Charter Member of the Sub-Media

June 05, 2004

NYT: The "T" is for "Treason" « Media Distortions »

The mainline news media continues to fight against the United States with the New York Times as its vanguard.

Need some evidence? Check out this article. (Note: I got there without needing a subscription by way of Google News)

Check out this sentence:

The deal made scant mention of the fate of Mr. Sadr himself. The capture of Mr. Sadr, who is accused of planning the murder of a rival imam, was one of the reasons American forces started the fighting, which is estimated to have cost more than 500 lives.

This is demonstrably slanted against the United States.

1) American forces did not start the fighting. We arrested one of Muqtada al-Sadr's leading subordinates, and they started the fighting in protest and pre-emptive protection of Muqtada, who is wanted for murder but protected by armed guards.

2) 500 deaths? Who died, specifically? If they know it was more than 500, can't they determine how many were non-combatants? Can't they determine how many US Soldiers were killed in ambushes? Can't they determine how many US Soldiers were killed by Muqtada's forces breaking a cease-fire they requested? The bulk of the 500 killed were thugs, terrorists, and illegal militia who broke all internationally accepted Rules of Engagement. But the New York Times obscures those facts. If that was an unintentional obfuscation, then the reporters are incompetent and the paper is a worthless rag undeserving of press credentials. If it was deliberate, it is treason, pure and simple. The editors of the New York Times should be held accountable for their actions.

Update:: If these reporters are American, then they, too are traitors.

Posted by Nathan at 12:24 AM | Comments (0)
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?