Today's NYT page 1 story reads:
The platoon’s push began shortly after 4 a.m. on Saturday, as American forces continued their effort to wrest the western section of this city north of Baghdad from Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia
A month ago, that same story would have been written:
The platoon’s push began shortly after 4 a.m. on Saturday, as American forces continued their effort to wrest the western section of this city north of Baghdad from insurgents in Iraq
"Al Qaeda" vs. "Insurgents". Just a word, a phrase. But it makes all the difference at the metaphorical level, and all the difference as to what will happen in September.
Although Glenn Greenwald blogged on this issue recently, today's NY Times article shows we need to bring far more pressure on this issue or we will lose the effort to get out of Iraq.
The word "insurgents" implies civil war; it fits the civil war frame, and leads to the conclusion that we should leave them to resolve their situation as they wish, without further interference.
The phrase "Al Qaeda" implies we are fighting back against the people who attacked us on September 11th. It leads to the conclusions that regardless of what happens, we must pursue the war until we crush them, and it is cowardly and self-defeating to do anything else.
This word change paves the way for Bush to say, come September "It does not matter whether the surge has reduced American casualties, or ended the insurgency... that is old news... the only thing that matters is we are battling the evil doers who attacked us on 9/11 and who continue to attack us daily. We must stay in Iraq until we prevail."
We must challenge the media who are taking the bait.
Contact the NYT public editor, Clark Hoyt, at public@nytimes.com or call (212) 556-7652.
Write a letter to the editor at letters@nytimes.com
It may seem like just a word, but we can't let them take it this time. The stakes are just too high