|
With the
exception of the
Post, the
papers play up those
caveats and emphasize
that the bigger import
of yesterday's big
announcement may be
political. The Security
Council has specifically
called for Iran to stop
enriching uranium, and
Iran was sticking it to
them. Top U.N. inspector
Mohamed ElBaradei is
scheduled to arrive in
Tehran this week in an
effort to get Iran to
chill out. (Quibble: The
NYT's
story emphasizes all
this—"the announcement
may have had less to do
with an engineering feat
than with carefully
timed political
theater"—but the paper's
headline doesn't exactly
convey that: "IRAN
REPORTS BIG ADVANCE IN
ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM.")
One analyst in Tehran
told Knight Ridder that
he's
betting Iran will next
actually announce a
freeze on enrichment.
"They wanted this big
ceremony to show that
nuclear technology is
not a goal—it's an
achievement," he said.
"This is enough, and now
we can go back to
negotiations."
The WP
revisits those
nonexistent mobile bio
labs the White House
once insisted that
Saddam had. "We have
found the weapons of
mass destruction," Bush
declared in May 2003
after some trailers were
found. The Post
says two days before
that, a secret Pentagon
mission had sent its
findings "to Washington"
and unanimously
concluded that the
trailers weren't for
banned weapons. The team
had inspected the
trailers and dubbed them
"the biggest sand
toilets in the world."
Said one team member,
"Within the first four
hours, it was clear to
everyone that these were
not biological labs."
The Post's
bio labs story mentions
that the team included
both American and
British personnel. Which
is interesting, because
take a look at one of
the first stories on the
found trailers,
from the NYT:
U.S. Aides Say
Iraqi Truck Could Be
a Germ-War Lab
BAGHDAD, May 7
[2003]
Senior Bush
administration
officials in
Washington said
today that a joint
British-American
team of experts had
concluded that a
tractor-trailer
truck found in
northern Iraq
several weeks ago
could be a mobile
biological weapons
lab.
Is that the same team
that soon concluded the
bio-story was BS? (For
the Times'
part, the paper soon
corrected course and
later
had
great coverage of
the trailers.)
In other WMD-ish
news, TP and some others
had a kvetch-fest noting
that, according to the
special prosecutor,
Scooter Libby had been
told to tell reporters
that intel agencies had
firmly concluded that
Saddam was trying to get
uranium even though
intel agencies weren't
firm on that. Well,
today's WP
mentions that the
special prosecutor has
now issued a correction:
Libby, reportedly, was
not told to say that.
The WP
fronts the results of an
in-house poll on
Medicare's new drug
benefit concluding
that recipients are
actually pretty darn
happy with the coverage.
About 75 percent said
the paperwork was easy,
and two-thirds said the
program has saved them
money.
The Journal
goes Page One with, and
everybody else mentions,
a federal study
concluding that,
contrary to long-held
wisdom, estrogen
treatment during
menopause doesn't itself
increase the risk of
breast cancer. The study
did find that another
hormone, progestin, can
increase the risk. As
the WSJ
emphasizes, the
conclusions were the
latest from the Women's
Health Initiative, whose
studies have "been
plagued by design
challenges and differing
interpretations."
The military
announced that five U.S.
troops have been killed
in Iraq this week,
including three by one
roadside bomb. The
NYT notes that 32
troops have been killed
there this month, more
than the number of
deaths "for
all of March."
Everybody mentions
that about 50 people
were killed by a bomb at
a Sunni prayer service
in Pakistan, where
hundreds have been
killed in sectarian
violence during the last
few years.
The NYT
off-leads the
mini-tumult in Italy,
where the center-left
coalition—led by
longtime pol Romano
Prodi—appears to have
eked out a victory over
Prime Minister Silvio
Berlusconi. The only
catch is that Berlusconi
is refusing to concede
and warning he'll
challenge the results.
Bill, Please
… For those who
haven't spotted it yet,
the NYT's top
editor, Bill Keller, has
been
answering readers'
questions all week.
Keller's been quite the
Chatty Cathy—16
detailed, and quite
friendly, answers so
far. No word yet on what
happens after Friday, so
get 'em in now
.
Eric Umansky
(www.ericumansky.com)
writes "Today's Papers"
for Slate.
He can be reached at
todayspapers@slate.com
|