[Almondjoy]

Human right organizations have more than adquate examples of what Saddam's regime did. There was no point in them pulling out and telling the world what was going on there.. it was just another drop in the bucket. I'm not defending everything CNN did... but to call them complicit or a propaganda machine for Saddam is lunancy.. they put their spin on it sure but there were also the only eyes in ears the western media had in iraq.. regardless of whether you like their style that was important for the world to have.

[KingKongCobra]

There is no excuse for a news organization to NOT report news. There is no value to having an office in Iraq if you don't use it to report news. CNN traded blood for money. You have no leg to stand on.

[samkatz]

The point is this:"journalists" are treated like saints when they go to jail to protect sources, when they break the law, when they spy on people etc. "Journalists" have no problem releasing the "Pentagon Papers" or anything detrimental to our national security. ALWAYS THEY CITE THE NEED TO TELL THE TRUTH.

HERE, THEY LIED! THEY COVERED UP! THEY BETRAYED EVERY ASPECT OF HONESTY, INTEGRITY, etc. (I'm not even talking about "patriotism") There is no gray area here!

[cyncooper]

As I said, it isn't just the cover up of atrocities they were directly affected by, it was the demonizing and undermining of George W. Bush in particular that is objectionable.

[CharacterCounts]

Reporting a lie as a fact when you know it is a lie is not putting a spin on things. It's dishonest. Spinning is reporting facts but trying to put a different light on thos facts.

Lying is lying nothing more - nothing less.

[CFC__VRWC]

Human right organizations have more than adquate examples of what Saddam's regime did. (snip)...they put their spin on it sure but there were also the only eyes in ears the western media had in iraq..

And exactly what kind of "eyes and ears" were these? You say everyone knew about what Saddam was up to and that there was no point in CNN talking about it. I ask you, what exactly was so newsworthy about showing government-approved clips of Saddam firing a rifle in the air to rally his thugs? What was so important about telling us stories about how Saddam was so loved by the Iraqi people that 100 percent of them "voted" for him in the last "election"? Especially when it turns out that these stories were nothing but a crock of shit, and especially when CNN was treating Saddam with more deference and respect than our own President Bush? What was so important - why, CNN's reputation of being the only news organization with "access" to Baghdad.

Sorry, but in my book, looking the other way while incredible atrocities are taking place, just so you can win a "mine's bigger than yours" argument with your rivals, is about as low as you can go. And this so-called self-serving "apology," dumped onto the op-ed pages of the premier left-wing propaganda sheet in the land on a Friday, doubtless as pre-emptive damage control and doubtless in the hopes that by the end of the weekend it will have disappeared down the memory hole, doesn't even begin to come close to making up for what CNN has done for the last 12 years of Saddam Hussein's rule.

...regardless of whether you like their style that was important for the world to have.

Let me tell you something - as much as I love Fox News, if they had behaved as selfishly and as unconcernedly for basic human decency as CNN has done here, I would be just as hard on them, and I sure as hell would no longer be watching them!

[Ben Bolt]

You mentioned the word spin . Do you look at your self in the mirror in the morning and say this while you shave each day ?