October 17, 2005
NBC: Sunni "Tribal Chief" Better Source Than US Pilot
How propaganda gets from the ground in Iraq to the nightly news in America
NBC's Brian Williams reported tonight that "Iraqi civilians" said that a US airstrike had killed not insurgents, but innocent Iraqis. Williams' report was based on an Associated Press story by Thomas Wagner and a CENTCOM news release. Williams left out a couple of telling details that even Wagner felt obligated to include in the AP story.
Here's the pertinent text from the CENTCOM release:
While conducting a combat air patrol, crewmembers from an F -15 observed 20 men arrive in four vehicles at the crater site of a previously-detonated IED which had killed five U.S. and two Iraqi Soldiers on Oct. 15. The terrorists were in the process of emplacing another IED in the same spot when the F- 15 engaged them with a precision-guided bomb, resulting in the death of terrorists on the ground.
Wagner's AP story was based on the testimony of unnamed witnesses and a "tribal chief". Wagner noted that the area was "a hotbed of Sunni-Arab insurgents". He didn't identify the religious affiliation of the "tribal chief", but it seems likely that few Shiites inhabit the area.
Brian Williams did not mention any of this tonight. He simply left the impression that the American pilot lied about his target. About what you'd expect from Williams, who has indicated that he sees little difference between Iraqi terrorist insurgents and the American Founding Fathers.
More at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
06:21 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Where's DSM when you need him? I demand hyperventilating, off-topic, and childish commentary!
Posted by: File Closer at October 17, 2005 07:22 PM (xvfRU)
2
So who beleives NBC and BRIAN WILLIAMS and his lie a day news? the peacock is lying again
Posted by: sandpiper at October 17, 2005 08:16 PM (bTjmD)
3
Remember the busload of "businessmen" that were vaporized crossing from Syria to Iraq? Recall how the terrorist types on the scene characterized them as simple businessmen and how the Mainstream Mastadons simply accepted them at their word.
Well I think it was Time Magazine that later on learned by interviewing a terrorist type the business of those killed on that bus "businessmen" was jihad, and the terrorist types spun it all brilliantly.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at October 17, 2005 09:44 PM (W/xl/)
4
The mindset of these people in the old media is to try to discredit the military. They will always take anyone's word over our military, including the ridiculous, such as Bagdad Bob.
What they are too stupid to realize, though, is that they are discrediting themselves with the American people. It is now at the point that I don't believe one thing the media says.
Look at the ABC headline for the rioting in Toledo over the weekend. It said that hundreds of white supremicists were rioting, which was a complete fabrication, because the blacks were the ones rioting and there were less than a dozen Nazis there anyway. If the media had looked at the live feeds, it was obvious there were no white people rioting.
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 18, 2005 10:22 AM (rUyw4)
5
Exactlt JJ, Accuracy is a secondary consideration, and not even a consideration if it interferes with the prevailing narrative. story here:
http://exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/2005/10/abcap-big-lie.html
Posted by: traderrob at October 18, 2005 10:49 AM (3al54)
6
So who you gonna believe ........ Myself, I think that both stories are suspect.
Posted by: john Ryan at October 21, 2005 01:45 PM (ads7K)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Interview With A Knucklehead
Michelle Malkin (not a knucklehead) gives a nice
recounting of her experience regarding an interview she gave to a Wall Street Journal reporter (the knucklehead) concerning the Hinrichs case.
I read her post (3 times) and just read the article. Amazingly, it was free, so I guess that's something.
But a quick synopsis of the two pieces boils down to pretty much this:
Even though blogs such as this one went out of their way to report on the Hinrichs case in such a way that did not, I repeat did not make any solid conclusions, the MSM is firmly convinced that we're all just a bunch of black helicopter seeing, rumor mongering, attention whores.
Never mind that Rusty's posts in particular on this subject have been geared towards pointing out that there were things that warranted a closer inspection. I don't recall any hard statements here claiming as fact that Hinrichs was a Muslim terrorist. The Jawa Report merely criticized the lack of MSM attention, and pointed out certain things that were miraculously reported, and said that they needed to be looked at more closely.
