oaknet wrote:
] "Cover Story
]
] Average Americans are opting for cosmetic surgery in record
] numbers. But do they know the risks?

I'll be the first to admin the U.S. News and World Report is hardly among my top choices for credible journalism. You're totally right about their current cover story. Ridiculous. However, unless they've changed significantly in recent years their cover stories are typically harder news then that.

Having said this, they are directly quoting Gabriel Weimann. I'll bet that the "direct quote" isn't direct at all, as U.S. media is basically notorious for completely rewriting direct quotes. However, given who Gabriel Weimann is and the kind of research he does I don't think that its unlikely to hear such a statement from him. Whether or not HE is credible is a different story. I don't know the answer to that question, but I think its a better place to focus inquiry then on U.S. News.

http://www.usip.org/specialists/bios/current/weimann.html
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-4-2004_pg3_5

] "The Madrid bombings... toppled the Spanish government"
]
] It didn't.
]
] "and triggered the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq."
]
] It didn't.

They wording here is an oversimplification, but I understand what they mean. I'm not aware of anyone who has argued that the intent of the Madrid bombing was anything other then to intimidate Spain and other European countries into withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan, and that they got exactly what they wanted. Furthermore, the incumbant government was polling ahead in the days before the bombing, so the bombing, or the events surrounding the bombing, certainly impacted the outcome of the election.

The only room I see for question here is the fact that the government of Spain intentionally mislead the world as to who was responsible for the attacks in the days following the attacks. If I was Spanish that would be enough for me to vote left.

The question is, and I don't know the answer here either, but was the typical Spanish voter, at the polls, thinking "I'm voting against the incumbant because they lied about the bombing," or "I'm voting against the incumbant because our involvement in the Middle East is the reason that we were attacked."

If the later, then yes, Al'Q toppled the Spanish government by intimidating the voters into the false conclusion that they'll be safe from Islamic terrorism if they don't fight against Al'Q.

Do you disagree?

RE: USNews.com: Suspicions about a new terrorist attack have U.S. spies scrambling (5/31/04)