What? No Outrage from the Editors?

John Burns, foreign correpondent for the NYT, offers his opinion on Iraq.

And my guess is that history will say that the forces that we liberated by invading Iraq were so powerful and so uncontrollable that virtually nothing the United States might have done, except to impose its own repressive state with half a million troops, which might have had to last ten years or more, nothing we could have done would have effectively prevented this disintegration that is now occurring.

No outrage from the editors at the NYT??? I mean, sure, he didn't say the US could win but, he didn't Blame Bush.

Previously: Post-Pretense

NY Post: A Ban on 'Victory'

What timing: NY Post - A Ban on 'Victory'

Consider correspondent Chris Hedges' infamous 2003 commencement address at Rockford College, where he charged that Americans were becoming "tyrants to others weaker than ourselves," and linked Bush to Vladimir Putin and Ariel Sharon - whom he said were "carrying out acts of gratuitous and senseless violence."

Nor, as the Web site Timeswatch.org points out, was there any reprimand of correspondent Neil McFarquhar, who last summer also appeared on Charlie Rose's show and at tacked the Bush administration for "rush ing bombs to this part of the world."

"It just erodes and erodes and erodes America's reputation," said McFarquhar - who, unlike Gordon, did not even offer the disclaimer that his was "a purely personal view."

From the Times, silence.

Sigh

Post-Pretense

Some of us have, apparently, moved beyond the pretense of supporting the troops but not the mission.

William Arkin (via his WaPo blog):
The Troops Also Need to Support the American People
The Arrogant and Intolerant Speak Out
A Note to My Readers on Supporting the Troops

Arkin, the Greenpeace activist turned Military affairs correspondent claims, among many other things, troops receive "obscene amenities", are mercenaries, and owe us. Anybody who disagrees with him is apparently arrogant and intolerant. And now, in his last post, he didn't really mean it we're to believe.

But others, like Kos, buy it "lock, stock, and barrel" so-to-speak.
Arkin Was Right - We Do Have a Mercenary Army and They Do Owe Us!

Interestingly, with Arkin expressing what is clearly a personal view...one has to wonder what the folks at WaPo think about all this. Especially in light of recent events over at the NYT regarding Michael Gordon. What that about? Michael Gordon was asked for his opinion. Unlike William Arkin.

Drawing a Line

Times editors have carefully made clear their disapproval of the expression of a personal opinion about Iraq on national television by the paper’s chief military correspondent, Michael Gordon.

The rumored military buildup in Iraq was a hot topic on the Jan. 8 “Charlie Rose” show, and the host asked Mr. Gordon if he believed “victory is within our grasp.” The transcript of Mr. Gordon’s response, which he stressed was “purely personal,” includes these comments:

“So I think, you know, as a purely personal view, I think it’s worth it [sic] one last effort for sure to try to get this right, because my personal view is we’ve never really tried to win. We’ve simply been managing our way to defeat. And I think that if it’s done right, I think that there is the chance to accomplish something.”

I raised reader concerns about Mr. Gordon’s voicing of personal opinions with top editors, and received a response from Philip Taubman, the Washington bureau chief. After noting that Mr. Gordon has “long been mindful and respectful of the line between analysis and opinion in his television appearances,” Mr. Taubman went on to draw the line in this case.

“I would agree with you that he stepped over the line on the ‘Charlie Rose’ show. I have discussed the appearances with Michael and I am satisfied that the comments on the Rose show were an aberration. They were a poorly worded shorthand for some analytical points about the military and political situation in Baghdad that Michael has made in the newspaper in a more nuanced and unopinionated way. He agrees his comments on the show went too far.”

It’s a line drawn correctly by Mr. Taubman — and accepted honorably by Mr. Gordon

I haven't seen anything in the NYT from Gordon since this. Disturbing to say the least.

Reuters is on the ball

You know how important it is to frame people in the proper perspective right?

Insurgent vs. Terrorist?
Academic vs. Racist?

Iran opens conference questioning the Holocaust

Among the participants was U.S. academic David Duke, a former Louisiana Republican Representative. He praised Iran for hosting the event.

Four hours later, the same "reporter" "published" an updated "article", with a new title, Iran meeting questions Holocaust and gas chambers. The paragraph I cite above is, strangely, missing.

Ya'think there might be some shortcomings in the "process" over there at Reuters?

