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

Warnign the tarver argument here is so bizarre I need to highlight it



Tarver Engineering wrote:

> > > > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> > > The "widely reported" news source is lying; there is no change in the
> policy
>
> > > of not reporting a body count.  Toumbstones are a poor metric for
> success,
>
> > > in winning hearts and minds.

Brannigan wrote

> > you are wrong
> > New york times Dec 3
> >
> > But after weeks of suffering casualties from an enemy that detonates
> > roadside bombs from afar and fires mortars under cover of darkness,
> > American military officials seemed to relish the opportunity on Monday
> > to claim credit for dealing the fighters a punishing blow.
> >
> > "They got whacked, and won't try that again," a senior military official
> > in Washington said. The Pentagon insisted the body count was accurate.


, but according to American
> > commanders, the Iraqis suffered a devastating defeat. The battle ended,
> > they said, with as many as 54 insurgents dead and only 5 Americans
>
> wounded.
>
> As was reported in Reuters first and then by Fox News.
>
> There is no change in policy WRT reporting body counts.

So according to Tarver when a senior governemtn official tells Reuters 
something, and reuters reports what that government official says

he laims tha titisis "reuters" decidign to publish a body count rahter 
than reuters reporting the body count as given thm by a government official

Sheesh

Vince