Atrios
points out that the New York Times has finally admitted their false claim that American casualties in Iraq have declined since the handover. Let's take a moment to salute the delicate language that was used in this 'correction':
An article on July 21 about President Bush's campaign plans for the rest of the summer referred imprecisely to the trend in American military casualties in Iraq after the transfer of sovereignty there on June 28. From the transfer date to the date on which the article was written, casualties increased compared with the same length of time before the transfer; they did not show "some reduction."
In other words, the
Times asserted that up was down. I suppose that could be decribed as "imprecise".
posted by Alex at 2:43 PM
