Re: Is that they call discriminate fire? Yes, actually...

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> > It's beginning to sound like some junior officer decided
> > on a Viet Nam type body count.
>
>
> It was Reuters that decided to publish a body count.

no it is being widely reported as a major shift in US spin on the war.


"Numerous newspapers on Monday played up as front page news the Sunday 
clash between rebel forces and U.S. soldiers in the city of Samarra, 
with most declaring that between 46 and 54 Iraqis had been killed and 
using only U.S. military officials as their sources. After a run of bad 
news for the U.S. in Iraq -- including a record monthly death toll of 
U.S. soldiers -- the military portrayed this as a major victory, and the 
press seemed to accept it.

Neither The New York Times, New York Post, The Boston Globe, USA Today, 
The Washington Post, or Knight Ridder included any civilian witnesses or 
Iraqi hospital accounts in their initial reports Monday. Many flatly 
reported the death tally and account of the battle without noting this 
was "according to military officials." The Times topped its front page 
with the declarative headline: "46 Iraqis Die in Fierce Fight Between 
Rebels and GIs," and this was common treatment. The Los Angeles Times 
account, however, noted that the 54 deaths had yet to be confirmed and 
included hospital officials' contentions that only nine people had died.

On Tuesday, nearly every major newspaper was forced to report that the 
death toll and, indeed much of the original account of the "battle," 
were in dispute. The New York Times declared that "while American 
commanders said the Iraqi body count had come from precise reports filed 
immediately after a close-range battle, hospital officials said Monday 
that they could account for, at most, eight dead, with most of those 
probably civilians."

http://www.mediainfo.com/editorandpublisher/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2043555