Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    February 2026
    S M T W T F S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728

  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

    al qaeda barbarism big government blogging colorado congress corruption culture democrats denver economics economy elections environmentalism firearms freedom global warming gop gun control guns health care human rights humor iraq islam islamofascism israel journalism leftists liberty media bias military moonbats msm music obama politics presidential candidates republicans socialism soldiers spending terrorism war weather

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘journalism’

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Dame Helen, the Queen, and the Beeb

Posted by Richard on March 19, 2007

Gerard Baker is U.S. Editor and Assistant Editor of The Times of London. While back in Britain recently, he happened upon a BBC interview with Oscar-winning actress Helen Mirren. The interviewer asked her about the difficulty of playing a character as "unsympathetic" as the Queen. To her credit, Mirren rejected the premise.

Baker was struck by this precisely because it was merely about an actress, not Iraq or politics, and he proceeded to unload on the Beeb most marvelously (emphasis added):

It betrayed an absolutely rock-solid assumption that the Queen is fundamentally unsympathetic, and that anyone who might still harbour some respect for the monarch – or indeed for that matter, the military or the Church, or the countryside or the joint stock company or any of the great English bequests to the world – must be some reactionary old buffer out in the sticks who has not had the benefit of the London media's cultural enlightenment.

More than that, the question – all fawning and fraternal and friendly – contained within it an assumption that, of course, every thoughtful person shares the same view.

You really do have to leave the country to appreciate fully how pernicious the BBC's grasp of the nation's cultural and political soul has become. The groupthink and assumptions implicit in almost everything broadcast by BBC News … lie like a suffocating blanket over the national consciousness.

This is the mindset that sees the effortless superiority, at every turn, of benign collectivism over selfish individualism, exploited worker over unscrupulous capitalist, enlightened European over brutish American, thoughtful atheist over dumb believer, persecuted Arab over callous Israeli; and that believes the West is the perpetrator of just about every ill that has ever befallen the world – from colonialism to global warming.

I'm often told, when I take on like this, that I'm ignoring the quality of BBC output. But I spent almost a decade in the employ of the BBC and I can say, without demeaning my gifted colleagues at The Times, that it has probably one of the highest concentrations of talent of any institution in the world. But that, of course, is the problem. It perpetuates its power by attracting and retaining an educated elite that is distinguished by its unstinting devotion to collectivist values. I've no doubt it does what it does very well. It is what it does I object to.

Bravo. In today's world of cable and satellite channels, lots of Americans who consider themselves educated and sophisticated speak of BBC News in glowing terms — admiring the Beeb even more than NPR or MacNeil-Lehrer. It's a sentiment not confined to those who are philosophically aligned with the collectivists at the Beeb, and it's something I don't understand. The Beeb reports on its own postmodernist alternate universe that bears little resemblance to the reality in which I reside. Their purpose is evil and the result is pernicious. Why should I admire them for doing it well?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Pack ice and polar bears

Posted by Richard on February 7, 2007

You’ve no doubt seen the picture, accompanying a story about global warming and tugging at your heartstrings. It shows two polar bears atop what appears to be a remnant of an ice floe. Why, it looks like the poor dears have been stranded by the terrible consequences of global climate change. I feel so ashamed of my SUV. [sob!]

Well, Dan Riehl uncovered the real story behind the photo. For starters, the New York Times had the photo credit wrong — it wasn’t taken by Dan Crosbie, but by an associate of his on the same expedition, Amanda Byrd. I wonder if she’s any relation to the famous explorer. For another thing, the polar bears aren’t stranded on a rapidly melting floe, they’re exploring a wave-carved ice sculpture (maybe to better spot seals) near a large sheet of ice, as is clear from some of Byrd’s other photos of them. Another expedition photo shows someone standing guard with a shotgun in case the bears attack. The expedition encountered unexpectedly thick ice.

Riehl not only found several examples of the picture being misrepresented to sway people’s emotions, he also found an article in which an "environmental journalist" and a climate scientist revel in the fact that reporting about climate change has become one-sided, advocacy journalism.

Meanwhile, polar bears on ice floes are posing a problem in Iceland, which is experiencing a bitter winter with lots of pack ice (emphasis added):

Thick packs of ice, which have not been seen for almost 40 years, have been moving into the western fjords across some of the best fishing grounds, followed by bitter winds and plummeting temperatures. …

Communities living around the fjord of Dryafjordur, have noticed that their inlets have been filled with ice in recent weeks – ice drifting in from Greenland and carrying dozens of polar bears on their floes.

When chunks break off the bears become stranded, drifting helplessly on the floes. There have been a number of stories of bears making land around Iceland and having to be shot because they pose a danger to humans and livestock.

The return of pack ice to Iceland goes against all the forecasts of doom of global warming, although some forecasters think it may just be a climatic aberration.

When the empirical evidence fits the forecasters’ computer models, it proves their theory. When the evidence contradicts the models, it’s just an aberration. Ain’t the world of government-funded science wonderful? It’s so much more objective and honest when the checks are written by power-hungry politicians and bureaucrats with an agenda instead of by greedy oil company executives with an agenda.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Trying to shut up the troops

Posted by Richard on February 2, 2007

The "chicken hawk" meme that’s long been popular with the left is bad enough. It’s the contemptible claim that only those who’ve been in combat are entitled to support the war, and that those of us who support the war and haven’t served either need to enlist or shut up. But now we have a new anti-war meme — courtesy of Bill Arkin, a journalist and "military analyst" for NBC News who blogs at The Washington Post — that’s stunningly vile and disgusting.

