and former attorney general Ramsey Clark.
"Nothing is going to stop this machine but to impeach Bush and his gang and bring the troops back home," Clark said.
Sheehan urged war opponents to be assertive. "It's time to lay our bodies on the line and say we've had enough," she said. "It's time to shut this city down."
A group called Iraqi Veterans Against the War organized a mass "die-in" in front of the Capitol to memorialize the Iraqis and American soldiers who have died since the invasion.
"The Iraqi people do not see us as peace-makers, they see us as occupiers and murderers," Veterans Against the War member Garett Reppenhagen said. The 32-year-old Coloradan, who said he served as a sniper in Iraq in 2004 and 2005, was among those arrested at the end of the march when he climbed over the barrier surrounding the Capitol.
About 5,000 people laid down for the die-in, said Ian Thompson of Los Angeles, one of the protest organizers, and none was arrested. But when the crowd started to get rowdier, officers pepper-sprayed many of the protesters and started making arrests, he said.
The marchers "were met with a huge police presence. Obviously they're very scared of an antiwar movement," said Thompson, 32. Into the early evening, protesters continued to chant "What do we want? Peace!" in front of the Capitol building.
Among them was Jessica Ramierez, a student at the University of California, Los Angeles who spent $500 on her trip to Washington because, she said, she wants to see more students mobilize against the war. "It's about doing something that you believe in," Ramierez, 22, said as she sat on a ledge near the Capitol.
In the morning, about a mile away, more than 1,000 people stood on the National Mall to rally in support of the war. The counterdemonstration, organized by the Gathering of Eagles - a group of Vietnam veterans - and the Washington chapter of the conservative group Free Republic, lasted for more than three hours.
"Those who protest our troops, they no longer own the streets," said Colonel Henry J. Cook III, retired US Army Special Forces national commander.
Kristinn Taylor, spokesman for Gathering of Eagles, said he refuses to think of the consequences if the troops were to be taken out of Iraq. "Even though the parents have paid the price, they know the price of losing this war would be too much for any of us to bear," Taylor said.
Some counterprotesters said they were disgusted by the war protesters. Marilee Carlson, chairwoman of Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission, described them as "despicable."
"It dishonors our sons and daughters and goes against everything we live and die for," said Carlson, whose son, Sergeant Michael Carlson, died in Iraq on Jan. 24, 2005."
"Antiwar Protest Ends With Dozens of Arrests" by DAVID JOHNSTON
WASHINGTON. Sept. 15 — A rally on Saturday to protest the war in Iraq, which began with a peaceful march of several thousand people to the Capitol, ended with dozens of arrests in a raucous demonstration that evoked the angry spirit of the Vietnam era protests of more than three decades ago.
[Love how the pro-war, pro-Zionist paper slants things, don'tcha, reader?!]
The police, including some officers dressed in riot gear, tried to halt demonstrators as they sought to climb over a low wall near the Capitol after a march that had begun near the White House in a festive atmosphere.
The protest grew tense as the chanting, placard-carrying demonstrators gathered near the Capitol for a planned “die-in.” Officers struggled to keep demonstrators from breaking through their ranks and began arresting those who tried.
Demonstrators were pushed to the ground, placed in plastic handcuffs and led away to the Capitol. Sgt. Kimberly Schneider, a spokeswoman for the Capitol Police, said that the authorities had arrested 189 people and that they would be charged with illegally crossing a police line. Two protesters and two police officers received minor injuries, Sergeant Schneider said.
The antiwar demonstration was held on the same day as a separate event sponsored by a group called Gathering of Eagles, a veterans group.
Before the antiwar marchers arrived, there was a brief physical altercation between some members of the antiwar group Code Pink and some of the demonstrators who said they were there to support the troops. The police moved in to break up the scuffle. As the antiwar demonstrators moved along Pennsylvania Avenue, the two sides continued to trade chants and sometimes heated messages, but lines of police officers intervened to keep the opposing sides apart.
[Oh, yeah, those VIOLENT OLD LADIES of CODE PINK!!
Good God!!! What SHIT by the fucking stink Times!!!
They are SO DISCREDITED because of their obviously biased SHIT COVERAGE!!!!!]
“What troubles me, the thing that is so dismaying, is they don’t realize the big picture,” said John Aldins, 54, who came from Media, Pa., with his wife, Karen, and daughter, Rachel, to show their support for the troops. The Aldins have three other children serving in the military. Rachel Aldins will join the Army in the fall to serve as a nurse.
“It’s not just Iraq, it’s the whole Middle East,” Mr. Aldins said. “It’s not a red, blue or pink issue. It’s an all-of-us issue.”
The protests came during a week in which Iraq dominated the attention of the White House and Congress. In a speech on Thursday, President Bush sought support for a substantial military presence in Iraq and a gradual troop reduction.
Members of the Answer Coalition, the umbrella organization of activist groups behind the demonstration, are demanding an immediate troop withdrawal. Some of the protesters called for Mr. Bush’s impeachment. Speakers at the rally included familiar political and antiwar activists, among them Cindy Sheehan, Ralph Nader and Ramsey Clark.
