CNN.com's phrasing on Saddam's sons' deaths (prob. nothing, but...)

[Skip Intro]

Was just at CNN.com, and the lead story was the supposed capture of saddam's bodyguards. The blurb under the story's photo reads:

----------
A U.S. Army general said today that American forces believe they have captured several of Saddam Hussein's personal bodyguards in Iraq. The announcement follows the release of pictures and videotape of two bodies U.S. sources say are Hussein's dead sons.
---------

Wasn't all the news media, the US media anyway, almost instantly after the announcement that these guys had been shot, reporting their deaths as fact? Yet if you look at the last sentence above, CNN is now, at least in this piece, using the phrase "...two bodies US sources SAY re Hussein's dead sons."

Maybe its just all the caffiene I've ingested today, but does that kinda look like CNN could be ever so slightly backing away from the assertion that saddam's sons were killed?

[diamond14]

1. it's the bush*-ordered assassination of the SONS of a leader of

a sovereign nation...and the execution of the leader's grandson...

no news channels want to tell it like it is....

[Cujo]

2. theres a few stations that are begining to do that

saying that the picutres are of the men the US says are saddams sons. who knows...the truth may come out after all, bye dubya

[w4rma]

3. CNN is just giving their source for how they know who the bodies were of

They know what they were told, and that is how journalism is supposed to work.

CNN isn't backing off, they are just being more specific. Journalists are supposed to give sources for their information since they are supposed to be describing the news, not making it.