The parenthetical clarification may have been that of the writer of the article, Julia Preston. I don't know whether she's a freelance contributor or on the NY Times staff.
At least she didn't dumb it down entirely by converting everything and not mentioning liters at all. (Nor, obviously, did any staff sub-editor or rewrite person.) She does at least deserve kudos for her consistent use of the original SI units and for not inserting her clarification within an actual quotation. Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On >Behalf Of Nat Hager III >Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 15:05 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:24679] RE: State of the Union > > >Now why does the NY Times have to do this, being otherwise such an >excellent >newspaper? Even the President assumes everyone knows what a liter is. > >Nat > >http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/28/international/middleeast/28IRAQ.html > >Iraq has declared that it produced 8,500 liters (a liter is slightly more >than a quart) of anthrax for biological warfare before the Persian Gulf war >in 1991, Mr. Blix said, and has claimed to have destroyed all of it >unilaterally that year. > > >>>> >W. quoted on Saddam, in his State of the Union speech: > >"25,000 Liters of Anthrax" >"38,000 Liters of Botulin" > >Come on media, don't "translate" it, just report it as the >President said... >>>> > > > > >
