“Militant group” gets routed from Baghdad, NYT buries the news on page 19

posted at 12:10 pm on November 8, 2007 by Bryan

The “militant group” in question is, in fact, al Qaeda.

American forces have routed Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the Iraqi militant network, from every neighborhood of Baghdad, a top American general said today, allowing American troops involved in the “surge” to depart as planned.

Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Fil Jr., commander of United States forces in Baghdad, also said that American troops had yet to clear some 13 percent of the city, including Sadr City and several other areas controlled by Shiite militias. But, he said, “there’s just no question” that violence had declined since a spike in June.

“Murder victims are down 80 percent from where they were at the peak,” and attacks involving improvised bombs are down 70 percent, he said.

I’ve heard similar information from an Army captain who until recently was commanding a tank platoon in east Baghdad. I’m hoping to interview him next week. We won’t bury that interview.

The surge is among the reasons for the decline in violence, along with the “awakenings,” improvements in the Iraqi army and the abatement of militia violence. The war in Iraq is too complex to be won or lost on any of those factors and a few others besides.

With less than two months to go before his division heads home, General Fil offered a mixed vision of the military’s role for the coming year. He said that if 2007 was the year of security, 2008 would probably be “a year of reconstruction, a year of infrastructure repair, and a year of, if there’s going to be a surge, a year of the surge of the economy.”

The bottom line is that as things are going now, we’re winning in Iraq. I didn’t say we’ve won, just that we’re winning.

So, wouldn’t you think this news would be big enough to warrant better placement than page A19?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Was page 19 the last page? If not, someone at the NYT is probably going to lose his job over this.

Good

Kowboy on November 8, 2007 at 12:12 PM

All The News That’s Fit To Ignore.

Frozen Tex on November 8, 2007 at 12:14 PM

No, no, no. Losing is news. Winning is… an inconvenient truth.

TallDave on November 8, 2007 at 12:14 PM

What was on the front page?

Connie on November 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

What’s the problem! Everyone knows that the first 18 pages of the NYT are all ads and bullcrap anyway.

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on November 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Yes, it would warrant better placement… IF TRUE. I mean, look at the sources? The U.S. military? Statistics? Common sense? Reason? No no no, I don’t think those are on “the Deciders” list of verified data sources, and therefore cannot be true. Right? Come on, they know better than us, they fact check and have levels of editing!

Wineaholic on November 8, 2007 at 12:18 PM

What was on the front page?

Connie on November 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

“Markets and Dollar Sink”
“US Prods Musharraf to End Emergency Rule”
“In a Surprise, Robertson Backs Giuliani”
“US Will ask a Grand Jury to Indict Kerik”
“Dow Falls 360 – Oil is Pushing Gas Prices”
“House Backs Broad Protections for Gay Workers”

Among others.

amerpundit on November 8, 2007 at 12:21 PM

“Militant Group Is Out of Baghdad, U.S. Says”

Even for the NYTimes, this is something else.

Vizzini on November 8, 2007 at 12:22 PM

YAY America! We win.

ThackerAgency on November 8, 2007 at 12:23 PM

I love how they caveat it with “U.S. Says”, as though it’s not really true because the evil Boosh in president of the United States.

SouthernGent on November 8, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Yes, it would warrant better placement… IF TRUE. I mean, look at the sources? The U.S. military? Statistics? Common sense? Reason? No no no, I don’t think those are on “the Deciders” list of verified data sources, and therefore cannot be true. Right? Come on, they know better than us, they fact check and have levels of editing!

Wineaholic

Yeah, it’s really profitable for the military to lie about these things when there are military bloggers, emails home, phone calls, etc., to dispute this if untrue.

Get a grip. Maybe a little less wine?

Mommynator on November 8, 2007 at 12:31 PM

What? We’re still in Iraq?…I thought we lost that months ago.

right2bright on November 8, 2007 at 12:33 PM

People are still reading that rag? I wouldn’t use the NYT to line my birdcage.

Scorched_Earth on November 8, 2007 at 12:37 PM

What’s the problem! Everyone knows that the first 18 pages of the NYT are all ads and bullcrap anyway.

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on November 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Fixed.

Hollowpoint on November 8, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Mommynator on November 8, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Sometimes a /sarc tag seems redundant, then again, maybe not.

TBinSTL on November 8, 2007 at 12:43 PM

I was checking out the “Today’s Paper” link at the very top of the NYT website (the low res scan that can barely be read). In the lower right corner of the NYC edition and the National edition scan of the actual front page, you can see the one paragraph lead-in of this story with a bold-type medium font headline. The whole story wasn’t on the front page, but the first paragraph lead-in was. Looking at the scan, they could have buried any number of the front pager stories and kept this short but sweet article on the front page in it’s entirety. I’m somewhat surprised that the NYT even printed the story at all, whatever page it’s on.

I guess what the NYT believes (begrudgingly) is that it’s “news that’s fit to print”, but just barely.

SilverStar830 on November 8, 2007 at 12:43 PM

Mommynator on November 8, 2007 at 12:31 PM

And I thought the “/sarcasm” tag wouldn’t be necessary, especially when I throw common sense and reason into sources that “the Deciders” don’t use. Silly me, I in fact need more wine to negate that rational thinking part of my mind…

Wineaholic on November 8, 2007 at 12:44 PM

I didn’t want them routed. I wanted them captured and.or slaughtered like one would do with rats if they became diseased.

I thought that was clear.

Jaibones on November 8, 2007 at 12:51 PM

The NYT needs some real journalists like Rosie.

abinitioadinfinitum on November 8, 2007 at 12:51 PM

We have to see first whether it’s a trend. Check back in five years.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 8, 2007 at 1:06 PM

Wineaholic on November 8, 2007 at 12:18 PM

No tags needed, it just shows that people do read what some write.

right2bright on November 8, 2007 at 1:06 PM

In the same article the NYT did find some good news however ….

On Wednesday, two children were killed when a roadside bomb exploded on a farm road in Wasit Province. South of Baquba, Iraqi army patrols found 17 bodies, blindfolded, handcuffed and decayed. Four were found headless about 200 yards away. It was the second mass grave discovered in a rural area this week.

It could only have been worse if the victims had been waterboarded. Apparently the terrorists, in a rare display of compassion, avoided using this publicly condemned torture technique.

fogw on November 8, 2007 at 1:15 PM

Anyone want to organize a mass burning of the NYT?

Or, better yet, let’s all throw the NYT in a toilet, and then put a video of it on YouTube. The irony should be delicious.

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2007 at 1:30 PM

fogw on November 8, 2007 at 1:15 PM

It truly is a sad time in America when the NYT, among many others are enemies within our own Great Country.

abinitioadinfinitum on November 8, 2007 at 1:32 PM

I wonder if Harry Reid will call Prince to ask his opinion on how to get “the war is lost” videos off of youtube.

swami on November 8, 2007 at 1:46 PM

So, wouldn’t you think this news would be big enough to warrant better placement than page A19?

Only if the Treason Times was rooting for the Americans.

ReubenJCogburn on November 8, 2007 at 1:48 PM

Bad News in Iraq = Page 1
Good News in Iraq = Page 19

SoulGlo on November 8, 2007 at 2:23 PM

So, wouldn’t you think this news would be big enough to warrant better placement than page A19?

+ good for president Bush
+ good for the U.S. Military
+ good for conservative candidates, at all levels
+ good for America
+ good for freedom in an otherwise oppressed region
+ good for women
+ good for freedom of religion
+ good for the free world
+ good for Capitalism
+ good for…add on

- bad for terrorism
- bad for dictators
- bad for liberals
- bad for Hillary, Obama, and the pretty man
- bad for Murtha, Pelosi, Reid,…
- bad for the NYT
- bad for the liberal media, here and everywhere
- bad for…add on

Entelechy on November 8, 2007 at 2:48 PM

Don’t forget that the New York Times is the newspaper that brought us Walter Duranty, who wrote at length about the wondrous progress that was made under Uncle Joe Stalin. It is the same newspaper that as early as 1959, referred to Fidel Castro as “Dr. Castro”, that it is the same newspaper that gave us Jason Blair, that is the same newspaper that said it would not use the word terrorist in the context of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and instructed its reporters to use the word “militant” rather than “terrorist” when suicide bombers struck Israelis, that it is the same newspaper whose publisher (the rich kid Arthur Sulzberger the Fourth or whatever he is) apologized to graduating students because they have to live in a country as evil and corrupt as the United States under George Bush and it is the same newspaper that gave us Anthony Lewis and Maureen Dowd. At the Times, Lewis was seen as the conservative!

Larraby on November 8, 2007 at 2:49 PM

The surge is among the reasons for the decline in violence

So. Enforcing law and order reduces violence?

Hmm. Maybe we could try employing this same tactic on our own southern border, just to see what happens?

Lawrence on November 8, 2007 at 3:14 PM

Typical,Liberals want full control,Liberals have
already demonstrated time and time again they want
a political solution or surrender,or as they call it a police action,like meals on wheels in Somolia chasing down
abjibskyhook and his goons,Clinton denied the MI abrams,
the rest is history,and moonbats think dictators are there
buddies,the US Military is the enemy,and the liberal media
is going to bend over backwards in this election to win it,
if Liberal politions can’t win it,then the liberal media
will try,——————–a positive story on page 19.

canopfor on November 8, 2007 at 3:29 PM

This war is lost…

If the trends continue in Iraq, whomever runs against H. Reid should just play this clip on TV over and over again.

CliffHanger on November 8, 2007 at 4:36 PM

A New Energy policy would be get rid of all the liberal newspapers and start with the NYT. You could save millions of trees and the world would be a much better place and have a better impact on the so called global warming affect which is ALL liberal hot air

bones47 on November 8, 2007 at 6:00 PM

I’m surprised the NY Times even printed the story. Sure, they buried it but they did print it though the “militant group” instead of AQ twist in the title was pretty low even for them.

Yakko77 on November 8, 2007 at 9:18 PM

So, wouldn’t you think this news would be big enough to warrant better placement than page A19?

NYT is deeply sorry that this article appeared on page A19. NYT assures that the next article depicting good news in Iraq is printed on A18.

MaelstromX on November 8, 2007 at 11:45 PM

What was on the front page?

Connie on November 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Here ya go.

Michael in MI on November 8, 2007 at 11:59 PM

But Abu Ghraib can get on page one for 34 days straight.

The New York Times is on the other side.

Pablo on November 9, 2007 at 8:59 AM