Archive for January, 2008

The NY Post calls BS

The New York Post calls the Old Grey Witch on the carpet for that piece of slanderous garbage they claimed was a “story.” More like a fairytale.

January 17, 2008 — Memo to New York Times Public Ed itor Clark Hoyt: Your urgent atten tion is needed on the slanderous 7,000-word front-page article published last Sunday about homicides allegedly committed by US veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns.

We say “allegedly,” because the article lumped those merely accused of a homicide with those who’ve already been convicted. But that was the least of the piece’s problems.

As our colleague Ralph Peters so adroitly demonstrated on these pages Tuesday, the article embraced the hoariest of overwrought clichés – the US combat vet as psychotic killer.

But on what evidence?

None at all.

Indeed, it’s impossible to take issue with the statistics cited by reporters Deborah Sontag and Lisette Alvarez – because their article doesn’t have any.

For most editors, that would be a red flag. Not at the Times, not in a piece that appealed to the editors’ dearest prejudices.

The article, said to be the first of several, reports that there have been 121 homicides involving active-duty or recently discharged Iraq/Afghan combat veterans.

(Need we mention here what the Times thinks of that war – as has long been clear in both its news and opinion pages? Didn’t think so.)

Read the rest here.

Another hit from the Enemedia…

First the returning vets are whacked out — refuted by MoveAmericaForward — now their wives are wimps.

Dead Man Walking

U.S.-Born Al Qaeda Appears In New Video

…At one point in the video, Gadahn took out his U.S. passport, showed it to the camera and tore it into several pieces.

“In symbolic rejection of the American citizenship that honorable and decent and compassionate people are ashamed to carry, I will now proceed to destroy my American passport,” he said.


Gadahn is the first American to be charged with treason in more than 50 years and could face the death penalty if convicted. He also was indicted on a charge of providing material support to terrorists.

Two versions of the Truth

I disagree with Vin Suprynowicz’s views about the war in Iraq – I believe we should be there. However, his assessment of the media’s coverage of the war is dead on accurate.

Isn’t it interesting the way Iraq news gets reported in our media.

A Jan. 10 Associated Press story begins: “Nine American soldiers were killed in the first two days of a new offensive to root out al-Qaida-in-Iraq fighters holed up in districts north of he capital. …

“The losses came as many enemy militants fled U.S. and Iraqi forces massing in Diyala” — a lot of those guerrillas fleeing north into the province of Salahuddin — AP correspondent Christopher Chester continues.

Read down to the seventh paragraph — halfway through the story. There, we finally learn that our troops “killed 20 to 30 insurgents in the first two days of the operation,” including some in attacks in Salahuddin province.

Now, I’m one who thinks we shouldn’t be in Iraq, at all. In the end, we’ll tacitly endorse some strongman who’ll let us maintain a few military bases in the region — a deal we probably could have cut with Saddam Hussein. Then we’ll declare “victory” and come home.

But if the news report above had been written by the kind of reporters who covered our advance through German-occupied France in 1944, I’ll bet it would have started off:

“Badly disciplined enemy fighters dressed in dirty rags, abandoning the women and children they had vowed to protect, scampered like scared rabbits ahead of advancing American soldiers and their allies in Diyala Province this week. They thought they could find safety in Salahuddin province to the north, but Maj. Gen. Mark P. Hertling’s boys were ready for them there, too. Hertling estimates 20 to 30 enemies died, despite the fact they ran like shrieking monkeys ahead of a forest fire.

“Nine American soldiers died, six in a booby-trapped house in Diyala. The reason American soldiers die in booby-trapped houses, soldiers at the front explained, is because our rules of engagement place the protection of civilians — even those who have harbored the enemy — above the safety of our own boys. Otherwise, neighborhoods could be ‘cleared’ by artillery fire, rather than more dangerous house-to-house searches designed to spare civilian lives.”

The newspaper stories on June 7, 1944, didn’t lead off, “Thousands of Americans died on some beach in France yesterday,” implying Congress should investigate how those sad sacks in the U.S. Army had bungled things again, did they? No, I think they said something more like, “The issue is not yet decided, many brave boys gave their lives yesterday, but the liberation of Europe has begun. Our guys hit the beaches at dawn, overran all opposition by noon, and kept on going.”

Each way of reporting the news is “true.” But the second version gives you a little different feeling about how things are going, doesn’t it?

He continues from there and it’s worth your time to pop over and read what he says. Another hat-tip to freema for pointing me to this article!

Lest anyone still believe the Old Grey Witch is unbiased..

I am late to the party on this one, for sure. A hat-tip to freema at FreeRepublic for pointing me to this, and to PJ-Comix for posting it from NewBusters. The NY Slimes, in an editorial called Looking at America on Dec 31st, 2007, put their agenda out there for all to see, and man is it ugly!

Published: December 31, 2007

There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.

if (acm.rc) acm.rc.write(); It was not the first time in recent years we’ve felt this horror, this sorrowful sense of estrangement, not nearly. This sort of lawless behavior has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001.

The country and much of the world was rightly and profoundly frightened by the single-minded hatred and ingenuity displayed by this new enemy. But there is no excuse for how President Bush and his advisers panicked — how they forgot that it is their responsibility to protect American lives and American ideals, that there really is no safety for Americans or their country when those ideals are sacrificed.

Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America’s position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America’s global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world’s anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.

In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant.

We have read accounts of how the government’s top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions — and both American and international law — to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.

Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn’t go just a bit too far and actually kill them.