Apparently, Arkin noticed that the vast majority of military people do support the war (we Fighting Keyboardists pointed this out a long time ago). He’s sick of listening to them and thinks they should shut up. He cited a few examples —  soldiers in Iraq speaking out in a recent NBC Nightly News report — and responded with ill-concealed contempt and loathing (emphasis added):

These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President’s handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.
…

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don’t get it, that they don’t understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoovers and Nixons will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If it weren’t about the United States, I’d say the story would end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, would save the nation from the people.

But it is the United States, and the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary – oops sorry, volunteer – force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

First of all, only a postmodern leftist worshipping at the feet of Chomsky and Said would interpret a soldier’s simple criticism of his viewpoint as a demand that "we should … roll over and play dead, … and give up our rights …"

It’s clear that Arkin despises people in the military and suspects that many of them are bloodthirsty goons who enjoy murdering and raping civilians and would be happy to turn the U.S. into a military dictatorship. His hatred has become so intense that he can no longer heed the advice he gave himself when he began the blog (emphasis added):

My basic philosophy is that government is more incompetent than diabolical, that the military gets way too much of a free ride (memo to self: Don’t say anything bad about the troops), and that official secrecy is the greatest threat citizens actually face today.

Mind you, I think he was off to a bad start with that philosopy. It starts out all right, but "official secrecy" (whatever that means) is our biggest threat? Not the people who want to blow up our airplanes, trains, and buildings? Not the movement that wants to subjugate us all under its 7th-century laws, turn women into chattel, and stone homosexuals and adulterers to death? Interesting perspective you have there, Arkin.

So, according to Arkin and his leftist friends, who has moral standing to comment on the war? Those of us who haven’t served have no right to speak out because we’re chicken hawks, hypocritically asking others to do what we haven’t done ourselves. The troops have no right to speak out because they’re mercenaries lusting for blood and ready to institute a fascist dictatorship. The people who served in the past and support the war have no right to speak out because … well, I’m not sure, exactly, but I think it’s because they’re still mercenaries at heart, lusting for blood and dictatorship.

Apparently, Arkin and his friends think that only those who’ve served in the past, but who now oppose war, are entitled to voice their opinions — people like Jack Murtha and John Effin’ Kerry.

And he has the gall to worry about us silencing him?
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Relentless negativity

Posted by Richard on February 1, 2007

Since the Democrats have hitched their future to failure and retreat in Iraq, it’s not surprising that their PR operatives in the mainstream media have committed themselves to reporting the news from Iraq with a relentless negativity. In practice, this has mostly meant ignoring positive developments, battlefield victories, and enemy losses and setbacks, while providing a steady stream of stories about IEDs, American and civilian deaths, and Iraqi failures and shortcomings.

Occasionally, something positve is too big to ignore, such as the recent battle near Najaf, the largest since the U.S. invasion. A radical religious sect, mostly Shia, apparently intended to attack Najaf and massacre the Shia clergy supportive of the government, starting with Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani. Iraqi forces, backed up by U.S. troops and air support, killed between two and three hundred and captured hundreds more. Eleven Iraqi soldiers and two Americans were killed. A horrible and bloody act of terrorism was prevented, and a dangerous religious militia organization was destroyed — that’s a pretty positive story, right? Well, not if you’re determined to portray everything negatively (emphases added here and there):

Analysis: Najaf battle raises questions

By ROBERT H. REID Associated Press Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Accounts of the bloody battle near Najaf have produced more questions than answers, raising doubts about Iraqi security forces’ performance and concern over tensions within the majority Shiite community.

Missteps by Iraqi forces in battle raise questions
By Marc Santora
Published: January 30, 2007

BAGHDAD: Iraqi forces were surprised and nearly overwhelmed by the ferocity of an obscure renegade militia in a weekend battle near the holy city of Najaf and needed far more help from American forces than previously disclosed, American and Iraqi officials said Monday.
…

The Iraqis and Americans eventually prevailed in the battle. But the Iraqi security forces’ miscalculations about the group’s strength and intentions raised troubling questions about their ability to recognize and deal with a threat.

A victory, of sorts
…
… Across Iraq, many called for an end to Iraq’s bloodshed. Not least among them was Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of a powerful Shia party, who said “I condemn the killing of Sunnis just as I do Shia and any other Iraqi”. But the events in Najaf show how quickly a hitherto unnoticed group that threatens to bring further violence to Iraq can spring up. Worse still the emergence of this mainly Shia splinter group suggests that on top of Shia-Sunni enmity, power struggles among Shia are yet another problem that Iraq’s leaders must counter. And elsewhere in the country, the mindless small-scale killings that plague Iraq carried on. But the near-disaster at Ashura shows that, for a day at least, it could have been much worse.

Militias on rise in Iraq
Burst of splinter groups stiffens challenge for US

By Farah Stockman and Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | January 31, 2007

WASHINGTON — The messianic Soldiers of Heaven militia that fought US and Iraqi troops in one of the fiercest battles of the war Sunday is among the more than two dozen extremist militias operating across Iraq that are fast becoming a powerful, and hidden, new enemy.

Ashura pilgrims attacked in Iraq, 40 killed

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Bombers killed 36 people in two attacks on majority Shi’ite worshippers marking the religious ritual of Ashura on Tuesday amid heightened tensions between Iraq’s Shi’ites and once politically dominant minority Sunnis.
…

Fearing a possible strike by insurgents, Iraqi authorities had deployed 11,000 police and soldiers to the holy Shi’ite city of Kerbala, focus of the commemoration that marks the death in battle of the Prophet Mohammed’s grandson there 1,300 years ago.

