Yah we all know about the phoney LA Times picture, discovered by ANOTHER newspaper. But Andrew Sullivan has focused in on Howard Raines NY Times campaign that is replete with misquotes that coincidently always make the Bush admin look bad and "lies to keep the propaganda war going". (The propaganda war against Bush.)

RAINES WATCH II: Another fascinating correction from the Times, this time yesterday:
A front-page news analysis article on Sunday about the political perils faced by President Bush over the war with Iraq misattributed a comment about Saddam Hussein's government being "a house of cards." While some American officials had used the phrase to predict a shorter conflict and a quick collapse of the Iraqi leadership, Vice President Dick Cheney was not among them.
Amazing. Another front page Big Lie from Raines and company. Notice also the mealy-mouthed correction. Which other "American officials" are they talking about? Somehow, I suspect, if they exist at all, they're nowhere near the senior levels - which was the point of Johnny Apple's self-parodic piece. More and more, readers are beginning to realize that Raines' NYT doesn't just spin against the Bush administration on an hourly basis. It also merrily lies to keep the propaganda war going.

RAINES WATCH I: A jaw-dropping correction in the New York Times today:
A front-page article on Tuesday about criticism voiced by American military officers in Iraq over war plans omitted two words from an earlier comment by Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace, commander of V Corps. General Wallace had said (with the omission indicated by uppercasing), "The enemy we're fighting is A BIT different from the one we war-gamed against."
One simple question: why are the reporters who used that critical quote to exaggerate the difficulties of the allies still working for the NYT?

RAINES MISSILE INCOMING: The New York Times has commissioned another piece designed to attack the administration's journalistic supporters. The first, by Jim Rutenberg, was an attempt to gloat over conservatives' alleged belief that this war would be a "cakewalk." (I wonder if the Times would ever ever run a piece about those journalists who recently claimed that a "quagmire" was imminent.)