Do you believe the "biased national press" should report Bush's
announcement, but suppress stories about things which contradict what he
said?

Jeff Rigby wrote:
No, and Fox reported both. The difference is that Fox reports WHY we are
there

Uh huh. Why is that, exactly? Because Saddam was responsible for Sept 11th?

Face facts, Fox is nothing but a Bush-Cheney propaganda outlet. It's
amazing to me that with the millions they spend primping the Bush
Administration (thru Fox and other media), they're still in the mud.
Nixon did a better job... at least, up until he got caught.


... They never report on the strategic value Iraq has. IF it has
no value then why is there such a massive terrorism campaign there and not
in Afghanistan.

Excuse me, there *is* a massive terrorism campaign going on in
Afghanistan. The difference is that there are far fewer U.S. troops
there, they're better insulated, and the whole country has a far lower
population density.

... Everytime I hear of more terrorism in Iraq I KNOW we are in
the right place.


That figures.

No explain why we're doing sucha great job in Iraq if fewer people have
running water & electricity now than 2 years ago, and the Army can't
even keep the road to the airport safe.

DSK