The fears were fuelled [sic] by the discovery of what Iraqi officials said was a plot by a messianic Muslim cult to target senior Shi’ite clerics in the holy city of Najaf south of Baghdad at the climax of Ashura this week.

Iraqi security forces backed by U.S. tanks, helicopters and jet fighters fought a fierce day-long battle with the "Soldiers of Heaven" near the city on Sunday in which one U.S. helicopter crashed. Iraqi officials said the cult’s leader was killed.

Mideast tensions dominate Ashura ritual

BEIRUT (Reuters) – Attackers killed 40 Shi’ite Muslim pilgrims in Iraq on Tuesday and Hezbollah’s leader warned of the threat of civil war in Lebanon as tensions across the Middle East overshadowed the annual rite of Ashura.

In most of the Arab world the climax of the ritual, in which Shi’ites mourn the slaying over 13 centuries ago of the Prophet Mohammad’s grandson Imam Hussein, went off peacefully.

But the talk from worshippers and preachers alike was of impending struggle and conflict.

None of this negativity was enough for the rabidly leftist "media critics" at Media Matters, though. They’re angry that the reporting wasn’t negative enough:

Media uncritically reported Bush’s statement touting Iraqi success in Najaf

Summary: Numerous media outlets reported — as President Bush claimed in an interview on National Public Radio — that Iraqi troops took the lead in the battle near Najaf against religious militia the Soldiers of Heaven, without noting that the Iraqis were reportedly "overwhelmed" until U.S. forces joined them.

The barking moonbat outlets, quoting "authoritative" Iraqi and Arab sources, have already begun spinning this as an atrocity and cover-up — just simple, peaceful tribesmen on a pilgrimage attacked without provocation by the Iraqi army and then massacred by American planes and helicopters.

Almost none of the news stories mentioned, and none analyzed, what struck me as some rather important information about this "Soldiers of Heaven" cult: They’re a messianic group that wants to hasten the return of the mahdi, or 12th imam, and thought killing the Najaf clerics would help bring this about. The group’s presence in the area expanded greatly in recent months, and they set up sizable compound. There were some interesting discoveries at the compound:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — The ruins of the Soldiers of Heaven compound in Najaf yielded evidence Tuesday that the group had amassed huge wealth and weapons storehouses virtually under the noses of the Iraqi and U.S. militaries.
…

McClatchy Newspapers correspondent Qassim Zein entered the compound Tuesday afternoon, more than 24 hours after the battle ended.

He found a beauty salon for the women who lived there. New air conditioners kept the building cool, and outside was a large swimming pool. Expensive furniture was everywhere.

Zein said a police official told him a search of the compound uncovered $8 million to $10 million in U.S. currency. U.S. Army officials took the money, along with computers and documents, he told Zein.

A spokesman for U.S. forces referred questions to the Iraqi government. A State Department spokesman had no comment.

Zein counted more than 60 vehicles, including pickups and sedans. Another four large trucks were thought to have hauled weapons.

So this small, messianic cult somehow suddenly obtained vast weapons stockpiles, luxurious facilities, and mountains of U.S. currency (maybe counterfeit hundreds like those that Hezbollah passes out?). And their goal is to bring about the apocalypse by hastening the return of the mahdi. I can’t imagine where they got all these resources — maybe it was someone *cough*Ahmadinejad*cough* who shares their goal.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Retaliation threatens cease-fire!

Posted by Richard on December 27, 2006

It was just about a month ago that Reuters redefined "cease-fire" to mean, as Tammy Bruce put it, "when Israel stops defending herself." So, for the past 30-odd days, the Paleostinians in Gaza have fired Kassam rockets at Israeli towns at an average of two a day, and the Israelis haven’t responded — and this constituted a successful on-going "cease-fire."

But now, the Israelis have said they’ll target the Kassam rocket launchers with "pinpoint" strikes — and this "threatens" the "cease-fire"! The Paleostinians may be feuding savagely amongst themselves, but they all seem to agree that the "cease-fire" can survive only as long as the Israelis refrain from hitting back:

Palestinians warned Wednesday that Israel’s decision to target Kassam cells in the Gaza Strip will lead to the total collapse of the current cease-fire.
…

Abu Ahmed, a spokesman for the Al-Quds Brigades, the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, said his group would continue to fire rockets at Israel as long as the cease-fire is not extended to the West Bank.

"Israel is continuing to perpetrate daily massacres against our people in the West Bank," he claimed. "We have the right to respond to these attacks. In the next few days we will increase our rocket attacks on Israel."

Fatah’s armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, also threatened to resume terror attacks if Israel launches attacks on Palestinians who fire rockets at Israeli cities. "Israel’s threats will destroy the cease-fire," the group said in a statement issued in Gaza City.

PLO executive committee member Yasser Abed Rabbo, who also serves as an advisor to Abbas, warned that the Israeli decision would lead to the breakdown of the cease-fire. He described the decision to target Kassam launchers as a "breach" of the cease-fire agreement and called on the Israeli government to reconsider its decision.

At LGF, Charles Johnson noticed that the Associated Press has also adopted the Reuters definition of "cease-fire":

In the Bizarro world of the Associated Press, Palestinians can fire rockets into Israel every single day, yet the “truce” is only “derailed” when Israel decides to defend against the attacks: Israel threatens to renew attacks.

JERUSALEM – After weeks of restraint, Israel said Wednesday that it will renew attacks on rocket-launching militants in the Gaza Strip, threatening to derail an already shaky, month-old truce.

