Make your own free website on
Seattle News Bites!
April 26, 2001

This morning, we thought we'd do something a bit different: a website comparison of the Times and the PI.

Looking at just their home pages, here's the scoop:

PI's top stories

Seattle Times' top stories

Looking at these two papers side-by-side is rather interesting because the TIMES actually begins with some MAJOR stories first!

  • Kerry admits killing Vietnamese civilians
  • Bush agrees to bargain on tax cut
  • But the PI DOESN'T!
  • Kemp lost touch with lessons of Regrade Park
  • Reservations remain after Amazon report

  • Now wouldn't you agree that former U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey's revelation that the unit he lead in Vietnam 32 years ago had actually killed civilians by mistake IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN Kemp loosing touch with Rengrade Park or the Mill Creek Country Club being sold?

    I mean, come on!

    Kerrey, who was awarded the Bronze Star as a result of this incident, had received the Congressional Medal of Honor for being wounded in an unrelated incident, and is considered by many to be a hero, had just

  • publicly admitted to mistakenly killing civilians in what, even he calls, an atrocity,
  • knowing about it all this time,
  • and remaining silent about it to everyone, including his own family!
  • And what about the implications and controversy surrounding this whole incident.

  • Kerrey says his unit acted in self-defense after being fired upon, and that when the shooting was over, they only found women, children, and older men.
  • But two others, a former squad member and an eyewitness, both claim the civilians were intentionally lined-up and then shot to death at point-blank-range.
  • They further allege that the killings were done on the orders of Kerrey because the squad believed they wouldn't get out of the village any other way.
  • And what about Kerrey's silence all this time? Never coming forward until 30 years later despite knowing full well his unit had killed civilians!
  • And how about Newsweek Magazine's decision not to run its 1997 story about this incident on the basis they didn't have enough proof.Should they have run it anyway and let the readers decide? Who knows?

  • So we ask: how could the PI not even have it listed among its top stories?