I had noticed this today from Reuters:
"Iraqi army soldiers swept into the city of Diwaniya early this morning to disrupt militia activity and return security and stability of the volatile city back to the government of Iraq," the US military said in a statement. Bleichwehl said troops, facing scattered resistance, discovered a factory that produced "explosively formed penetrators" (EFPs), a particularly deadly type of explosive that can destroy a main battle tank and several weapons caches.
NOTE:the Reuters story was changed at some point during the day.MAIN REUTERS SITE.
I posted it at my blog, thinking that this was a pretty important item as it shoots a pretty big hole in one of Bush/Abrams' main propaganda stories about Iran.
Turns out there is even more to this story.
I was doing my usual morning surfing when I stopped at Eschaton; according to Atrios, the Washington Post is carrying the Reuters story, and initially included the paragraph about the EFP factory (yes, there is a screenshot). BUT, then the WaPO CHANGED THE REUTERS STORY, OMITTING THE EFP FACTORY PARAGRAPH AND SUBSTITUTING:
The U.S. military said two U.S. soldiers died in separate roadside bombings in the east and west of Baghdad on Friday.
One of the bombs was an explosively formed projectile, a particularly deadly type of device which Washington accuses Iran of supplying Iraqi militants.
Well, well, I think we should be asking the WaPo for an explanation here? Did they suddenly get a call from Elliot Abrams? the Pentagon? John McCain? Dick Cheney? Did they take over the water-carrying contract from the NY Times on the EFP issue?Why didn't they explain? How does Reuters feel about some editor changing its story without a footnote? Was it the same editor who was involved with this story? (h/t Firedoglake)
Dunn Loring, Va.: Lyndsey: In your glowing profile of Adam Putnam today (gift citrus basket on the way!) why didn't you mention his gaff last month of accusing Pelosi of requesting a jumbo jet to travel back and forth to her district when no such request was made, where he later admitted he got the information from an article in another D.C. daily? Not to mention that he accepted a $1,000 donation from Mark Foley last year after Foley's troubles were known? Please tell me an editor deleted this from your story.
washingtonpost.com: Rep. Putnam Stays on Message (Post, April 6)
Lyndsey Layton: Dunn Loring, how did you know? The Pelosi plane was the original lede on that story and it was sliced from the final version because the editor felt the reference was dated.
In other words, the entire force of the story was changed.
Am I wrong, or is Fred Hiatt forcing his political views onto the reporting side of the Washington Post?
UPDATE: at some point during the day, Reuters made the same change to its story. I believe it was after 217 pm, EST, but I don't know for sure.