Nice phrasing; Israel “threatens to renew attacks.” The Palestinians, on the other hand, can’t “renew” their attacks because they never stopped.

But AP’s reporting is more sinister than Bizarro. Compare the AP story with the quotes of Paleostinian leaders in the JPost article above and it becomes clear that the Associated Press has adopted the Paleostinian talking points.

The next time you read an AP or Reuters news report from the Middle East, just remember that, for all intents and purposes, you’re reading an Islamofascist press release with the language toned down to suit Western sensibilities.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Grim milestone” hyped

Posted by Richard on December 26, 2006

A couple of weeks ago, I warned you that the 90% of American media outlets that give the rest a bad name were preparing to hype another Iraq death toll milestone — "the momentous occasion when the number of Americans killed by al Qaeda is eclipsed by the number killed because of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Halliburton/oil." Editor and Publisher had predicted it would happen by Dec. 19, and I’m sure many in the MSM were chagrined as Christmas approached, and the toll in Iraq remained short of the 9/11 toll of 2,973.

On Christmas Day, it happened. Within minutes of learning about death number 2,974, AP had a story out, updated several times since as the toll climbed further:

NEW YORK (AP) – In a span of a few hours, 2,973 people were killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. In a span of 45 months, the number of American troops killed in Iraq exceeded that grim toll as the war continues.

The milestone in Iraq came on Christmas, nearly four years after the war began, according to a count by The Associated Press.

Based on a quick check with Google News, I’m guessing the story has appeared over a thousand times on media websites alone. The latest AP rewrites have buried the "grim milestone" aspects deeper in the story, maybe in response to criticism. Charles Johnson called the first version "disgusting and ghoulish beyond belief," and suggested:

Write to the Associated Press and tell them what you think about this.

I suspect I was correct in predicting that no one would mention how long it took for the number of combat deaths in World War II to eclipse the number killed at Pearl Harbor (2,403). I actually did a bit of research on this, but with not much success. I found casualty numbers for specific major combat operations, and a Navy document showing casualties by year, but that’s too coarse. My best guess is that U.S. combat deaths in the Pacific theater surpassed the December 7 toll some time between the Battle of the Java Sea in late February and the fall of Bataan in early April — so, roughly 3 or 4 months.

I doubt if anyone noticed at the time. In 1942, American journalists were too busy reporting actual war news. Plus, they were on our side.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

British lord demands senators “honour the Constitution”

Posted by Richard on December 20, 2006

It’s a sad indicator of the sorry state of American politics in general and the U.S. Senate in particular that a British lord has to remind American senators that the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech, and that attempts by senators to silence ExxonMobil, accompanied by thinly-veiled threats, violate their oath of office. Bravo, Lord Monckton!

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 /PRNewswire/ — Lord Monckton, Viscount of Brenchley, has sent an open letter to Senators Rockefeller (D-WV) and Snowe (R-Maine) in response to their recent open letter telling the CEO of ExxonMobil to cease funding climate-skeptic scientists.
(http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20061212_monckton.pdf).

The entire Monckton letter (link above is to PDF) is well worth reading. It begins (emphasis added):

The US Constitution guarantees the right of free speech. It is inappropriate for elected Senators such as yourselves to suggest that any person should refrain from exercising that right, as you have done in your letter of October 27 to the CEO of ExxonMobil. …

You defy every tenet of democracy when you invite ExxonMobil to deny itself the right to provide information to “senior elected and appointed government officials” who disagree with your opinion. You are elected officials yourselves. If you do not believe in the right of persons within the United States to exercise their fundamental right under the world’s greatest Constitution to petition their elected representatives for the redress of their grievances, then you have no place on Capitol Hill. You must go.

Your letter says climate change is “a matter of urgency for all mankind”. It is not. The UN’s 2001 report estimates our greenhouse effect compared with 1750 AD as 2.43 watts per square metre. Its new report will cut that figure to 1.6 watts, little more than 1 per cent of the 150-watt natural greenhouse effect.

The UN will also reduce its high-end estimate of sea-level rise to 2100 from 3 feet to just 17 inches. Morner (2004), a lifelong student of sea level changes, says: “There is a total absence of any recent ‘acceleration in sea level rise’ as often claimed by IPCC and related groups. … our best estimate of possible future sea-level changes is +10 +/- 10cm in a century, or, maybe, even +5 +/- 15cm.” That is a maximum of 8 inches in 100 years. See also Morner (1995); INQUA (2000).

All other imagined consequences of climatic warming are more likely to be beneficial than harmful. …

The seven-page letter, which includes references for the studies cited, goes on to provide an excellent, readable summary of the state of knowledge — and misinformation — about climate change, and to deliver a fine verbal thrashing to Senators Rockefeller and Snowe. It closes with (emphasis added):

Finally, you may wonder why it is that a member of the Upper House of the United Kingdom legislature, wholly unconnected with and unpaid by the corporation that is the victim of your lamentable letter, should take the unusual step of calling upon you as members of the Upper House of the United States legislature either to withdraw what you have written or resign your sinecures.
 
I challenge you to withdraw or resign because your letter is the latest in what appears to be an internationally-coordinated series of maladroit and malevolent attempts to silence the voices of scientists and others who have sound grounds, rooted firmly in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, to question what you would have us believe is the unanimous agreement of scientists worldwide that global warming will lead to what you excitedly but unjustifiably call “disastrous” and “calamitous” consequences. Let me give just two examples from this side of the Atlantic:

The Institute for Public Policy Research, a Leftist pressure-group, has stated that public bodies should act henceforth as though there is no debate among scientists and should assume that “disastrous” and “calamitous” climate change will be a fact.