Apparently, there's also something behind the charaterization of the Jewish Rabbis in attendance. Although I admit to having no first-hand knowledge on the subject. Reuters: David Duke a "US Academic" (LGF)

These so-called "Jewish rabbis" that Reuters casually drops into the article are in actuality members of Neturei Karta—an insane sect with a tiny membership that makes a practice of supporting evil around the world. Sort of the Jewish equivalent of Fred Phelps and his sick bunch. But to Reuters they’re just like any other "Jewish rabbis."

Interestingly, this paragraph is also missing from the second "article" "authored" by the esteemed "journalist".

Cartoons and Conferences

In a partial response to the Danish Muhammad cartoons Iran hosted a gallery of cartoons from around the world back in August. (BBC)

Organiser Masoud Shojai said: "You see they allow the Prophet to be insulted. But when we talk about the Holocaust, they consider it so holy that they punish people for questioning it."

No mention of the lack of violent protests and out-right murder in response to the anti-semitic cartoons.

So, that wasn't good enough. Didn't provoke enough of a reaction among the infidels. Thus, Iran is hosting a two-day conference which is likely to question whether the Holocaust actually happened. (BBC)

"The first question to be posed is: did the Holocaust actually happen or not? And the second one is: if it did happen, what was the scale of it?"

"The allegation that six million Jews were killed or burnt in this event, is it true or not?"

You know, so what if it didn't. How does that affect anything? Oh, nevermind, I get it, "6 million of you didn't die 60 years ago so, we're going to kill 7 million of you now."

Here's to negotiating with genocidal maniacs.

more dead horses

I lied earlier, I really do love beating dead horses, muwahaha...

Cherry-Picking Campaign Promises (NYT)

...Democrats eagerly made a campaign vow to promptly enact all of the [9/11] panel’s recommendations...Now that they can taste power again, however, the victors seem to be having second thoughts...Surely, the leaders of the new Congress know they will be risking the nation’s security, far more than their credibility, if they retreat from the vow to do a stronger job of oversight.

Emphasis Mine. And rightly so.

Irony of Tolerance

Isn't it ironic that after hundreds of years of struggling against various forms of prejudice under the banners of human rights, civil rights, tolerance, desegregation, women's suffrage, etc, etc multi-culturalism brings us full circle: The end of one law for all? (BBC)

Of course, in new age speak it's called, legal pluralism, not segregation. And true, it has differences. It's not a case of a group of people having "box" drawn around them by others based on the color of their skin. It's a case of a group of people drawing a box around everyone else due to their lack of proper religious values.

Supporters of the extra-judicial systems insist their courts will not delve into criminal mattes. But, precedent is clear. Islam and Sharia must govern all forms of life: domestic, financial, commercial, international, criminal, etc...to comprimise would be to stray from the path. Apostate.

What will be the effect on a society that allows multiple judicial systems to "coexsist"?

dead horses

As much as I despise the beating of dead horses, I'm about to engage it a bit of it.

Democrats Reject Key 9/11 Panel Suggestion

It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies.

As I recall, Nancy Pelosi beat the drum about the 9/11 Commission repeatedly. Oh look, Sister Toldjah has, in fact, documented this: Promises made, promises broken

Not to mention the corruption issue and the complete lack of understand of Iraq and terrorism which I hint at in my previous post: for all his faults

I saw the implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations as a real positive of the Democrat take-over of Congress. Now, I'm having a hard time finding any positives.

for all his faults

For all President Bush's faults, at least he knows who the bad guys are.

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is "sad" that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi insurgent violence on al Qaeda.

"My thoughts on the president's representations are well-known," Pelosi said. "The 9/11 Commission dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad that the president is resorting to it again."

Somebody please tell me where the 9/11 Commission discussed the issue of Al Qaeda inciting sectarian violence in post-war Iraq. Thought so. Tell me again why this lady should influence the national dialogue? agenda?

Oh, and to address the substance of Pelosi's assertion: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L29434212.htm

DUBAI, Nov 29 (Reuters) - Iraq's al Qaeda wing on Wednesday condemned Pope Benedict's visit to Turkey as part of a crusade against Islam...

Make a sentence with these words: Denial, River, Egypt.

So, take this, add it to my previos post, the Murtha fiasco, the Hastings debacle...and you know why I find it so hard to vote for most democrats.