January 16, 2006
Gray Lady's 30 Layers of Editors Screw Up Again
Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker points us to this photo (which can still be seen here).
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
This is the caption that ran with the photo originally:
“Pakistani men with the remains of a missile fired at a house in the Bajur tribal zone near the Afghan border.”What the New York Time's editors failed to notice is that the object is not part of a missile, but an old artillery shell. In fact, the sort of thing that terrorists use to make improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The caption was corrected after its propaganda value had been exploited.
Isn't it odd that the NYT's 'errors' always seem to be on the side of America's enemies?
Via Michelle Malkin.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
01:19 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"Isn't it odd that the NYT's errors always seem to be on the side of America's enemies?"
No, not odd at all, when the NYTs is obviously on the side of our enemy. They knew this photo was not from a missle strike, as is evident to anyone with only spotty knowledge of military ordinance. A missle has tail fins and would only be in pieces when recovered from an area struck. The photo is an easily recognizable artillery shell.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 16, 2006 01:31 PM (rUyw4)
2
U.S. airstrikes, inasmuch as they are targetting AQ terrorists, are an act of self-defense. The sooner those Pakis hand over their jihadis, the sooner they won't get j-dammed anymore. Their choice.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 16, 2006 01:33 PM (8e/V4)
3
"Isn't it odd that the NYT's 'errors' always seem to be on the side of America's enemies?"
Nothing odd about it. In fact, it's only odd that it's taken most of a century for people to catch on. When Stalin was murdering twenty million of his own people, the NYT was right there cheering him on the whole time. When Hitler was preparing the ground for the greatest calamity of human history, they were rooting for him. When Castro et al were murdering tens of thousands and enslaving millions in our own back yard, they were lying to us the whole time and fellating him in print. They are all traitors and accessories to crimes against humanity countless times over, and they should all be shot.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 16, 2006 01:33 PM (0yYS2)
4
I should be banned for this, but...I'm glad Ahmacrackhead is coming out of the closet
Posted by: Vercingetorix at January 16, 2006 01:45 PM (LVVcX)
5
Good points about the NYTs. I had forgotten about the Gray Lady's rotten coverage of Stalin's atrocities. Seems like the reporter received the Pulitzer Prize for his fabrications and ruminations of the Stalin Regime.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 16, 2006 01:46 PM (rUyw4)
6
When I went to Bluto's link (indicated by "here") it showed that the photo was taken by "Thir Khan" and distributed by Getty. I tried to find out more about the photographer but little was available through google concerning him; he seems to be an enigma. I am not really skilled in internet research, perhaps AGENT SMITH would use his skills in finding out more about the source of this photo. It is obviously staged, but why and by whom ?
Posted by: john Ryan at January 16, 2006 02:10 PM (TcoRJ)
7
Vercingetorix - Semtex™ butt-plugs? You hang around a really sick bunch. Funny stuff!
Posted by: Oyster at January 16, 2006 02:26 PM (osKlJ)
8
Part of a long line of fakes and hoaxes on the part of the MSM - some stories these past few years have been real doozi's.
The MSM in the true sense is not sympathetic to the oposition - its just an opportunity to bash America and Bush n' company.
The truly amazing thing though (and few have noticed) is how pathetically bad and inept these attempts have been. Being biased is one thing - but being incompetent at it is amazing! The MSM and the left have a defiite quality control problem!
Posted by: hondo at January 16, 2006 02:52 PM (3aakz)
9
Bit of an odd item (artillery shell) to have in a humble peaceful lil' village isn't it?
Maybe it a nik-nak.
Posted by: hondo at January 16, 2006 03:09 PM (3aakz)
10
Yeah, a nik-nak on its way to becoming an IED. Another big red flag in this whole incident is that most of the 'bodies' had been buried by the time Paki authorities got there. Not a lot of mention of that in the MSM.
This whole tribal region is full of AQ collaborators. This time they reaped what they sewed. Tough.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 16, 2006 03:37 PM (RHG+K)
11
I'd say we'll know more about Dr. Demento soon, because if he doesn't release another video, it would not look good for him if he's alive.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 16, 2006 04:08 PM (0yYS2)
12
Bluto
If he was there and is dead - I would fully expect the locals and his people to conceal his body - like with OBL - a live "hero" myth ""IS"" worth more than a dead marytr.
Posted by: hondo at January 16, 2006 06:46 PM (3aakz)
13
not to nit pick a nit that's already been picked, but...
the NYT online edition shows the correction, but calls it "ordinance"....
maybe they could ask William Safire to come back and explain the difference between "ordinance" and "ORDNANCE"...
just saying...
Posted by: MajMike at January 17, 2006 09:37 AM (zXWkt)
14
The difference can be summed up thusly: And ordinance says "don't do that", whereas ordnance says "stop now".
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 17, 2006 11:58 AM (0yYS2)
15
I think that al Queda will be happy to announce his death as a martyr whether or not his death is caused by us. Although it may be delayed a few days. C and C is a little slow over their. It is to bad that Thir Khan the photographer didn't provide us with more photos. The manufacturing lot numbers might have been more interesting as to the history of that artillery round.Even over there it is worth a substantial amount of money. So any answers as to: Why the photo was taken ? Certainly not to prove it was the USA that caused the deaths. Was it taken as proof that the village deserved what happened ? To prove how inept the editors at the NYT are ? In the free market economy it is the advertisers who really decide what the content will be: they foot the bill not the readers.
Posted by: john Ryan at January 17, 2006 01:02 PM (TcoRJ)
22kb generated in CPU 0.141, elapsed 0.2568 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.2408 seconds, 251 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
118 queries taking 0.2408 seconds, 251 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
