Comments: "A force of freedom and a force for peace"

But isn't this "balanced" reporting? It's the only reasonable and mature approach to take, surely!

Posted by James at December 23, 2008 07:58 PM

I always assume that anyone writing for the Times is capable of writing clear and proper English, so if they're not, it must be because they're trying to defend the indefensible.

It's a good way to spot the censor's hand: just look for sentences that a college-paper editor wouldn't accept, like:

The journalist said that a letter to the prime minister written by him from jail expressing regret for the attack had not been coerced, his brother said.

Got that? Is it "The journalist said that his brother said...", or "his brother said that the journalist said..."? Your guess is as good as mine.

Posted by SteveB at December 23, 2008 09:11 PM

When I was a kid I used to relish reading the New York Times - R.W. Apple was a particular favorite. WTF happened?

Posted by Guest at December 23, 2008 09:39 PM

Everyone should read Christopher Simpson's THE SCIENCE OF COERCION to understand the full implications of this.

Posted by Bob In Pacifica at December 23, 2008 10:31 PM

Guest: you grew up and became intelligent?

Posted by Solar Hero at December 24, 2008 01:05 PM

Marilyn Klinghoffer deserved the same treatment for her vile, despicable act.

Posted by Seth at December 26, 2008 05:55 AM

Seth, man, you already told us that one.

Posted by Save the Oocytes at December 26, 2008 08:33 AM