US Casualties up 65%

While the media keeps putting out the Admin spin that things have improved in Iraq since the handover of "sovereignty," the number of US casualties has, according to my calculations, actually gone up 65% since June.  This prompted me to write the following to the NY Times public editor; we need to at least try to shame the media into not putting out this bull:

Dear Mr. Okrent:

In his July 21st piece, Adam Nagourney had the following:

Mr. Bush has other factors potentially in his favor, several Republicans said. The economy is showing signs of strengthening, though it remains an open question whether that is happening in time to change voter attitudes about how Mr. Bush is managing the economy. In Iraq, the transfer of sovereignty has led to some reduction in American casualties.

Then, last night on the Charlie Rose show, I heard David Sanger repeat the same, that US casualties had gone down since the transfer of sovreignty in Iraq.

According to the website, Iraq Coalition Casualty Count (http://icasualties.org/oif/), the US has lost 47 soldiers so far in the month of July -- as opposed to a loss of 42 soldiers in June.  

To break these grim statistics down, the US in July is suffering losses at a rate of 2.32/day (47/22) as opposed to 1.4 in June (42/30) -- or an increase of approx 65%.

How is it that 2 of the Times' star reporters, Nagourney & Sanger, label a 65% increase in casualties as a reduction?  How is it that they could be so wrong about what is arguably THE big story of the past 2 years?

Pushed by the administration, the idea that things are getting better in Iraq seems to have become conventional wisdom in the mainstream media -- yet again, reporters seem to be accepting the spin put out as fact.  Is it laziness, incompetence or simply faith-based reporting yet again.

Is it any wonder The Times (along with most of the rest of the major US media) has lost its credibility?

Thanks for your consideration & efforts to bring some at least some of the more egregious errors to the light of day.

Sincerely,

XXXXXXX