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.