I was recently mocked (along with some others) for not noticing that the vicious, murdering, fascist “insurgency” in Iraq had murdered yet another journalist in Iraq, this time one Aswan Ahmed Lutfallah.

This is sort of a……

Man, do we need a less buddy-buddy press corps. They should eat each other alive over this sort of thing.

The Washington Post disputes Cliff May’s opinions with Cliff May…

Insomnia led me online quite early today. I ran across this gem of an AP headline on Yahoo: U.S. deaths in Iraq exceed 9-11 count.

Wait, I thought Iraq, according to Reuters (where Yahoo gets their news) had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al Qaida. So, is this tacit admission that Iraq is part on the war on terror? Or is it just some other useless milestone (e.g., “Iraq has lasted longer the WWII!”)?

Good to see a new voice on here, if for no other reason than it tells me that Allah may actually be taking some time away from this place.

Insomnia led me online quite early today. I ran across this gem of an AP headline on Yahoo: U.S. deaths in Iraq exceed 9-11 count. Kinda makes you wonder how long they’ve been salivating to run it. I can just imagine they were almost wetting themselves when the number reached 2,970.

Charles has some comments on it over at LGF. I’ve taken a few minutes to write to AP with some personal observations on their obvious fixation with numerology.

For people who are so keen on this sort of thing, you’d think they would have written down the phone number for Jamil Hussein somewhere. Or maybe they will run a similar story when the number of discredited MSM stories on the war equals the number of 9/11 victims (if that milestone hasn’t already been achieved).

If their story is food for thought, I’m becoming bulimic.

I did make a factual error in my last column. … I noted the “odd silence that emanated from the warblogs” at the time, which was accurate. I also wrote that warbloggers “uniformly ignored” the news. That was not accurate.

I take major issue with his premise, “Lefti-anti- anything Bush” Bloggers routinely ignore actually instances of digressions from their own camp —yet LOOOOOSE it if a republican does it…when called to the mat they routinely, like Boehlert desperately search for instances they cry about hypocrisy…I’m really, really sick of it.

Remember, this issue is what caused Glenn Greenwald’s puppetry…he was pathetically searching for instances that disproved Liberal double standard.

One could easily turn the tables on Boehlert and say, for example, “No anti-war blogger has noted the death of (specific American troop X)

It may be charicature on my part, but I’ve yet to see the death of any troop mentioned by an anti-war blogger without it carrying the distinct message of “Bush has killed another one. Troops home now!”
I don’t specifically remember the murder of the AP cameraman, but I would be surprised to hear if he was sympathetically eulogized by anti-war bloggers with no anti-war message embedded in the eulogy.

As for Jamil Hussein, the AP simply can’t back down on this one. They already have one stringer in US custody for being involved with the insurgency. The AP is desperately trying to make him an innocent victim of circumstance and military overzealousness. Imagine how it would look if they had another stringer (or source) with questionable allegiances- it may start to appear that the AP hasn’t been careful in its hiring practices! For Bilal Hussein’s sake, Jamil Hussein has to exist.

Yet again, everyone thinks they know how the Right thinks better than we do ourselves.

Of course. They erect their strawmen of what ‘that party is capable of’, part and parcel of the circular reasoning that characterizes the echo(location) chambers that puts Monty Python to shame.

It’s far easier to argue with a caricature of the other side than the real thing. That being said, there are people for whom a caricature would be redundant.

Then when news came that an AP cameraman was killed by insurgents, one warblogger wrote about it sympathetically, devoting approximately 50 words to the murder. I think that gives readers all the perspective they need

Actually, yes, it gives readers all the perspective they need, because if not too much was said in the blogsphere about that report or anything else for that matter, it is an indication that the bloggers are comfortable enough that the MSM did at least as credible/fair a coverage as could be expected to the story. The bloggers then wouldn’t have much to add, would they? Where the blogs come into serious play is when the MSM reporting fails the fact-checks, the date-checks, the sequence checks, misleading headlines, photo captions, doctored photos, mangled or make up quotes – then the blogs weigh in – usually after a tip from someone who was close to the story somehow and leaked that all wasn’t right.
As usual, even a grinchy, grudging acknowledgement is just another opportunity for the Old Media to make a nasty dig at bloggers.

The “Free for All” section is no way to handle this. That’s the section that my kids and I laugh about every week, where every stupid pedant writes in to complain that so-and-so put a comma in the wrong place.