The British “Foreign Secretary”, one Beckett, responded to a recent newspaper article by me that questioned the science behind the soi-disant “consensus” on climate change by demanding – during an otherwise paralyzing speech on terrorism – that the news media should treat climate sceptics as though they were spokesmen for Islamic terrorism and should deny them column inches or air time. Al Gore, who was Vice-President when the Senate declared 97-0 that it would not ratify any treaty that did not bind fast-growing, heavily-polluting nations such as China, India, Indonesia and Brazil because without them no action by the West would make any difference, wrote a reply to my article saying that I should not be discussing these matters in the Press. He said I should rely on peer-reviewed research in journals such as Science, Nature and Geophysical Research Letters. Within 12 hours, I had published a 24-page refutation of his scientifically-inaccurate article, citing more than 60 references in learned journals. Twenty-five of the citations were from the three journals he mentioned.

You will rightly deduce from Beckett’s sinister remark that after a decade of Socialist government freedom of speech does not figure in our constitution. But let me quote the First Amendment to yours:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the Press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

I call upon the pair of you to live by those great words, or to leave. Yours truly,

MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY

Outstanding. I wish we had some Moncktons in the United States Senate.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Preparing to hype the death toll again

Posted by Richard on December 15, 2006

Editor and Publisher is a trade publication for the newspaper industry. Describing their editorial viewpoint as liberal is something of an understatement. The other day, one of their columnists recalled "the last soldier to die for a mistake" in Vietnam and speculated about who’d be the last to die for the Iraq mistake, closing with "How many more years of torment and wasted lives remain in Iraq?"

On Tuesday, E&P provided a heads-up for journalists, basically telling them, "There’s another symbolically important milestone approaching in Iraq, so all you ink-stained wretches get ready to crank up the hype machine." Except they put it this way:

U.S. Death Toll in Iraq Hits 2,940 — Within 33 of 9/11 Total



By E&P Staff



Published: December 12, 2006 9:45 PM ET updted Wednesday


NEW YORK With five more deaths reported today, at least 2,940 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to the Associated Press count. The AP count is six higher than the Defense Department’s tally, which often gets updated.

The most often cited number for those killed in America on Sept. 11, 2001, is 2,973, leaving the Iraq tally just 33 short.

At the current rate, the 9/11 number will be eclipsed within a week.

I imagine that a fair number of reporters, columnists, and editors almost immediately began work on news stories, human interest stories, analyses, and opinion pieces addressing the momentous occasion when the number of Americans killed by al Qaeda is eclipsed by the number killed because of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Halliburton/oil.

I predict that virtually none of these articles, analyses, and opinion pieces will mention how long it took for the number of combat deaths in World War II to eclipse the number killed at Pearl Harbor.

UPDATE: The toll in Iraq reached the number they were waiting for on Dec. 25. The MSM celebrated commemorated the milestone without drawing any comparisons to WWII and Pearl Harbor.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Jamil’s world

Posted by Richard on December 1, 2006

I thought everyone who half-way keeps up with the news out of Iraq had heard about the Associated Press’s bogus "six burning Sunnis" story, but it was news to someone I know who’s reasonably well-informed, so maybe not.

People need to know that this stuff is happening, so I’ll do my little bit to spread the word: If you listen to the reports from Iraq on the evening news or read the wire service stories in your newspaper, you’re being manipulated, misled, and flat-out lied to. The evidence to back up that claim has become overwhelming.

A good place to start is with this Austin Bay column (emphasis added):

In 1980, Washington Post reporter Janet Cooke wrote a story titled "Jimmy’s World," the startling tale of an 8-year-old "third-generation heroin addict" living in Washington, D.C.

Cooke’s expose’ captured several volatile issues in one tear-drenched package. "Jimmy’s World" had drugs, race, poverty, "fast money and the good life."

In 1981, Cooke won the coveted Pulitzer Prize for journalism.

Fine and dandy — except she should have won the Pulitzer for fiction.

"Jimmy’s World" was a complete crock. Little Heroin Jimmy didn’t exist. The Washington Post, its publisher, Donald Graham, and Cooke’s editor, Bob Woodward, were all duly embarrassed when Cooke’s fraud was exposed. Her Pulitzer was withdrawn.
…

We now move from Jimmy’s World to Capt. Jamil Hussein.

Now, if I were "writing hot" — writing for sensational effect — I would have led with the alleged Jamil’s blazing claim: that six Iraqi Sunnis were dragged from a mosque in Baghdad last week, doused with kerosene and burned to death by a Shia mob. Four mosques were also (allegedly) burned.

The Associated Press ran the dousing story on Nov. 24, and the story was repeated worldwide. (I read it online in the International Herald Tribune, a publication owned by The New York Times.)

Sensational, "headline-generating" elements absolutely jam the story: gruesome savagery, mob action, chaos in Iraq.

The AP identified "Police Captain Jamil Hussein" as its source for the story, with a second source identified as "a Sunni elder."

On Nov. 25, the press office of Multi-National Corps-Iraq (MNCI) published press release No. 20061125-09 (see mnf-iraq.com). The MNCI stated that investigation showed only one mosque had been attacked and found no evidence to support the story of the six immolated Sunnis.

