Patterico's Pontifications blog has done some stellar detective work on a particular L.A. Times story wherein the Times claims that U.S. forces attacked a town with an aerial strike that killed 30 Iraqis, including women and children.
The Times also reported that widespread destruction resulted from this reported "bombardment".
A Times correspondent in Ramadi said at least 15 homes were pulverized by aerial bombardment and families could be seen digging through the ruins with shovels and bare hands.
Gruesome, eh?
Problem is, the big story that the Times reported upon doesn't seem to have ever happened.
As Patterico so ably demonstrates there was no "U.S. airstrike", no buildings were destroyed (perhaps damage to one, though), and, worse, no women OR children were killed.
It does seem 30 were killed and there does seem to have been a battle between insurgents and coalition forces, but those killed were all men (read insurgents) and they were all killed by ground forces. No air support was utilized in this fight at all. Not even a helium filled birthday balloon hovered over this battle ground.
Patterico has quite a long post filled with his investigation to disprove that Times' story. It is so comprehensive, I will not try to distill it here. Suffice to say, it is fantastic reading and is a must for those who want the truth about our efforts in Iraq. (Patterico's post is titled, Is the L.A. Times Repeating Enemy Propaganda?)
Go read this revealing story. It'll make your blood boil.
I will say one thing further, though. The biggest problem with the western MSM's reporting in Iraq is that they have NO ONE in the zone actually witnessing, filming, photographing, or reporting live from these events they are so willing to splash across the pages of our papers.
The western MSM hires what are called "stringers" to do their in person, ground work. These people are invariably members of the propaganda arm of Hammas, Al Qaeda or any of many recognized terror groups there. These "stringers" take their doctored photos and their fake stories straight to Western MSM sources where they are printed up as absolute fact without a single effort by those western sources to check the facts, look for corroborating reports, or even ask the U.S. military for comment. (Extensively reported here on NewsBusters as Reutergate and Fauxtography, where "news" photos and stories have been faked)
The MSM is undeniably unreliable with their reports on Iraq.
But, is it out of the question to suspect they KNOW they are printing falsehoods against our soldiers and endangering their lives? Sadly, it is awfully hard to escape the conclusion that they are, indeed, fully aware that their "reports" are pure lies because stories of these so-called disasters in Iraq neatly fits in with their desire to lose this war.
The MSM have taken an active hand in the efforts to destroy our war effort. It's fine to have an ideological bone to pick, but when stories begin to harm our soldier's moral and reputations, we have left the arena of discussion of policy and edged dangerously close to treason.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
All I can say is... so what e
November 25, 2006 - 09:07 ET by msh1973All I can say is... so what else is new. It is a sad day in America. Imagine if this sort of thing happened during WWII. Not only are we fighting an unseen enemy, we are fighting an enemy within our own borders...the msm. Outrageous!
So now the Times prints an ou
November 25, 2006 - 09:30 ET by Andrew H.So now the Times prints an outright lie--how can anyone buy or subscribe to this rag? Why would one want to?
Never relent.
So now the Times prints an
November 25, 2006 - 11:19 ET by ckc1227So now the Times prints an outright lie--how can anyone buy or subscribe to this rag? Why would one want to?
Because, sadly, most Americans don't realize they are being lied to.
LAT Circulation Plunges at Loss of 8%
November 25, 2006 - 16:17 ET by daveinbocaLuckily, a combination of awful journalism, rotten editors and ridiculous editorials has shrunk LAT circulation at the fastest rate of all major dailies, minus 8%, even faster than the Boston Globe at minus 6%, another ultra-left rag suffering from the same journalistic diseases and moral rot from the head down. Both are unfit for the bottom of a birdcage.
When papers print lies, and
November 25, 2006 - 09:53 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWhen papers print lies, and the lies can be easily proven, and people can show that they're lying... shouldn't there be some penalty for lying? I mean, they can be sued for libel, they can be sued for slander, and they should be able to be sued if the stories they write are a direct result in people's death and endangerment.
When are we going to start treating them like who they are??? Traitors!!!
They need to be tried for treason and hung.
I'll say it again for good measure and clarity....
The MSM that aids and abets our enemy must be tried for treason as is written in our Constitution and given the sentence laid out in our Constitution....
They should be executed!
I'll do it if no one else has the guts.
One penalty for the LATimes
November 25, 2006 - 10:03 ET by Warner Todd HustonOne penalty for the LATimes has been that they have lost nearly 1/3 of their readership. California has millions upon millions of citizens yet the LATimes has but about 750,000 readers! That is a HORRIBLY small number among so many. And it is getting smaller by the year.
I'd bet that I have more reaers for my OWN stuff on the internet than most LATimes columnists do in that rag! My stuff reaches about 20,000 pairs of eyes per story (sometimes more, but that is an average).
lies
November 25, 2006 - 11:14 ET by iveseenitallThe MSM has gotten away with so much in recent years that they are now emboldened to lie outright. The press has lost all its credibility. And surprise--they are all liberals!
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
"The MSM has gotten away
November 25, 2006 - 21:46 ET by Indiana Joe"The MSM has gotten away with so much in recent years that they are now emboldened to lie outright."
EXACTLY what I've been thinking for a long time. And this last election cycle merely emboldened them. It proved that they make a difference with their "spin," and basic willingness to kowtow to specific agendas, rather than be mere "reporters." They're focus has long-since shifted from reporting to manipulating events. Catching them in outright lies comes as no real surprise, sad to say.
Truth and honesty, not to mention any sense of proportion or accountability, are pretty much dead in today's MSM. It's why I don't even bother with them anymore. Watch almost no TV, except strictly for entertainment (when any can be found), barely glance at the newspaper. Most of my news comes from the web, and a lot from right here at NB.
At least here, we get what "they" say, and "the rest of the story." That's all I want. I can make up my own mind what to think about it, with a little logic and research.
And the MSM has no truck with people who dare bother to do that.
The morons in the press proba
November 25, 2006 - 12:33 ET by mattmThe morons in the press probably think they are benefitting humanity with their obviously slanted coverage. They think that if the insurgents succeed, we'll pull out and the war will be over and people won't die anymore. They live in la la land, but they really don't care about the people, they just want people to think they care. They want to be seen as "warriors for peace" so they can stroke their consciences with thoughts of how good they are.
I'm so sick of these Liberals and their fake concern for the lives of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians! The Libs in the media, in entertainment and in the education are directly and/or indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands. They are aiding and abetting the insurgents with the propaganda they spew. Their ridicule of president Bush and Rumsfeld, their Insurgent-slanted phony "analysis" of events that may or may not have even happened and their refusal to broadcast the side of the good guys all contribute to the morale of the ones who are causing all the death and destruction.
When I see people like David Lefterman and his one-sided "humor" or ABC "News" or any other of these Left-wing propaganda agencies, I see traitors. Plain and simple. And traitors should be shot.
Civil Suit
November 25, 2006 - 13:20 ET by acumenI am not an attorney and unlike Bill Clinton, I don't even play one on TV. So any help here from NB legal beagles would be much appreciated. It would appear to this commenter that anyone involved with our military and the WoT (active duty, wives of active duty, children, etc) could show damage by these outrageous stories. What say you?
A treason charge just isn't going to happen; however, two words jumped to my mind after reading Patterico's take on the situation; "civil suit". Similar to OJ, employing a civil suit could, at the least, provide an opportunity to call witnesses and enhance the possibility of gaining the truth (Patterico asks some relevant questions to the Times reporter - which of course went unanswered). Is a stringer considered a confidential source these days? A civil suit against the LA Times, editor(s) and Solomon Moore (Times Staff Writer) seems a logical way to defend Americans from homegrown terrorists.
I mean if someone can win a suit with McDonalds over hot coffee......
I would be satisfied if the A
November 25, 2006 - 13:40 ET by mattmI would be satisfied if the Administration would do a couple things: simply announce that the U.S. government is investigating possible treasonous behavior by the media with regard to terrorist propaganda; use national TV to get the truth out there to counter the lies; for every Howard Dean or Joe "and I quote" Biden on the Sunday shows put two Cheneys or Rumsfelds; and find one or two people to bring up on charges to serve as "examples". (Michael Mooron springs to mind)
Obviously it would be hard to convict "the media" of treason, but the administration could make the accusation, and that would be a good start.
media fights shoulder-to-shoulder with our enemies
November 25, 2006 - 13:59 ET by PlaceboAs mentioned if this tripe were published during WWII, these lies would be deemed treasonous. As our leftist media fights shoulder-to-shoulder with our enemies; few stand up to mete-out the truth.
These moronic a-h**es deserve to be freighted to Iran… disgusting swine-balls!
Since the government has no s
November 25, 2006 - 16:55 ET by Andrew H.Since the government has no stomach to prosecute (a shame, a damn shame), our only remedy is the marketplace. I'm doing my part.
Never relent.
No Gun Ri
November 25, 2006 - 21:57 ET by Carl KolchakI sometimes purchase a magazine called "Armchair General" which deals with military history as well as leadership strategies among other topics. In their current edition they have a summary of a book by Richard Bateman entitled "No Gun Ri: A Military History of the Korean War Incident." For those who may remember, AP ran a story back in 1999 in regards to South Korean civilians being killed during the Korean War by American soldiers. Their first assumptions were that 100 civilians were killed, but quickly they claimed that the number was as high as 400. One of their main sources was an ex army soldier named Edward Daily who claimed he in fact was gunning down the civilians. Ed Daily also claimed to be a Korean War decorated hero. He appeared on "Dateline" and met face to face with South Korean civilian claimants and apologized to them. Turns out this guy was a total fraud, and wasn't a war hero. In fact he was a jeep mechanic and didn't man a machine gun. He created a phony combat record and collected $400,000+ from the government. He also then acknowledged that he made everything up that he told the MSM. Now the AP writers for the story won Pulitzers. Bateman decided to do his own investigation, and he believes that nervous poorly trained soldiers became confused and somewhere around 35 civilians were killed. Now to try to piece together something from 50+ years ago is rather difficult, and in my opinion it would be very hard to rely on 50+ year old memories to know everything, but Bateman clearly showed that the MSM used a false eyewitness. Check out the link to see how the AP reporter responed when he found out a book was coming out that was negative towards their report. They sure like it when they make other people look bad with false eyewitnesses, but if someone wants to write a book about them, then they start pouting. If you are interested in learning more about this, checkout the current edition of "Armchair General" at your local bookstore. Here is a quote from Bateman "The AP was no longer investigating but rather trying to 'prove' something that it already believed. This [assessment] is supported by the manner in which the reporters terminated an interview if the veteran did not agree with their thesis" Armchair General January 2007 edition page 12.
http://www.pownetwork.org/phonies/phonies95.htm
"Well I got nothing against the press, they wouldn't print it if it wasn't true" 'Sunday Papers'