As far as my opinion? I think Hinrichs committed suicide after learning that Harriet Miers was nominated over him to replace O'Connor.
Hey, it's just as good as any other theory.
;-)
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:40 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Good point vinnie. Blogs mean we get answers to the questions we want answered not answers to the questions the MSM pre selects for us. I mean if we are so irrelevant why does it seem that if stuff shows on the blogs first it's not long before MSM picks it up. I've noted several times that little things here or there end up all over about two hours after the blogs pick it up. We lead they follow the upward pressure of the blogs on the media is undenyable.
Posted by: Howie at October 17, 2005 04:14 PM (D3+20)
2
Don't feel bad. I had a Wall Street Journal reporter ask me for a phone interview, and then never called. And never wrote the planned article, either, it seems. Oh well.
Posted by: IO ERROR at October 17, 2005 04:28 PM (vhWf1)
3
Look, comments I made on my own blog theorizing that there may be a terror connection due to other events in Oklahoma in the past that need to be investigated got picked up by Mark Tapscott's page - namely that Oklahoma seems to come up early and often in terror plots against the US (9/11 hijackers spent time learning to fly in OK and Moussaoui spent time there as well at the mosque that Hinrichs
may have attended.
I suggested that this needs to be investigated more thoroughly by the media, who seemed perfectly content to let this story slide.
Considering that we're talking about a guy who blew himself up on gameday outside a football stadium crammed with 84,000 fans, you'd think that someone in the media would want to look at this story in a critical fashion.
We now know the answer - not very. They might not like what they find.
Posted by: lawhawk at October 17, 2005 07:28 PM (R8MMe)
4
Just wait some idiot judge is going to rule that laws against child pornography are unconstitutional im tired of these idiot judges and their irresponible rulings
Posted by: sandpiper at October 17, 2005 08:19 PM (bTjmD)
5
Hold on a second Vinnie. Schippers did go after Clinton.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at October 17, 2005 08:39 PM (VP+X3)
6
That's nice, Filthy, and when I write a post about Schippers going after Clinton, I'll make sure to let greg post an on topic comment about it.
Posted by: Vinnie at October 17, 2005 08:41 PM (VP+X3)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 14, 2005
October 13, 2005
There Is Such A Thing As A Good Terrorist
One of the the things that I've always admired about Rusty and his blog is his willingness to post images that the MSM never would.
The images tend to be graphic, and viewing them causes righteous anger, and more than a little heartache.
Thankfully, however, I've managed to find an image that should cause great joy among the Jawa faithful.
Because the only good terrorist is...
(WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES BELOW)
more...
Posted by: Vinnie at
10:41 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Looks like they're all wearing the same thing. I'd call that "uniforms". That makes them legitimate targets, right?
Posted by: Oyster at October 14, 2005 05:59 AM (YudAC)
2
I like the cutline under the photograph. Bodies of apparent militants lie in the street. Oh, brother, the hypocrisy of the AP is also lying there for anybody to see.
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 14, 2005 10:08 AM (rUyw4)
3
It's not like the AP reporter can go over and ask them, "Are you terrorists?"
Posted by: IO ERROR at October 14, 2005 10:48 AM (vhWf1)
4
Well jj, at least they didn't call them "freedom fighters" like they used to in the 70's and 80's, but they still didn't call them terrorists either. I guess murdering 300 kids in a school doesn't qualify one as a terrorist.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 14, 2005 11:12 AM (0yYS2)
5
"apparent militants". Not only are they loathe to use the word "terrorist", but now they can't even bring themselves to say "Islamic".
Posted by: Oyster at October 14, 2005 12:51 PM (fl6E1)
6
Apparent=Clear,(but we cant say,why
R they Chechen rebels?
Reds have been tough on them for sure.
Posted by: Monzter at October 15, 2005 03:40 AM (b3c8h)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
30kb generated in CPU 0.056, elapsed 0.2293 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.2176 seconds, 266 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
