I answered some of your questions once before...to wit:
http://boortz.com/liveweb/comments/?url=%2Fnealz_nuze%2F2009%2F05%2Ffive-muslims-are-convicted-of.html&title=%2Fnealz_nuze%2F2009%2F05%2Ffive-muslims-are-convicted-of.html
. . .you might want to review.

While I fully agree with you about our borders, you are wrong about Al Queda trying to use our military presence to their benefit...they are not exactly fully successful. We have problems with the inherent cultural undercurrents that exist. Most in Afghanistan do not like the Taliban or AQ any more than they tolerate us...at least we are trying to do more to make the general populace more accepting. Something we learned while helping the Muj kick the Soviets out. We are hardly going down the same road, both tactically and strategically.

I guess those of us who think twitter (and Myspace/facebook, whatever) is pretty stupid and a waste of time will have to get our news the old fashioned way...

It's an okay place to get story leads, but it became just a start for getting the news decades ago.

A recent example was an AJC story about a "successful" VBIED attack a few years ago. The story reported the attack and the 40-something Iraqi civilians killed when it detonated on a crowded street. After looking up a few more sources I found out There were actually two VBIEDs, one was stopped before it could get anywhere near the target or detonate. The other was stopped and detonated just short of its' target, a crowded market where it would have killed or maimed hundreds.

So no, we can only rely on the msm for the part of the news they want us to hear. How they write it will often give you an idea of what's missing and where to look for the rest of the story.

There are reliable freelance reporters with military experience covering the war. Their reporting answers more of the questions that come to mind when I read a news story from a combat zone.

The military itself actually does some of the best and most accurate reporting on what happens wherever they are at, without compromising operational security or giving the enemy too much useful info. Every branch has their reporters and photogs.
The combat troops themselves are trained to notice pertinent details and give concise reports on what they see and do. I think it's a pretty good idea, if they are careful about security.

Why even go through all of this? Which army is Afghanistan going to use to attack America? If Afghanistan could have retaliated on American soil, would the U.S army have invaded? If they couldn't have retaliated then how are they a threat in the first place? If the Afghan army was building permanent military bases in America would Americans use it as a rally point against Afghanistan or would Americans be just fine with the bases? Don't you think that Al Queda is using American military presence in Afghanistan as a scapegoat to build his obvious support world wide for his cause? If Afghanistan and terrorists in general are a threat to America then what is keeping the politicians from closing the U.S/Mexican border and escorting every last illegal alien out of here? Sorry but no closed Mexican border = no "war on terror". Just the plain hard ugly undeniabe truth, that cannot be argued against without attempting to side step logic...we are being bamboozled. The Soviets used 10 times the military and 100 times the brutality in Afghanistan....and they lost. Why is America trying to go down the same road...intentional inflation then expantion of govt after promoting crisis perhaps? Everybody that has been paying attention knows that at this point America cannot afford ANY military actions around the planet without printing money out of thin air.

Yesterday I read we are training the prisoners at Gitmo on computers and the internet and providing both to them. Today I read that we are using facebook, twitter etc to combat their free comrades. I would like the government to explain this. Why do we need to provide internet and computer training to the same people we are communicating with through twitter and facebook?

Actually, aside from some independent reporters like Michael Totten and Michael Yon, the best information has come not from traditional reporters but from the soldiers themselves via milblogs. The Mudville Gazette is the grandfather and founder of the Milblog Ring (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/) and Blackfive (http://www.blackfive.net) is the most read in the world. Others like This Ain't Hell, Bouhammer, etc. do a fantastic job, one the regular media can't or won't do. If you have questions, drop me a line via Blackfive and I will be glad to discuss this with you and my perspective via two embeds as a blogger in Iraq.