The U.S.-based Website FloppingAces (floppingaces.net) has published an email from MNCI to the AP that states "no one below the level of chief is authorized to be an Iraqi police spokesperson." The email also addresses the story of the Sunnis being burned alive: "… neither we nor Baghdad Police had any reports of such an incident after investigating it and could find no one to corroborate the story. … We can tell you definitively that the primary source of this story, police Capt. Jamil Hussein, is not a Baghdad police officer or an MOI (Ministry of the Interior) employee." The letter is attributed to U.S. Navy Lt. Michael Dean.

I contacted CENTCOM’s Baghdad press office and received an email confirming that Hussein is not a policeman nor does he work for Iraq’s MOI.

FloppingAces noted that the AP has quoted "Jamil Hussein" in at least eight stories since April 2006.

FloppingAces has tons of stories and updates, so just go check out all the posts of the past week. Michelle Malkin has posted lots of good info and links, too. But if you just want the highlights, Gateway Pundit has your one-stop roundup, with lots of links to more details:

It is now confirmed that:

* Witness Capt. Jamil Hussein is not an Iraqi police officer!
* There were not 4 Sunni mosques torched in the attacks in the Hurriya neighborhood but only one mosque was damaged and not destroyed
* Witness Imad al-Din al-Hashemi is described as a University professor, foreign pediatrician, and a Hurriya elder depending on the article
* Witness Imad al-Din al-Hashemi says the mosque he was attending was attacked by "rocket-propelled grenades" yet there is no such damage to the mosque
* No bodies were discovered by Iraqi or Coalition investigators nor were there any pictures as evidence
* The AP later produced anonymous witnesses from the neighborhood
* The Multinational Forces Iraq and Baghdad Police did not find any reports of such an incident occurred after investigating the Hurriya neighborhood
* Multinational Forces Iraq claim that the AP source, Capt. Jamil Hussein, is not who he claims he is. He is not a Baghdad police officer or an MOI employee!
* The imam at the mosque in question where the "6 Sunni torchings" supposedly took place is accused of being a member of Saddam’s secret police by his own congregation!
* Attempts by Sunnis to smuggle arms into this mosque were foiled by Iraqi security forces back in December 2003

And that’s just the opening. Go read the rest.

If you have some time, read the original FloppingAces post — there are lots and lots of updates, including a long list from CentCom of potentially bogus news sources — mostly AP — whom they’re trying to track down.

Then check out two JunkYardBlog posts — this one first, and then this one (right above the first) — about other AP stories that cited Jamil Hussein as a source. The common thread tying them together seems to be AP Baghdad correspondent Qais al-Bashir. And Qais al-Bashir has quoted a number of suspect sources, including at least two other "Iraqi policemen" whom CentCom and the Iraqi Ministry of Interior categorically insist aren’t policemen.

Gateway Pundit posted nice roundups (here and here) of news stories quoting two of these bogus policemen, and the stories have something in common: they all describe Shi’ite atrocities committed against poor innocent Sunnis.

The next time you see an al-AP news story about violence in Iraq, remember that it was probably written by a Wahhabi Sunni propagandist quoting Baathist insurgent "witnesses."
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Reports of my death exaggerated

Posted by Richard on October 14, 2006

Hi, there! Miss me? Sorry about the long absence (I can’t believe it’s been almost two weeks). I’ve been working toward a big deadline, and although I wasn’t really working killer hours (I don’t do that anymore — for one thing, my back won’t let me), I consistently found myself too mentally tired — or distracted — or lazy — or something — to sit down and blog. I finished up a couple of days ago, and have pretty much avoided the computer since.

I haven’t even been reading much or keeping up with world events during the last couple of weeks. I’ve been tossing most my newspapers in the recycle bin unread, and I’ve only glanced at a few blogs from time to time. Oh, I caught the news highlights, but I missed a lot of the details and follow-up stories.

For instance, I remember some Democrats suggesting that a gay man shouldn’t be permitted anywhere near a bunch of teenage boys. But somehow I missed the coverage of gay rights demonstrators demanding that those homophobes apologize. And did the Boy Scouts of America ever issue a statement of support for the Democrats’ position?

I heard a brief mention of Sen. Harry Reid’s illegal real estate dealings, but I never did hear details of the investigation that I’m sure was launched by the non-partisan Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). And I missed the stories about legislators calling on Reid to resign.

And then there was that North Korean nuclear test. I heard how Japan immediately imposed a strict trade embargo. Surely, France denounced Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s unilateralism and failure to work with the international community, right? And John Kerry must have held a press conference to declare that if he were the Japanese P.M., he’d have deferred to the United Nations.

It’s really a shame that I missed such important stories. Why, by only hearing part of the news like that, I could easily get the impression that fairness, balance, and impartiality are sorely lacking nowadays.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

News flash! Islamofascists hate Jews!

Posted by Richard on August 2, 2006

How ignorant and stupid can you be and still be a successful mainstream journalist? How totally clueless? Apparently, pretty ignorant, stupid, and clueless. At least, that’s the conclusion suggested by a segment on Tuesday night’s Anderson Cooper 360° on CNN, in which the big-shot news anchor, Cooper, interviewed the esteemed foreign correspondent  for The New Yorker, Jeffrey Goldberg:

Jeffrey, thanks very much for being with us. You know, I reread your article from several years ago about south Lebanon. It is just a fascinating look at life under Hezbollah, and of the inner workings and the message of Hezbollah.

I think what’s been lost in a lot of this coverage is just how anti-Semitic Hezbollah is in the rhetoric.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG, "THE NEW YORKER": Yes, it’s absolutely fascinating, Anderson. The anti-Semitism — there’s two things that are fascinating, rather. One is how embedded in the core of Hezbollah ideology, anti-Semitism is. And I don’t mean anti-Israel thinking or anti-Zionism. I mean frank anti-Semitism.

