Rumsfeld tells it like it is. Source: Instapundit

There are two ways, I suppose, one could inform readers of the Geneva Convention stipulation against using places of worship to conduct military attacks. One might be to headline saying that Terrorists Attack Coalition Forces From Mosques. That would be one way to present the information.

Another might be to say: Mosques Targeted in Fallujah. That was the Los Angeles Times headline this morning.

Just like they say, there's two sides to every story. The question is what side is the Los Angeles Times on? Anti-War, Anti-American, Anti-Bush...?

Seriously, how the hell did we ever know what was going on in the world before there were blogs? Isn't it also amazing that with all this information being passed back and forth that there is no ultimate truth or universal agreement to be found?