Palin did not attempt to tie 9/11 to Sadam

The Washington Post has a piece in today's edition, September 12, 2008 that is blatantly misleading. The piece by Anne E. Kornblut begins:

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

The way Kornblut frame's Palins remarks isn't bad in and of itself. However, Kornblut continues:

The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.

The Bush administration attempted to make the link between al-Qaeda and Sadam early on making the case for war. It was only one part of an entire case war. Of course Palin isn't trying to resurrect this discounted theory.

Kornblut provides herself some wriggle room by stating that indeed, "But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion." Of course this is what Palin meant.

Kornblut bringing up what Palin most likely couldn't have meant when it was obvious what she did mean is bad journalism. It would be akin to the following senario:

Headline: Sen. Obama alludes to Middle Eastern scripture

Sen. Obama alluded to words from a sacred text in his acceptance speech saying, "At this moment, in this election, we must pledge once more to march into the future. Let us keep that promise — that American promise — and in the words of Scripture hold firmly, without wavering, to the hope that we confess."

Rumors that Obama attended an extremist Muslim school as a child and was at one time, or still is, a practicing Muslim, have been denied by his campagin. It is widely agreed that the allusion was most likelyin reference to the Bible--used by Christians as a sacred text.

The above example is how one could take words that Obama did say, and frame them in such away with such a headline to be misleading. Everything above is factual, as was in the Washington Post piece.

Of course Obama wouldn't be referring to he Koran in his acceptance speech, neither would Palin be espousing a long discredited story in recent speeches.