Brian Becker, a national coordinator for the coalition, said in a statement: “What Bush really intends is to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for years or decades to come. He plans to move forward with a policy that will continue to kill thousands of U.S. service members and hundreds of the thousands of Iraqis.”
Several marchers said they were demonstrating against what they called the Bush administration’s false assertions about Iraq. Kim Druist, 39, a nurse from Plainsboro, N.J., who wore a camouflage shirt to represent solidarity with American troops, said she intended to be arrested to protest the testimony by Gen. David H. Petraeus earlier in the week in which he said there had been progress in Iraq. Ms. Druist referred the statement to as propaganda.
Some people said they were protesting other Bush administration policies.
Chris Hager, 62, of Falls Church, Va., and Wendy Salomon, 52, of Arlington, Va., walked through the crowd assembled in front of the White House wearing orange jumpsuits and dark hoods to represent the detainees in Guantánamo Bay and other detention centers. “We are here to help to get the American people to think about what is being done in our name,” Mr. Hager said.
He added: “We want to make people think about what is happening. This certainly wasn’t the country I was brought up to believe in.”
As far as I am concerned, after the disrespectful and shit treatment the media and public heap upon anti-war folks, America can FEAST on the corpses of their WAR DEAD and DRINK THEIR BLOOD!!!
Go on, Amurka!!!
EAT and DRINK UP until you fucking choke on the ROTTING FLESH and WARM BLOOD of your son's and daughter's corpses!!!
Oh, and by the way, over 1.2 million Iraqis dead as a result of this invasion.
Those are "Nazi-like" numbers for old Georgie, and he ain't done yet!
"Greenspan admits Iraq was about oil, as deaths put at 1.2m" by Peter Beaumont and Joanna Walters/The Observer Sunday September 16, 2007
The man once regarded as the world's most powerful banker has bluntly declared that the Iraq war was 'largely' about oil. Appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1987 and retired last year after serving four presidents, Alan Greenspan has been the leading Republican economist for a generation and his utterings instantly moved world markets.
In his long-awaited memoir - out tomorrow in the US - Greenspan, 81, who served as chairman of the US Federal Reserve for almost two decades, writes: 'I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.'
[Yeah, and AIPAC had nothing to do with it, says the Jewish Greenspan!]
In The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World, he is also crystal clear on his opinion of his last two bosses, harshly criticising George W Bush for 'abandoning fiscal constraint' and praising Bill Clinton's anti-deficit policies during the Nineties as 'an act of political courage'. He also speaks of Clinton's sharp and 'curious' mind, and 'old-fashioned' caution about the dangers of debt.
Greenspan's damning comments about the war come as a survey of Iraqis, which was released last week, claims that up to 1.2 million people may have died because of the conflict in Iraq - lending weight to a 2006 survey in the Lancet that reported similarly high levels.
More than one million deaths were already being suggested by anti-war campaigners, but such high counts have consistently been rejected by US and UK officials. The estimates, extrapolated from a sample of 1,461 adults around the country, were collected by a British polling agency, ORB, which asked a random selection of Iraqis how many people living in their household had died as a result of the violence rather than from natural causes.
Previous estimates gave a range between 390,000 and 940,000, the most prominent of which - collected by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and reported in the Lancet in October 2006 - suggested 654,965 deaths.
Although the household survey was carried out by a polling organisation, rather than researchers, it has again raised the spectre that the 2003 invasion has caused a far more substantial death toll than officially acknowledged.
[Or REPORTED, either!]
The ORB survey follows an earlier report by the organisation which suggested that one in four Iraqi adults had lost a family member to violence. The latest survey suggests that in Baghdad that number is as high as one in two. If true, these latest figures would suggest the death toll in Iraq now exceeds that of the Rwandan genocide in which about 800,000 died.
The Lancet survey was criticised by some experts and by George Bush and British officials. In private, however, the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser Sir Roy Anderson described it as 'close to best practice'."
So the DEATH TOLL is ACCURATE, folks!!!
The United States -- under George W. Bush -- has "liberated" OVER 1.2 MILLION IRAQIS from their LIVES!!!!
And here is the violence the shit War Dailies reported today:
N.Y. Times (last half of last paragraph of story; in other words, buried):
"On Saturday a suicide bomb blast at a popular market in the predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Amel in Baghdad took the lives of 10 people and wounded 15, according to the Interior Ministry. Also on Saturday, the ministry said 11 bodies were found in Baghdad."
Despite 35 people being killed every day -- on the rise over the summer -- and the number of Iraqis killed by the surge is around 300 per day, 10,000 per month!
Boston Globe:
"A car bomb exploded late yesterday in a mostly Shi'ite area of southwest Baghdad, killing at least 11 people lined up to buy bread at a bakery. Two of the dead were children, police said."
See why I'm done purchasing and reading newspapers.
They don't tell you the truth:
They LIE and PROMOTE a CERTAIN WORLD VIEW and a CERTAIN AGENDA!
They OMIT, DISTORT, and MISREPRESENT!
I don't need this angering shit!
