March 29, 2008
Elite Media: Never Let Your Right Hand Know What Your Left Hand Is Washing
A sample platter of silly contradictions and absurdities in the AP's confusticated account of the Battle of Basra... thank goodness for those "multiple layers of editing" that separate the professional media from blogs!
Take me to your leader
British ground troops, who controlled the city until handing it over to the Iraqis last December, also joined the battle for Basra, firing artillery Saturday for the first time in support of Iraqi forces....
The fight for Basra is crucial for al-Maliki, who flew to Basra earlier this week and is staking his credibility on gaining control of Iraq's second-largest city, which has essentially been held by armed groups for nearly three years.
Who was that masked man?
With the Shiite militiamen defiant, a group of police in Sadr City abandoned their posts and handed over their weapons to al-Sadr's local office. Police forces in Baghdad are believed to be heavily influenced or infiltrated by Mahdi militiamen.
"We can't fight our brothers in the Mahdi Army, so we came here to submit our weapons," one policeman said on condition of anonymity for security reasons....
Iraqi police said that earlier in the day a U.S. warplane strafed a house and killed eight civilians, including two women and one child. They spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to release the information.
Wait -- does the claim we killed women and children come from the same anonymous Iraqi police who defected to Sadr? Or does AP have rival, unfriendly anonymous sources?
Depends on what the meaning of "civilian" is...
Iraq's Health Ministry, which is close to the Sadrist movement, on Saturday reported at least 75 civilians have been killed and at least 500 others injured in a week of clashes and airstrikes in Sadr City and other eastern Baghdad neighborhoods.
The U.S. military sharply disputes the claims, having said that most of those killed were militia members.
Well actually, Dude, except for those Mahdi Militia members who also happen to be in the Iraqi Army...
'Ere now, what's all this then?
If you're interested in what's really "goin' down" down south in Mesopotamia, try Bill Roggio instead of the Associated Press. Roggio sums up his post thus:
Fighting in Basrah and Baghdad and throughout much of the South continues as Iraqi security forces and Multinational Forces Iraq press the fight against the Mahdi Army and other Iranian-backed terror groups. The Iraqi Army has moved additional forces to Basrah as the US and Iraqi military have conducted significant engagements in Shia areas of Baghdad. The Mahdi Army has taken significant casualties. The US military has denied the Mahdi Army has taken control of checkpoints in Baghdad.
You won't read this in the elite media; it just doesn't fit "the story."
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, March 29, 2008, at the time of 8:33 PM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/2926
The following hissed in response by: Fritz
Now Dafydd, you're getting awfully picky. I would hope that the British were armed while controlling Basra. And surely you don't think any of those anonymous sources would be less than honest. After all, only the U.S. and its lackeys lie. And since there are only peace-loving Sadrists in Basra, then of course those killed are civilians. You need an attitude adjustment because you are not looking at things properly. With your present attitude you will never be hired by the A.P., which I'm sure breaks your heart. Perhaps some lessons from "Grenn Glenwald" will help you to see the light. After all, he is a best selling author, was quoted on the floor of the Senate, and won some kind of prize.
The following hissed in response by: Steelhand
For all the leftists out there trying to get Hillary and/or Obama elected, it's "Tet Offensive Time." Win the battle if you want; we control the story. McCain might win if it looks like he was right about Iraq; by God-like-force-that-your-culture-decides-it-likes we'll make him wrong.
For those of you keeping score at home, let me explain the rules. You take a quote from some unnamed source 5000 miles away with an ax to grind, and that's journalism. You play audio from a speaker (Rev. Wright) making pronouncements that disgust the majority of Americans, you're cherry picking. Make sense? Thorough attribution is merely spin. Unverifiable sources (and no one ever makes things up, do they?) are the real thing.
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved