Of course, I'm not surprised about the tone and nuance of Raghavan's pro-terrorist, anti-U.S. rant disguised as journalism. The Washington post is a paper thats well known for its anti-administration, anti-Iraq, pro-insurgent/terrorist bia (I'd go so far as to call it an agenda, and feel comfortable doing so), and known to be seemingly unaware of the role media is suppose to play in a free society - as in reporting the facts, not distorting them. So we are so accustomed, Raghavan and the WaPo have once again served as a conduit for America's enemies. While there's nothing wrong with presenting facts from the camp of the enemy, especially facts that relate to the human condition, distorted nuance slanted to serve an agenda crosses the line from journalism to simple propaganda and shrilling for the enemy.

It's shameful journalism, at the very least. For a more balanced view on Iraq, we can always check out what Michael Yon has to say. It won't be sugar-coated and you'll find the good with the bad. Most importantly, you'll find no bias - just the facts. I don't know about you, but seeing some WaPo anti-American journalist put a pretty face on terrorists makes my skin crawl and gives me a "queezy" feeling in my gut.

Perhaps better put, reading Sudarsan Raghavan's articles, and many of the WaPo's in general, gives me a gut feeling I'm being sold a pig in a poke and a bill of goods.