Now that the military surge led by General Petraeus is clearly succeeding in lowering the violence level in Iraq, the liberal media cheerleaders for defeat are scrambling for a new strategy to convince Americans that Iraq is a disaster. But what line will they choose?
The New York Times has apparently decided that since success on the military end of things is now fairly evident, that it is time to begin chipping away at the political side. To this end, they have once again utilized their favorite tool, the anonymous source, to try to destroy Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
The Times story, posted on the front page of their web site, is entitled Report Cites Grave Concerns on Iraq's Government. Once a reader gets past the scare-mongering headline, the report continues to cast doubt on the Iraqi government in every way it can, stating,
The administration is planning to make public today parts of a sober new report by American intelligence agencies expressing deep doubts that the government of the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, can overcome sectarian differences. Government officials who have seen the report say it gives a bleak outlook on the chances Mr. Maliki can meet milestones intended to promote unity in Iraq.
Naturally, the Times used an anonymous official to reinforce their position.
“The report says that there’s been little political progress to date, and it’s very gloomy on the chances for political progress in the future,” said one Congressional official with knowledge of its contents.
It is no surprise that the Times uses "an anonymous Congressional offiical". During the course of their campaign for defeat in Iraq and the destruction of President Bush's Adminstration, the Times has rarely dared to actually quote from true named experts, and many of the anonymous experts they have used in the past, such as Michael Scheuer, have been easily discredited once their real names and positions became known. Whereas, by using an "anonymous" expert, the actual espertise (or lack thereof) of their chosen commentator is difficult to discern.
It appears that the Times has decided that since military success is virtually impossible to deny, that it is time to attack the civilian authorities, despite the fact that they too have made great strides since the beginning of the campaign. al-Maliki has managed to reach out to Sunnis and hang on to his own Shi'ite support as well, in the process marginalizing the Moqti al-Sadr forces as well. In the Times's view, any American defeat that hurts the Administration is apparently better than a victory that actually strengthens America. Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Duh...all Terrorists are anonymous...and the NYT is their paper
August 23, 2007 - 11:14 ET by JayTeeanonymous sources...eh ? Al Queda is anonymous, otherwise they'd be in Jail.
Unfortunately for the NYT, normal people in Iraq are not reading their paper....It's in English....and I doubt the NYT will be able to Influence the Political situation in Iraq.....they can observe it, but their Editorials don't reach that far.
They're are like a Dog chasing a Car.....The driver of the Car can't understand their barking...as they drive on and leave the barking dog behind.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
So this means we should
August 23, 2007 - 11:17 ET by dscottSo this means we should point to the deep doubts the American people have about Congress with their poll ratings so low at 18%??? I smell a rat at the NYT, they are attempting to cover up the failure of Democrats by pointing the finger of accusation elsewhere. Good old fashioned PROJECTION on the part of the libs and their supporters at the MSM. Apparently, since W's rating is way higher than yours, you have to point to a politician outside the country just to distract attention away from your own policy failures. How pathetic can you Libs get?
BTW- Has Congress passed any of the 12 appropriation bills due Oct 1 when the new budget is to begin?????? It's now August 23rd, tick, tick, tick. Folks, it's a quagmire, the Dems need to resign and pull out of Congress. I advocate cut and run for the Dems because that's the best they can do besides talking a good game.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
Exactly Right
August 23, 2007 - 11:38 ET by Terry TrippanyThe narrative has been decided for a while. The press and Democrats in Congress have been looking for any rain cloud to dampen the affects of a positive military outcome.
The focus on Maliki is a reflection of the simple minded approach they are taking to a vastly more complex set of problems whose solution wouldn't be realized if there was a change in any one person. Maliki faces the same issues that others would have in a country that is heavily divided among sectarian lines.
Now that the left sees that being on the side of failure might just backfire they have decided to move the line to create a whole new set of predetermined failures in order to snatch defeat from the hopes of victory.
See the distinction here, military progress creates hope, regardless of progress on the political front. It is not a full scale victory, merely a stepping stone toward achieving one. In fact one can argue that there can not be any political progress if we don't eliminate the sectarian strife and influences of foreign fighters who would like to undermine the U.S. backed government.
I include the New York TImes in that camp of foreign fighters. It is clear that they are seeking out defeat; anything to blunt the effects of military progress. Anonymous sources who have a political agenda have an open invitation to undercut the Bush administration. They are anonymous for a good reason. Their political goal is designed to focus people's attention on the negative aspects of the NIE before it is even released.
The New York Times is at the top of the pile, not only cheerleading for defeat but actually trying to make sure the mood of American's does not change, thus trying to buy defeat.
I hope American's realize how insidious the newspaper really is.
et al
August 23, 2007 - 14:57 ET by PTWThe Military and CIC have gotten everything they need to win this battle in the GWOT. If we win the press will report it (as it did with Mission Accomplished).
If we win in Iraq you excuse makers / neocons will be exonerated for all deeds. Until then, stop blaming EVERYTHING on the media and dems.
Just win the war in Iraq as you all predicted we would and stop your crying.
