Dude the article says that the State Department doesn't believe it's safe for tourists or business travelers to stay in their hotel rooms. If you think fearing for your life in your freakin' hotel room consitutes some kind of progress, well, I hope you aren't a travel agent by day.

from the article:

"Attacks against military and civilian targets throughout Iraq continue," and targets include hotels and restaurants, the State Department's travel warning said. "There have been planned and random killings, as well as extortions and kidnappings."

The State Department issues warning against unnecessary travel to countries where internal conditions such as war, political unrest or terrorism may make American tourists, business people or other travelers targets. Wednesday's warning replaced a similarly worded warning issued in October.

Great. Just great. The State Department couldn't have said something BEFORE I put down my deposit on that Euphrates River rafting trip by al-Zarqawi tours.

frameone makes good on his nickname, If you think fearing for your life in your freakin' hotel room consitutes some kind of progress, well, I hope you aren't a travel agent by day.

Way to frame the debate there chief. Iraq is going to be dangerous for a while. That doesn't mean that there isn't progress going on.

The whole point was that this warning from the State Department is wholly unrelated to Bush's comments regarding the progress we have made in Iraq. An Associated Press writer tied those two together and the point she was trying to make is obvious. This is where the bias came in.

RE: fatman's post [July 1, 2005 01:15 AM]
LOL.

In other news, I hear Aruba has safety issues too. Where's FOXNEWS when you need 'em. They really should look in to this. This... and Baghdad Disney's belated construction.

But Baghdad is safer for US national security than Jerusalem for the US Embassy...

Dubya Term II has been a disaster. The only consolation is the certainty that Mr. Heinz-Kerry would have been much worse.

Oh well, I guess I have to go back to Maui this year. Damnit.

Like Jon Stewart said
"All you hear is the car bombs. You never get to hear about the cars that don't blow up."

There is no progress. It is not a safe country to visit. What is so hard to understand and where exactly is the media bias? You haven't even linked the entire article.

There is no progress.

Incorrect. There has been a lot of progress in Iraq.

It is not a safe country to visit. What is so hard to understand and where exactly is the media bias?

I've already explained this above. I'll reiterate: The whole point was that this warning from the State Department is wholly unrelated to Bush's comments regarding the progress we have made in Iraq. An Associated Press writer tied those two together and the point she was trying to make is obvious. This is where the bias came in.

Do you understand now?

There is no progress; it is blatantly clear that we are not where the administration assumed we would be at this phase of the war.

I will say that I agree the graf could have been written without linking the two ideas, but I don't think that in doing so, it creates liberal bias. I think the phrase "liberal media" has been so beaten to death that people will find a paper running a news brief on speech given by Hillary Clinton as "liberal bias."

There is no progress...

What's wrong with you people? Fine then,..the burden of proof is on you to back up your comments. Why do you say that there "is no progress"?