The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat — and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could.

Hundreds of men, swept up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, were thrown into a prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, so that the White House could claim they were beyond the reach of American laws. Prisoners are held there with no hope of real justice, only the chance to face a kangaroo court where evidence and the names of their accusers are kept secret, and where they are not permitted to talk about the abuse they have suffered at the hands of American jailers.

In other foreign lands, the C.I.A. set up secret jails where “high-value detainees” were subjected to ever more barbaric acts, including simulated drowning. These crimes were videotaped, so that “experts” could watch them, and then the videotapes were destroyed, after consultation with the White House, in the hope that Americans would never know.

The C.I.A. contracted out its inhumanity to nations with no respect for life or law, sending prisoners — some of them innocents kidnapped on street corners and in airports — to be tortured into making false confessions, or until it was clear they had nothing to say and so were let go without any apology or hope of redress.

These are not the only shocking abuses of President Bush’s two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism. There is much more — so much that the next president will have a full agenda simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting them.

We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once again, the reflection of the United States of America.

So many lies in there, you just don’t know where to start. And very little actual facts — we’re just supposed to believe the editorial staff of the Times that all these things happened just as they say? Hogwash! The New York Slimes has lied about everything from remarks of John Kerry’s to photos of a dead guy in Tyre to publishing a photoshopped image of an airstrike in Pakistan to who knows what else? And I mean that seriously. How much more have they gotten away with and no one caught them on it? How do you trust someone who lies so brazenly and then implies that the problem is everyone else’s when you point out their “mistake”? They are so eager to publish anything that furthers their agenda that either they do not check the facts or they knowingly publish falsehoods. Either way, they have squandered the public trust in such a way that they are ringing their own death knell.

Closure for Abu Ghraib – and the “human rights activists” whine

From the USA TODAY

Human rights advocates complained that the case did not go higher up the chain of command and said the decision sent a troubling message.

“It could not be more clear that prisoner abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted from policies and practices authorized by high-level officials, including military and civilian leaders,” said Hira Shamsi, an attorney with the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. “Although the abuse was systemic and widespread, the accountability for it has been anything but.”

Mila Rosenthal, deputy executive director for research and policy for Amnesty International USA, said: “I think we’re emboldening dictators and despots around the world. We’re saying that it’s OK to allow these kinds of abuses to flourish.”

No, we’re not Mike. We’re saying that this punishment fits that crime. This is what it says…

“In light of the nature of the offense that Jordan had been found guilty of committing and the substantial evidence in mitigation at trial and in post-trial matters submitted by defense counsel, Rowe determined that an administrative reprimand was a fair and appropriate disposition of the matter,” Joanna P. Hawkins, a military spokeswoman, said in a statement.

Fair and appropriate and I have to agree. Abu Ghraib was an embarrassment – it should NOT happen again. But we didn’t cut anyone’s head off. No one was raped. No one had their genitalia connected by wires to an electrical current. Get some perspective.

Mr. Gates is either delusional on this, or very smart

According to the New York Slimes article titled “For Pentagon and News Media, Relations Improve With a Shift in War Coverage,” SecDef Gates is denying the enemy status of the media.

And, perhaps most important, their boss, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, has stated a view never heard from his predecessor, Donald H. Rumsfeld. “The press is not the enemy,” Mr. Gates tells military audiences, including at the service academies, “and to treat it as such is self-defeating.”

Mr. Gates, the media is NO friend of the military. If you really believe that they are, it is to your own detriment. Reading further into the story goes on to prove it…

…however, the success of the lightning-quick invasion became not the full story, but merely the early chapter of a frustrating and deadly narrative of war in Iraq.

Frustrating for who? Certainly for those of us who knew you weren’t telling the whole story!

As insurgent violence rose in 2003, echoes of that earlier conflict in Southeast Asia could be heard.

Because you kept the drumbeat going and tried to get us to believe it was headed in that direction.

The downturn accelerated with the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in 2004. The credibility of the armed forces fell even further in the eyes of reporters when it was disclosed that military contractors in Baghdad had paid Iraqi reporters for stories in the local news media.

And exactly who gives a rats patootie what the reporters think — and isn’t that mutually exclusive? Reporters and thinking??

In return, the military’s familiar complaints resumed: There is no coverage of the good news from Iraq, officers said. The focus is on violence and daily casualty counts, and not progress. Reporters cannot or will not get out and about in Iraq to tell the whole story. Editors and reporters are biased.

And those complaints are the Truth — and the Slimes can’t hide it, because the Truth has been told by many, many bloggers with boots on the ground. If it weren’t for them, I have no doubt that the Enemedia would have had a much easier time turning this WOT into another Vietnam.

“The death knell of your ethics has been enabled by your parent organizations who have chosen to align themselves with political agendas,” General Sanchez said in comments that earned far less coverage than his equally harsh statement that the Bush administration had mismanaged the war.

“What is clear to me,” General Sanchez told a media group, Military Reporters and Editors, “is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.”

Well gee — wonder why that statement got less coverage? Is the Slimes actually condemning themselves for that? That the New York Slimes is covering the coverage on the Iraq war and ends up patting themselves on the back while using the words of others to excuse themselves for not being more accurate is just rich.

“In general, I thought the majority coverage was very accurate and fair,” said Colonel Bleichwehl, who has served twice in Iraq. “There were not always enough reporters there full-time to provide the complete story of what was going on in a city with seven million people, much less the rest of the country.”

%d bloggers like this: