The Times Regrets The Error

The media lies, blatantly, to us.

The Cassandra Page has documented already 36 major lies or falsifications by major news outlets just in 2005 (so far) alone, that we know about.

How much did they deceive us before the internet?

One especially egregious case concerns an op-ed the NYTimes ran, that was written by an army reserve officer.

It seems the editors decided not to only edit the piece, but to make up actual quotes from this officer, out of thin air, and to attribute feelings to him that he did not have. The result completely changed the meaning of the piece, and gave it an anti-Bush slant.

The Times, in regretting the "error", claims it just ran the wrong piece:

The Op-Ed page in some copies yesterday carried an incorrect version of an article about military recruitment. The writer, an Army reserve officer, did not say, 'Imagine my surprise the other day when I received orders to report to Fort Campbell, Ky., next Sunday,' nor did he characterize his recent call-up to active duty as the precursor to a 'surprise tour of Iraq.' That language was added by an editor and was to have been removed before the article was published. Because of a production error, it was not. The Times regrets the error.

One wonders, why did they add this fantasy at all?

If that doesn't reveal the subconscious, reflexive bias of the paper, nothing does. That they don't admit this is even more revealing.

Readers are outraged. You can find links to their complaints and the Paper of Record's "explanation" at Powerline and LGF. If you need to register to see that, visit Bugmenot for a working username and password.

So keep that in mind when The Times prints its pro-enemy propaganda, like this piece that begins

BAGHDAD, Iraq, July 23 - They just keep getting stronger.

Whose side are they on?

The other side.