NOT! You guys will
August 23, 2007 - 15:58 ET by dscottNOT! You guys will never stop your whining.
We don't believe promises or statements you never keep. That was then, this is now. BJ Clinton (after he reneged on the middle class tax cut and then jacked up the taxes.)
Your illustrious leader, Harry Reid already said the Surge failed. With friends like him supporting the troops, the terrorists are greatly encouraged. Thanks for those words of encouragement Harry.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
how many times do i have to
August 23, 2007 - 16:03 ET by TruthMongerhow many times do i have to freakin post this dammit
WE HAVE ALREADY WON IN IRAQ - SADDAM IS DEAD - NEW GOV IS IN PLACE
Even the MSM can't hide that - for now...
Mission Accomplished.......
August 23, 2007 - 16:12 ET by JayTeeI might add, that when an Air Craft Carrier Group comes home to Port, out of ammo, out of Gas/Food, and having performed their 500 sorties and Air Strikes, and being relieved by another Carrier group, that the Afore mentioned Carrier returning to Port does have the right to hang a "Mission Accomplished" Sign over the Quarterdeck, or the highest mast on the ship, and since such said sign is hanging on the ship, it has NOTHING to do with Bush....and everything to do with the mission accomplished by the Sailors.
Any further attempt to hang the banner around Bush's Neck, was unsuccessful by the MSM....for people who support the mission of the Troops....and do not have BDS.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
well speaking for the
August 23, 2007 - 16:21 ET by TruthMongerwell speaking for the democrats:
"i support the troops but millions of iraqi's are dead and billions of dollars have been wasted all just for a "mission" to increase haliburton and cheney's oil stocks, and furthermore OBL is still not captured, Iraq never attacked us on 911, we tortured completely innocent terrorists at Abu Grab, spied on Americans, profiled arabs, our standing in the world is ruined, etc, etc..."
feeling supported there, fine troops:)?
Millions of Iraquis are Dead ? ? ?
August 23, 2007 - 16:39 ET by JayTeeI thought Saddam only Killed a few hundred Thousand ? We'll have to check the carbon dating on the MASS Graves, I beleive it was before 9/11.
The Dems. couldn't possibly mean Millions killed since 911, or they would be a victim of the Left wing San Fran nuts. Even George bush said we're only Killing 1500 a month...and all of them were Terrorists. How could we kill millions un-intentionally while only killing 1500 deliberately ? ? Gee, that would be a Military that couldn't aim a Gun, or a smart bomb........maybe the Dems are confused.
Torture ? In Abu Grab ? Nahhh...torture was when we saw the Head Chopping Video by the Terrorists, actually I think they ended up "Sawing" while the guy Screamed.....I didn't see anyone screaming at the "naked pyraimid" pic....or the DOG looking at the Arab Pic....maybe we need the DEMS to define Torture ? ? Maybe it's Bush being President for 8 years is considered Torture for Dems.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
easy man - i'm not a dem -
August 23, 2007 - 16:41 ET by TruthMongereasy man - i'm not a dem - i don't come up with this stuff
so make it a billions iraqis - the actual numbers don't really matter
Truth monger....you were quoting Dems, I was addressing them.
August 23, 2007 - 16:52 ET by JayTeeNot U.....and I remember the Quotes as you stated.
Strange how we get assaulted by the same Drivel over and over, such that we can Recite it at will. Does repetition by the MSM create Truth ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
What a stretch
August 23, 2007 - 16:35 ET by PTWSo the White House did not mean to imply the mission was accomplished? Yea. You're right. Nothing to do with stagecraft..honest mistake...blame someone else...but let's put the podium in just the right position to cover the president like a halo for the media to consume. You forget to mention the speech that said "the end of major combat operations" while underneath that banner. Do you guys actually believe this stuff you write? You think "Bush-haters" are deranged?
i think they did mean to
August 23, 2007 - 16:39 ET by TruthMongeri think they did mean to imply that the ships mission was accomplished - and it was
as was the end of major combat missions in iraq - and they were
but your right reality can be deranged sometimes - to certain people - that live in certain secure facilities - with people in nice white coats that help them do stuff, like eat, bathe, take meds...
Mission Accomplished...Take 2
August 23, 2007 - 16:48 ET by JayTeeYou forgot.....the Dems didn't like the president flying in the plane onto the Deck of the Carrier....they didn't like the way he was dressed...etc..etc....
BDS......soone to be SDS.
PTW....Ascendo Tuum....
LOL, your total ignorance of
August 23, 2007 - 17:47 ET by Del DolemonteLOL, your total ignorance of things military is duly noted. Even on the most mundane and routine ship deployments, they display a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the ship when they return. They do it on giant Navy aircrafy carriers, and even on the little Coast Guard buoy tenders.
By the way, none of you leftists ever whined about a true draft dodger, Billy Jeff Clinton, when he staged FOUR photo opportunities aboard US Navy aircraft carriers while he was pResident. That's 4 times as many as Bush did.
PTW... Please explain to
August 23, 2007 - 17:53 ET by Clear thinkerPTW...
Please explain to all of us why you have such a hard time with the Mission Accomplished banner.