The other thing that’s so interesting about it is how blunt they are and how frank they are about their anti-Semitism. They don’t hide it. They don’t try to mask it in any way. They state very openly to you when you ask their exact feelings about Jews, which are quite extreme.

COOPER: It’s interesting because I talked to a representative news editor from al-Manar TV, and I asked him, you know, does Hezbollah still want to destroy the state of Israel? And I know Larry King has asked him that same question, and he rarely — he basically doesn’t answer that question. He sort of seems to avoid it. Which is so at odds because I mean Nasrallah himself is very point blank and matter of fact and open about his hatred of Jews.

GOLDBERG: Well, you know, al-Manar is an interesting place. They are slightly more schooled in let’s say obfuscation or public relations. The leadership — I mean, one of the things about Nasrallah that’s so interesting is how straightforward he is. And you see that in all of his statements on Israel. And even his statements on America. There’s no attempt to soften the language.

And the other thing about it that’s so shocking, I think, when you first hear it — is I always notice this — and one of the first things I noticed, was the use of epidemiological metaphors to describe the role of Jews in the world. Not just Israel, but Jews. Talking about Jews as a cancer, talking about Jews as a parasite on society. And they generally are very forward about this.

Is that truly bizarre? High-profile professional journalists amazed — shocked, even — that radical Islamists hate Jews and openly express extreme views about Jews? I hardly know what to say — it’s like a Saturday Night Live parody. What reality do these people inhabit?

(HT: Rush)
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Biased reporting

Posted by Richard on July 13, 2006

Thomas Sowell:

The same newspapers and television news programs that are constantly reminding us that some people under indictment "are innocent until proven guilty" are nevertheless hyping the story of American troops accused of rape in Iraq, day in and day out, even though these troops have yet to be proven guilty of anything.
…

We all need to understand the fraudulence of the claim that these media liberals who have been against the military for decades and who have missed no opportunity to smear the military in Iraq are now in the forefront of "honoring" our troops by rubbing our noses in their deaths, day in and day out.

Troops who have won medals for bravery in battle — including one soldier who won a Congressional Medal of Honor at the cost of his life — go unmentioned in most of the mainstream media that is focused on our troops as casualties that they can exploit.

A recent study by the Media Research Center found that the three big broadcast news networks — CBS, ABC, and NBC — ran 99 stories in 3 and 1/2 hours about the investigation of charges against Marines in the death of Iraqi civilians in Haditha last November.

These remain unproven charges in a country where people on the side of the terrorists include civilian women and children who set off bombs to kill American troops and who can set off lies to discredit those that they do not kill.

But the same networks that lavished 3 and 1/2 hours of coverage of these unproven charges gave less than one hour of coverage of all the American troops who have won medals for bravery under fire.

Every newspaper and every television commentator has a right to criticize any aspect of the war in Iraq or anywhere else. But when they claim to be reporting the news, that does not mean filtering out whatever goes against their editorial views and hyping unsubstantiated claims that discredit the troops.

Those troops deserve the presumption of innocence at least as much as anyone else.

You think Sowell exaggerates about the bias? Look at how little media coverage there was of Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester. She was the first woman ever awarded the Silver Star for actual combat (previous female Silver Star recipients, in WWII, were battlefield nurses) and a genuine hero.

You’d think the gripping story of the battle, the heroism and skill of Hester and her comrades, and the historic nature of her achievement would make this a compelling "man bites dog" news story, wouldn’t you? Well, you’d be wrong. As a commenter at the QandO post about Hester observed:

By the way, notice where in the WaPo the story appeared:

PAGE A21.

Now, if SGT Hester had put her panties on the head of a terrorist detainee, this would be on page A1 for the next several days. Instead, she gets A21.

Compare the number of stories, column inches, and broadcast minutes devoted to the heroic Hester with the coverage afforded to Jessica Lynch — a victim — and Lynndie England — a villain.

Google results (quotes included in search strings):

"Lynndie England" — 364,000 (plus 37,700 for the misspelling, "Lyndie England")
"Jessica Lynch" — 578,000
"Leigh Ann Hester" — 18,400
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

If this were WWII…

Posted by Richard on June 29, 2006

Go read Bill Smith’s wonderful satire at TCS, Times Reveals Enigma Codes:

WASHINGTON (SatireNewsService) — Yesterday, September 11, 1943, the New York Times reported that allied cryptanalysts had been, for several years, decoding top-secret Axis war messages. The Times story revealed that thousands of code-breakers working in a suburb of London had broken Germany’s Enigma military codes. …

I especially liked this bit:

Peace groups and administration critics lauded the Times’ decision to publish the story. "This administration has performed numerous illegal acts during this illegal war," said Norman Chomsky, professor of phrenology and astrology at MIT and a leading critic of the American and British war efforts. "We have attacked Italy, which never attacked us. We have illegally sold arms to the British, we have illegally targeted Admiral Yamamoto for assassination, we have illegally jailed and executed so-called ‘German spies’ without benefit of trial. This administration is far worse than the regimes of Hitler, Tojo or Mussolini. It is drunk on power."

Wickedly funny. RTWT.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 3 Comments »

AP: not just anti-American

Posted by Richard on June 11, 2006

Media bias doesn’t just manifest itself in politics. Reporters and editors are continually making decisions about the relative importance of different facts, what to include or exclude, what to emphasize, etc., and those decisions are inevitably affected by their beliefs, preconceptions, interests, and prejudices. I’m one of those who thinks reporters should stop pretending to be entirely objective. In politics especially, I think we’re better served by honesty and transparency than by a pretend objectivity.

