Submitted by Ed Walsh, Dec 1, 2006 09:09

It is becoming a regular feature of all stories involving the administration and any aspect of the War on Terror to lead with a misleading headline and follow with a story that not only refutes the headline but speculates rather than reports. President Bush has been remarkably consistent in his approach to the Middle East. He supports Israel, denounces terrorism, effectively crippled Arafat and acceded to all military actions taken by Israel in defense of her territory. At the same time, as stated, he has been clear that a Palestinian state is essential to stability in the region, while insisting on a legitimate leader of those people before undertaking negotiation. Where in this story is there any reportage that signals a change of course predicated on Iraq? Has anyone ever thought or believed there was no linkage between the multitude of problems in the Middle East? Would not the solving of one problem impact the others, positively or negatively? The bottom line here is that Israel has been traumatized by the loss of Sharon. The final sentence of the story dramatizes that and gets to the point of what a proper headline should have been, "Israel's leadership unsettled in its role, Bush team continues to seek solutions".

The media continues to fall short of informing the public choosing instead to "report" what it wants apparently hoping people skip the article and rely on the headline.. President Bush will indicate his thinking when he reviews the options to be presented next week and makes a decision regarding tactics in Iraq. Given his steadfastness, I doubt selling out Israel is on the table.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.