A Reuters story written by reporter Vicki Allen begins as follows: "Top U.S. Republican lawmakers on Tuesday called for a congressional investigation into leaks of information used by The Washington Post in an article on the CIA's secret global prison system
The story, titled "Congress may probe leaks in CIA prisons story" would seem to indicate that the piece will be about a major intelligence leak that may possibly put American lives at stake, much the same way the media ballyhooed the alleged administration outing of CIA-something Valerie Plame.
Alas, this was not to be. Reuters instead opted to dredge up nearly every negative story regarding the Bush administration. By the third paragraph, Reuters makes clear just what the overall backdrop of the story will be:
"Democrats said instead of just investigating possible leaks related to that story, Republicans should allow a broad investigation on detainee abuses and whether the Bush administration manipulated intelligence before the
Further down, Reuters inserts its favorite buzzword since April of 2004, when they and other media outlets had worked hard, hoping that the Abu Ghraib prison scandal would end the reelection chances of Bush: "Democrats and some Republicans have cited The Washington Post story as another reason Congress must set rules for the treatment of military detainees in the wake of the scandal over physical and sexual abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq."
To the average reader, it is becoming clearer that the media reports what it wants to see and be, as opposed to what actually exist and is. This story by Reuters is just a small example of the pervasive liberal bias--and an all-consuming hatred of George W. Bush--that exist in the