Nonetheless, reporters and editors should try to be fair and balanced, and they should ask themselves, "Does this story leave out something or misrepresent the situation because of my own blinders?" Case in point: the June 8 Rocky Mountain News carried an Associated Press story by Sara Karush headlined Toyota, Lexus tops in quality rankings. It began thus (emphasis added):

Toyota Motor Corp. held onto its dominant position in annual vehicle quality rankings, which were revamped to highlight design and layout problems that can irritate consumers as much as defects.

Toyota and Lexus, the automaker’s luxury brand, took the top spot in 11 out of 19 vehicle categories in the survey released Wednesday by J.D. Power and Associates. Porsche AG came in first in the overall ranking of brands, averaging 91 problems per 100 vehicles. That compared with an industry average of 124 problems per 100 vehicles.
…

Lexus came in second in the overall nameplate rankings, with 93 problems per 100 vehicles, while the Toyota brand was fourth with 106. The two brands scored particularly well on the defect side of the equation. 

The story contained 20 paragraphs in both its print and on-line versions (curiously, the print version added an important graphic not available on line). In addition to Toyota, Lexus, and Porsche, the story focused on BMW, which had the distinction of relatively few manufacturing defects, but very poor marks for ergonomics (design defects). Other brands mentioned in the story included GM, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Chrysler, and Ford.

From the quote above, you know that Porsche took the top spot, Lexus was 2nd, and Toyota was 4th. What you won’t find anywhere in the 20 paragraphs is the name of the number 3 brand, the one that finished ahead of Toyota: Hyundai.

The graphic included with the print version showed you the scores of all vehicle brands, but the on-line story didn’t include that. And the AP’s Sarah Karush apparently didn’t think it worth mentioning (at least, in the first 20 paragraphs) that the upstart Korean manufacturer known primarily for cheap econoboxes has surpassed Toyota in initial quality. Could there be an anti-Korean bias at the Associated Press? 😉

For a remarkable example of how two reporters can present the same data from the same study in strikingly different ways, compare the RMN/AP story with Sarah Webster’s Detroit Free Press story, J.D. POWER SURVEY: Hyundai leapfrogs Toyota in quality. It began thus (emphasis added):

Maybe Hyundai Motor Co. drivers don’t need that 10-year, 100,000-mile warranty after all.

The South Korean automaker known for its value pricing — all its vehicles sell for less than $29,000 — delivered a jaw-dropping performance in J.D. Power and Associates’ annual survey on new-vehicle quality, which was released Wednesday.

Hyundai was the No. 1 non-premium brand in the United States, edging past Toyota, the Japanese brand whose rock-solid quality reputation has been shaking Detroit’s dominance in the nation’s auto market for years.

Overall, Hyundai was No. 3 in this year’s report, behind No. 1 Porsche and No. 2 Lexus, Toyota’s luxury brand, and right ahead of Toyota. Last year, Hyundai was No. 11, so the leap made Hyundai the third-most improved nameplate this year.

Now, you defenders of the media explain to me again how virtually all mainstream journalists are objective, how I can count on what I see in the mainstream media to be a complete, accurate, and unbiased presentation of the facts, and how I should stop worrying about slanted, incomplete, inaccurate information. 🙂
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Agenda journalism

Posted by Richard on May 19, 2006

For those of you who still doubt that the mainstream media’s war reporting consists largely of agenda-driven, biased, anti-American propaganda, today’s front page of The Washington Post presented what I’d like the bailiff to tag as Exhibit #17,693. The story in question (log in with BugMeNot), by Pamela Constable of the "Washington Post Foreign Service," has the following headline and subhead:

Afghanistan Rocked As 105 Die in Violence

Toll Is Among Worst Since 2001 Invasion

If you just glanced at the paper (or one of the hundreds of other papers and web pages that picked up the WaPo story), you no doubt concluded that we’re in deep trouble in Afghanistan now, too — just like Iraq. If you began reading the story, the first paragraph confirmed the grim news conveyed by the headlines:

ASADABAD, Afghanistan, May 18 — Afghanistan has been rocked over the past two days by some of the deadliest violence since the Taliban was driven from power in late 2001. As many as 105 people were reported killed in four provinces as insurgents torched a district government compound, set off suicide bombs and clashed fiercely with Afghan and foreign troops.

If you stopped there (as many casual newspaper readers do), you probably thought that it’s all going to hell, that this incompetent administration has screwed up another country, and that maybe we should just withdraw from Afghanistan, too.

If you kept reading, however, you discovered that the overwhelming majority of the deaths were among the enemy, and that some of them were killed by U.S. air strikes:

Between 80 and 90 Taliban fighters were killed in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, according to Afghan, U.S. and NATO officials. Two sites in Kandahar were struck by U.S. warplanes, including a long-range B-1 bomber, which U.S. military officials said destroyed a compound that Taliban guerrillas were using to stage an attack.

So, "as many as" 90 of 105 were enemy combatants. That’s almost a 9-1 ratio, which means the phrase "Toll Is Among Worst" is accurate only from the perspective of the Taliban.

From the perspective of those of us who are on the side of the United States and Western Civilization, and who cheer the death, destruction, and defeat of the Islamofascists, these two days of fighting represent not a terrible toll, but a tremendous success. If we keep killing 9 of them for every Afghan and allied soldier we lose, things will go very well indeed!

Pamela Constable, Leonard Downie, Jr., Ben Bradlee, et al., are apparently cheering for the other side.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »