Iraqi PM: Accusation against US troops overplayed?
posted at 1:24 pm on June 2, 2006 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
I think I officially have war fatigue now. When I saw that blaring NYT headline in which the Iraqi Prime Minister accused US troops of committing atrocities daily, I concluded that we might as well pack up and leave the Iraqis to their savagery. After all, if the guy our blood and treasure helped put into power and is still defending thinks our troops are nothing but a band of criminals, it’s safe to say that the battle for hearts and minds is lost. Utterly and completely lost. The country can’t be saved and isn’t worth the effort.
But. Newsbusters and Eric Umansky did some digging.
“What the paper doesn’t include is another part of the prime minister’s quote, where he says, carefully, ‘Yes a mistake may happen but there is an acceptable limit to mistakes….I am not saying that they are intentional. But it is worrying for us.’ That’s a useful bit of context, no? (For what it’s worth, TP did a quick Nexis search and couldn’t find another publication that quotes Maliki’s charging “daily” attacks against civilians.)”
Hm. As if on cue from today’s Vent, the NYT seems to be making up news again. And it just happens to be news that hurts the war effort.
You’ve got to wonder at some point, what are people like the NYT’s reporters and editors thinking? The blogosphere can sniff out these fake news items and expose them. But even if we can’t, the best case scenario the fake news distorters can hope for out of stories like this is that we who still support the war get disgusted with the whole thing and pull out, leaving Iraq to its fate. That will result in an orgy of blood and violence that might eclipse Rwanda, or even rival the million dead after the Democrats abandoned Vietnam. Which, apparently, is fine with the anti-war side.
There’s a callousness and cold-bloodedness to the anti-war movement’s many lies that’s positively chilling if you give it a second’s thought.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
The MSM will lie and exaggerate EVERYTHING the Iraqi Prime Minister says in order to fulfill their anti-Bush anti-military agenda.
The Iraqi Prime Minister will praise our troops and you won’t see or hear a word about it.
The MSM and LIBERALS are the 5th Column - our enemy from within.
Richard Davis on June 2, 2006 at 1:43 PM
Everyone knows that the NYT has declared war on the war effort, President Bush, and American troops. What few seem to know is that the NYT is at war against the very people they want to purchase their rag, and their sales reports reflect that.
Thankfully New York got a cut in anti-terrorist funds. We wouldn’t want to be accused of fighting a non-existant war in their back yard.
Does anyone know how many retractions the NYT’s average per day throughout the year? I’ll bet that number is pretty high. ;o)
DannoJyd on June 2, 2006 at 1:43 PM
Thank you Brian for exposing the behemoth of the MSM, again.
These are the torch-holders of the ‘progressives’, remember.
Please, all on this board, make an effort to no longer refer to them as ‘progressive’. They support anything but progress.
Sulzberger’s commencement speech this year was a disgrace! He apologized to the graduates for all the unkept promises of the intelligentsia of the 70s.
Entelechy on June 2, 2006 at 1:47 PM
Why is this news or surprising? The New York Times flat out LYING about what someone says in order to defame the American armed forces and Republican government. Say it isn’t so! What a stunner!
Remember when members of the Iraqi government praised american troops? When an Iraqi government officer came to Colorado, to an American army base, and said thank you to the troops? Oh yeah that’s right, it didn’t happen according to the NYT
Defector01 on June 2, 2006 at 1:56 PM
Chilling? We’re already 6 years into the new century and socialism is a sorry shadow of the glorious killing machine that posted so many proud accomplishments in the 20th century. I figure we’re at least 4 million dead bodies behind.
And this Iraq War thing is NOT paying off as expected.
A good orgy of blood and violence will go a long way toward proving that today’s “progressive” has what it takes to keep the shine on the family legacy.
a4g on June 2, 2006 at 2:01 PM
You mean the NYT is being biased? for shame…! What else is new? same old news. move on now.
pullingmyhairout on June 2, 2006 at 3:13 PM
OK, so if there’s a possibility that the US Armed forces think they are under a real and present danger they are shooting first and asking questions later. This is a problem?
When the US Military starts blowing up crowded markets,weddings and schools the NYT might start getting concerned since that’s what the Islamic freedom fighters are doing to win hearts and minds and it could get confusing to report. Just think, they might have to start including the heart wrenching details of the victims even when the bad guys kill innocents instead of just the numbers. If an American soldier makes a mistake we get age, entry point of wound, family history and interviews with close family members and Jihadist eye witnesses. They leave out that these killings are going on in some of the worst rat holes in Iraq.
We haven’t let Patrick Kennedy drive in Baghdad, so what’s the issue about getting reckless?
Hening on June 2, 2006 at 3:55 PM
+”There’s a callousness and cold-bloodedness to the anti-war movement’s many lies that’s positively chilling if you give it a second’s thought.”+
Indeed.
violet on June 2, 2006 at 3:55 PM
Bryan, I agree, but ..
The point of diminishing returns in IRAQ was reached when Saddam’s statue was toppled in April, 2003. We’ve made progress since then, but at increasing cost.
Ignoring what ‘Murthra’ says, perhaps it IS time to consider a Gavin-like approach. Pull troops back to enclaves along the Iranian and Syrian borders. Engage in occasional joint operations with the Iraqi army, on explicit request of their government, to clean out terrorist nests as they pop up. Establish permanent bases in Kurdish, and perhaps Shiite, territory if they will have them. Get out of the policing business, and concentrate on keeping outsiders out.
Reduce direct contact with the locals and hone border control skills that can be used here at home. It’s time.
dman on June 3, 2006 at 12:36 PM
There is always the potential for a backfire here, as normal Americans are not sitting by wanting to hear their boys are bad people–and have it generalized by the actions–albeit alleged actions–of a few. Somehow I feel the same news correspondents that gleefully paint our young men and women as cold-blooded killers are the first to scoff at any galvanized opinions of a certain religion just because 19 of their guys leveled the twin towers.
The momentum will eventually turn against them.
The Therapist on June 4, 2006 at 12:46 AM
The Democrats shooting themselves in their brain housing group doesn’t help the Republicans turn their hearing aids back on. We’re in the middle of a war and we have a peacetime legislative branch. The executive isn’t doing very good with his border policy either.
The internet is a distributed computing project (witness Seti@Home and Einstein@Home, et al.) We need a project for distributed political guidance.
Mike H. on June 4, 2006 at 12:25 PM