Remember how MSMers such as Tim Russert recently taunted President Bush for claiming that Al Qaeda is behind much of the violence in Iraq?
Well, this morning comes a report from a certified MSM source lending credence to W's assertion. NBC's Richard Engel, who nobody would confuse with a Bush administration defender and who only yesterday was deploring the execution of Saddam as "primitive and vindictive," appeared on this morning's "Today" to discuss the aftermath of Saddam's death.
Asked host Lester Holt: "Lots of concern that there would be a violent response to the execution from Saddam loyalists, supporters. What has the reaction been so far?"
Engel: "So far that violent response has not materialized. There is a concern that some of saddam's supporters could try and launch a spectacular attack but most of the insurgents who are now attacking American troops in this country are not Saddam supporters at all. They are more militant al Qaeda-type supporters and there is concern they will continue their attacks but that Baathist spike so far hasn't happened."
Granted, Engel identified al Qaeda as a major source of violence against US troops, rather than of sectarian violence. But his statement suggests that al Qaeda is playing a more important role in Iraq than Bush-administration critics would have people believe.
Finkelstein was in Iraq last month. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Tim Russert
December 31, 2006 - 10:19 ET by iveseenitallTim Russert and his rich media friends are foreign policy wonks. They know exactly what is going on and how to "fix" it. If only President Bush would listen to those who hate him, the entire world would be better off. Just bring Russert, Lauer, Couric, Matthews, Scarborough, Williams,and Olbermann in for a consultation, Mr. President. Give each of them a healthy check and they'll tell you what to do. Easy as that.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Richard Engel
December 31, 2006 - 10:30 ET by NtvAmrcn"Richard Engel " = upchuck, puke......etc.
I really cannot express my disgust for him and his ilk. Nor the sadness I feel for my own country when his ilk speak every day on our own networks about how "we the people feel and think". It truely disgust me.
Civil war?
December 31, 2006 - 10:32 ET by nkviking75Kinda makes you want to reconsider that "civil war" ruling you made at NBC News, doesn't it, Richard?
Now that the MSM has had th
December 31, 2006 - 14:09 ET by HyunchbackNow that the MSM has had their "Duh!" moment can they get around to supporting this war?
Was al Queda in Iraq before we were? Irrelevant now. They ARE there now and if we leave they own it.
They don't have to put money into roads, hospitals, electricity, etc. They'll put on a dog and pony show and get funding for that from the U.N. They'll use it as they used Afghanistan, to train their own loyalists and send them out to sow terror.
We MUST win in Iraq because the price of failure is 9/11/2001 over and over and over until the United States is no more.
Mark - most major bombings are Al Qaeda
December 31, 2006 - 14:50 ET by Gary HallMark - most major bombings are Al Qaeda. Of course it should be obvious - what is and has been going on in Iraq - after all, the details of the battle plan was released by the leaders of Al Qaeda about two years ago.
About a month ago, (and on other occasions) there have been telling discussions in the MSM, in which a guest spoke the facts right in front of the usual liberal host. In one, I watched, it was spelled out quite clearly that the vast majority of the major bombings (notably the car and suicide bombings) were being carried out by Al Qaeda and it's agents (usually Sunnis, imported terrorists, or former Baathists - but all led by al Qaeda). It was further explained (and the news, each and every day supports just this) that the targets of these bombings are usually Shiite. The reprisal killings (ah, the makings of the much wanted civil war) are more often by the more radical Shiites on the Sunni's.
In this one discussion of which I am thinking - there was, amongst the libs at the table, complete agreement with this presentation of the facts. Then it was back to misrepresenting the entire picture once again.
I'd (I'm confident we'd all be) be interested in your analysis of this, following your trip to Iraq. (;> gary
Allowing people like Engel to
December 31, 2006 - 15:04 ET by NazarethAllowing people like Engel to spew his self loathing rhetoric all across our airwaves is primitive and vindictive- Saddams death was justice completed
http://sacredscoop.com
Tim Russert along with the re
December 31, 2006 - 16:52 ET by Dave RTim Russert along with the rest of the lying liberal media have done everything possible to push the media fabricated lie that Al Qaeda is not in Iraq and thus they are entirely seperate issues. This despite the rather strong evidence to the contrary.
I think Mr. Engel suffered from a slip 'o the tongue there.
Mark...First off Happy New Ye
December 31, 2006 - 18:57 ET by bigtimerMark...
First off Happy New Years to you and yours! Thank you so for the work and reporting you did from Iraq...I followed it everyday that you wrote, and very glad when you came home safely.
Now to the blog....the word, just the word, al Qaeda is like a glove of garlic or a cross in the face of a vampire as it is to the leftists in the media....they refuse to mention it's presence most times in Iraq, let alone the other 63 countries or more...this in the end will be to our detriment I believe, there is so much more to come yet in my opinion, and the media, all of them are to lazy or refuse or both to recognize this fact...let alone bother to investigate their presence and destruction or destruction yet to come everywhere around the world to any degree whatsoever.
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
I think we should take the
January 1, 2007 - 05:00 ET by MyKindaSpamI think we should take the word of the terrorists themselves when they say they are in Iraq. It is obvious that al Qaeda is in Iraq.
I do quibble with saying that Engle admitted Al Qaeda is operating in Iraq. I don't think that is what he said, though. He said "the more militant al Qaeda-type supporters" were responsible for the violence, not Al Qaeda itself. I think that is a significant distinction. I look forward to the day that reporters have to actually admit that Al Qaeda is in Iraq. Whether they were there before is moot now, because they are there NOW and will benefit from our absence.