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
Very Simply Put the reason is
August 23, 2007 - 19:27 ET by PTWYou all keep telling us the War is Won! Saddam gone...New Govt.
These ridiculous slogans...Plan For Victory, New Way Forward, all followed Mission Accomplished. And, wait for it....a new Prime Minister in Iraq will make all the difference. When will you realize that these are political slight of hand tactics to kick this can down the road. Be honest with yourselves...this is a long GWOT and Iraq should have been stabilized years ago except for gross miscalculations on many fronts. I have problems with people being led around like sheep by soundbites. They media doesn't make the soundbites the bully pulpit does.
I would like to see Iraq as an ally and democratic harbor in the Middle East storm. I want to fix this mess rather than pass it on or blame others for our failures. We're America, we can do this by taking responsibility and making something good/great out of our mistakes....but that's just me as a crazy lib!
The stupid "mission
August 23, 2007 - 17:55 ET by MightyMouthThe stupid "mission accomplished banner" again!?
For Pete's sake, get a new talking point you f***ing idiots!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
until you believe it
August 23, 2007 - 16:29 ET by PTWNow that makes sense. If we've already won then Iraq can defend itself and support our GWOT. So this thing we're doing now is what...a celebration picnic. In your world the war is won and now we nation build. Got it.
welcome to my
August 23, 2007 - 16:35 ET by TruthMongerwelcome to my picnic:)!
but Iraq nation builds, we help
its very "peace corps" of us i think
New approach....PTW.........Repeat after Truthmonger
August 23, 2007 - 16:58 ET by JayTeeWE HAVE ALREADY WON IN IRAQ - SADDAM IS DEAD - NEW GOV IS IN PLACE
Keep saying this until it becomes the Truth....MSM style
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Ironic
August 23, 2007 - 11:46 ET by Dr_LibertyI find it amazingly ironic that talking heads and news editors who were so against the US's interfering in the dealings of another country are now attempting to incapacitate the elected leader of that same country.
It is not only ironic, but it is dangerous. However successful or unsuccessful Maliki may be, undermining his credibility can only embolden the terrorists in the country to keep fighting (at a time when support for such terrorists is flagging). I really wish we could come up with a metric for "media related deaths."
<insert witty signature here>
Talking points implemented
August 23, 2007 - 11:52 ET by Mica the MagnificentTalking points implemented!
I watched, briefly, a PBS broadcast last night on our local South Carolina t.v. station, and there they were - 3 talking heads -experts no doubt- discussing the failure of the Iraqi leaders to promote unity there.
What's next? Here's my prediction for the next news cycle:
Cue the democratic candidates:
Our troops have done all they can. They cannot do anymore. Their government has lost control. The Bush policy has failed in Iraq.
Cue Chris Matthews, Olbermann, etc:
With the entire country of Iraq in political turmoil, it is time to bring the troops home. An MSNBC poll shows that X% of Americans believe the troops have done all they can there. Why is the Bush administration allowing more of our troops to die for a foreign president?
Cue Hillary:
Our brave troops have performed their job there bravely and with great competence. It is time for this failed administration to recognize this and bring the troops home.
Did I miss something?
Mica.....warning..warning....you're thinking like a Liberal
August 23, 2007 - 12:13 ET by JayTeeQuick Mica....Re-program, IPL, Bootstrap back to Conservative thinking, before it's too late...
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Wheew!
August 23, 2007 - 12:16 ET by Mica the MagnificentThanks, JayTee. I needed that.
Sequel for Cambodia
August 23, 2007 - 12:56 ET by nofateThe MSM and the democratic & rino fools in congress are bound and determined to have a sequel to Viet Nam/Cambodia. It will be a tragedy of epic proportions if they succeed. Then they will lay it all off on Bush, et. al. saying that they "caused" the terrorists to show up in Iraq because they ignored the "true" problem in Afghanistan, blah, blah, blah. What goes around... if we don't keep on top of this and let people who don't pay attention know about it. Blogs like this are the only defense against these fools. The MSM is actually helping our cause by railing against us. People who normally wouldn't pay attention are checking out "those right wing blogs".
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."
If every member of Al-Qaida
August 23, 2007 - 19:33 ET by PeskyDaneIf every member of Al-Qaida publicly threw down their arms and embraced free-markets and liberty for all, the NYT headline would read something like:
"Bush Fails To Provide Jobs For Out Of Work Insurgents."
Et Tu, Peter Pace? Cut
August 24, 2007 - 09:15 ET by LeonEt Tu, Peter Pace?
Cut and run?
Took long enough. The democrats have only been saying this for a year. It's good to see that they were right.
Leon....Think on this....
August 24, 2007 - 16:10 ET by JayTeeDuring a War, there are Some things one does NOT tell the Enemy IN ADVANCE......especially for political reasons.
WE may be planning a "Take down" of Troops.....but one does NOT really want to "Broadcast" it on AL Jazeera.....or even at home.
It's called "War Strategy"......you don't tell'em the day, hour you will attack, and you don't tell'em what time you are leaving, and who you're leaving behind, and where.
Geezzz......
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE