Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

January 9, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

TARGETING JOURNALISTS?....What the hell?

American troops in Baghdad yesterday blasted their way into the home of an Iraqi journalist working for the Guardian and Channel 4, firing bullets into the bedroom where he was sleeping with his wife and children.

Ali Fadhil, who two months ago won the Foreign Press Association young journalist of the year award, was hooded and taken for questioning. He was released hours later.

The troops told Fadhil they were looking for an insurgent, but Fadhil isn't buying it. He thinks it might have something to do with the fact that a few days ago he asked U.S. authorities for an interview regarding his findings that tens of millions of dollars in U.S. and British funds have been misused or misappropriated.

At this point, of course, there's no telling who's right. Still, this whole "targeting journalists" thing is starting to look more credible every day, isn't it?

Kevin Drum 8:00 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (159)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Especially journalists with terrorist connections. I suppose you've seen the staged terrorist photos done by AP stringers and "locals." Maybe he was scheduling another of those IED photo ops for the next day.

Posted by: Mike K on January 9, 2006 at 8:05 PM | PERMALINK

There's many a thing that will be credible, to those who can see and are willing to believe.

Posted by: Archie on January 9, 2006 at 8:05 PM | PERMALINK

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

Posted by: fugitive on January 9, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, please point out in stronger terms that NO DEMOCRATS TOOK ABRAMOFF'S DIRTY MONEY.

None. Not Durban. Not Daschle. None at all.

Posted by: Archie on January 9, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

In the fog of war, everything insidious and nasty remains merely suspicious.

Posted by: The Dad on January 9, 2006 at 8:08 PM | PERMALINK

So, what's the answer on the interview request?

Posted by: wishIwuz2 on January 9, 2006 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, unless you are deliberately insinuating that this American task force was intentionally targeting a journalist because he allegedly exposed something about the U.S and U.K. that most of these soldiers don't even know anything about, maybe for once you should give American troops the benefit of the doubt. I don't feel you realize the magnitude of your allegations.

Posted by: Dustin Ridgeway on January 9, 2006 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

...or dismissively coincidental.

Posted by: The Dad on January 9, 2006 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

"this whole "targeting journalists" thing is starting to look more credible every day, isn't it?"

Careful, you're kind of a journalist, aren't you?

Posted by: luci on January 9, 2006 at 8:11 PM | PERMALINK

Dustin

-suggesting that the raid was a warning to not snoop around DOESN'T mean that the troops carrying out the raid would have been told anything except what they needed to know. Kevin't not insinuating that the task force took it upon itself to carry out a raid, & only someone looking for kevin to be casting asp[ersions on American troops would have read it that way.

Posted by: URK on January 9, 2006 at 8:15 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, unless you are deliberately insinuating that this American task force was intentionally targeting a journalist because he allegedly exposed something about the U.S and U.K. that most of these soldiers don't even know anything about, maybe for once you should give American troops the benefit of the doubt.

The soldiers who made the arrest probably didn't know anything about the guy's report. It's the commanding officers we'd be curious to talk to. Like, did they get a call from the Pentagon telling them to arrest the guy?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on January 9, 2006 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

I'll say. It's not hard to do a little homework and reconnaissance and find out who lives in a particular home you are going to invade. If it turns out to be a journalist with his family, you certainly don't enter the home firing. Does the American military want us to think they're just stupid, and can't even do a little intelligence and reconnaissance work before these home invasions?

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

Well, I should hope that he was deliberately targeted. The alternative is that the soldiers mistakenly broke into someone's home, fired their weapons, and then kidnapped one of the occupants. That's certainly no way to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.

Posted by: josef on January 9, 2006 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

The soldiers who made the arrest probably didn't know anything about the guy's report. It's the commanding officers we'd be curious to talk to. Like, did they get a call from the Pentagon telling them to arrest the guy?

Oh, it's definitely the people giving the orders, not the guys carrying it out. Are we to believe that these people giving the orders are:

a) that stupid;

b) that reckless?

Or, maybe they're just lazy, and don't care if their targets are sound. Won't win many hearts and minds there.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 8:21 PM | PERMALINK

I don't feel you realize the magnitude of your allegations.
Posted by: Dustin Ridgeway

The grunts are on the front lines of a war predicated on a lie, with a CIC who is charitably described as a yuppie deserter, a VP who is a war profiteer, and a secretary of defense who is a war criminal.

I don't insinuate anything about the troops on the ground, but their chain of command isn't very inspiring. ... or trustworthy.

Posted by: Nads on January 9, 2006 at 8:25 PM | PERMALINK

While I strongly object to this treatment of journalists in Baghdad, I thing it would do the Wolf Blitzers and Tim Russerts in Washington no amount of good. (sarcasm)

Posted by: Thinker on January 9, 2006 at 8:25 PM | PERMALINK

Dustin:>"maybe for once you should give American troops the benefit of the doubt"

Yeah, to question the leaders motives is harmful to the troops

how dumb do ya gotta be to buy that?

Posted by: Joey Giraud on January 9, 2006 at 8:26 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, unless you are deliberately insinuating that this American task force was intentionally targeting a journalist because he allegedly exposed something about the U.S and U.K. that most of these soldiers don't even know anything about, maybe for once you should give American troops the benefit of the doubt.

Giving the benefit of the doubt to reckless home invasions where we go in firing with inaccurate intelligence and reconnaissance? Sounds like a capital crime if an innocent person gets killed, since there is no actual war in Iraq right now. The troops on the ground carrying out these missions aren't likely at issue - they're carrying out orders that legitimate insurgents are armed and dangerous in the home. It's the people giving the orders, and processing the intelligence and reconnaissance that would seem to be the only rightful basis for these orders, that need to be investigated.

Are they stupid, or reckless? Lazy, or just targeting whole blocks and not caring and going in blazing? It would be a very serious crime for the U.S. military without a status of forces agreement to be conducting home invasions against innocent parties, especially if they go in firing and kill an innocent party. Even in wartime such invasions would have to be justified with adequate intelligence, not hunches or rumours, or such invasions would be considered targeting civilians.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 8:26 PM | PERMALINK

"targeting journalists" thing

Anyone else remember right before the bombing of Baghdad began, the US military informed news outlets that any transmissions out of Iraq, from satellite phones for instance, would be indistinguishable from anti-aircraft targeting radar, and would be treated as such?...In other words, the military told anyone emitting such transmissions should expect immidiate destruction....

Not much stink made of it at that time...."news outlets" were too concerned with riding the jingoistic gravytrain for ratings and ad revenues to risk alientating their audiences, or "sources".

Not that I blame the military and the administration for wanting to maintain information control. What's surprises me is those who don't think that the US government would, can, and does do whatever it wants.

See current media lies about "foreign fighters" and the laughably transparent United States construct of "al Qaeda in Mesopotamia".

Posted by: luci on January 9, 2006 at 8:27 PM | PERMALINK

Even if the soliders carrying out the raid didn't have to be in on it, it's still a very serious allegation. What he's alleging is that higher ups in our armed forces deliberately tried to kill him, because of a story he published about 'tens of millions of dollars' (a fraction of the expenditure directed towards Iraq) were misused or misappropriated; as in not used for their intended purpose or lost in poorly run bureaucratic mess, not stolen or laundered or any other such thing.

I find it hard to believe, even taking for argument's sake our Armed forces engage in such measures (I don't believe they do) that they would do this because of something so petty. Especially after the fact that the story was already published. That's real bright.

Until I learn more about this matter, I'm going to give our armed forces the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: Dustin Ridgeway on January 9, 2006 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

Mnemosyne
I'LL TAKE YOUR VERSION BECAUSE I REMEMBER
FIFTY ONE YEARS BACK WHEN IT WAS " YOURS IS NOT TO REASON WHY-- YOURS IS TO DO OR DIE ! !
FUCK THAT SHIT --RUMMY YOU BE POINT MAN NEXT THEN PICK SOME ONE ELSE WEARING A RED TIE. GUNG HO

Posted by: GUNG HO on January 9, 2006 at 8:32 PM | PERMALINK

What he's alleging is that higher ups in our armed forces deliberately tried to kill him, because of a story he published about 'tens of millions of dollars' (a fraction of the expenditure directed towards Iraq) were misused or misappropriated; as in not used for their intended purpose or lost in poorly run bureaucratic mess, not stolen or laundered or any other such thing.

are you rationalizing ... or minimizing? or justifying? those are my tax dollars, too, asshole. I don't want them enriching cheney and random mercenaries anymore than I have to.

Posted by: Nads on January 9, 2006 at 8:36 PM | PERMALINK

From the Committee to Protect Journalists:

Iraq, the most dangerous place for journalists in 2005, also became the deadliest conflict for the media in CPJ's 24-year history. A total of 60 journalists have been killed on duty in Iraq from the beginning of the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 through the end of 2005. The toll surpasses the 58 journalists killed in the Algerian conflict from 1993 to 1996.

Somewhere on that site is a statement that 31 journalists have been abducted in Iraq as well.

Posted by: Linkmeister on January 9, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

I gotta tell you, Kevin. I'm usually with you, but the implication that the U.S. -- troops or higher ups -- targeted a journalist because he was snooping into their misappropriation of funds is simply conspiracy minded crap. Things are bad enough -- the mismanagment, the human tragedy, the political arrogance -- without flying off into moonbatville and making shit up. It's very out of character from what I usually read from you.

Posted by: Pat on January 9, 2006 at 8:39 PM | PERMALINK

The point Dustin isn't necessarily that they did it on purpose, but that it may have been ordered recklessly or carelessly, in which case the relevance of his being a journalist who wrote a critical story is only tangential.

Are we really doing home invasions, without a current status of forces agreement, without even a modicum of decent intelligence and reconnaissance, and going in recklessly firing our weapons?

If so, this would be nothing but a criminal act unless law is meaningless now in Iraq.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 8:40 PM | PERMALINK

If the Bush regime wanted to bomb an allied nation to remove unfavorable press coverage they
certainly wouldn't blink at the notion of roughing up somebody asking uncomfortable questions about corruption.

Posted by: Buford on January 9, 2006 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINK

According to The Guardian, Fadhil's tapes were taken and have not been returned...which lends some crediblity to the "targeting journalists" thing.

Posted by: bren on January 9, 2006 at 8:46 PM | PERMALINK

This is a CIC who thinks it's okay to torture innocent children. Targeting journalists is small potatoes to this administration.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11488.htm

Posted by: Mazurka on January 9, 2006 at 8:50 PM | PERMALINK

The fact that a mighty shitload of U.S. cash has been misappropriated or has outright disappeared in Iraq, usually resulting from Iraqi corruption, has got to be the worst-kept "secret" of the year.

Why bust this one guy's chops, as opposed to the squad of other reporters that covered that story, or the reporters who have written other anti-military stuff?

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

tbrosz, are you disturbed about this shitload of missing funds?

who's responsible for assuring our money is spent accountably?

why don't you make a stink about it?

how come it doesn't bother you that the U.S. government and GOP are infected with unprecedented corruption right now?

surely the democrats aren't saints, but if you can't keep order in your own house, why bother with the pretense of even caring about corruption at all, especially if that's the engine that drives you?

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 8:56 PM | PERMALINK


does anyone remember?

cnn news chief jordan eason (or was it eason jordan?) was fired a year or so ago for making comments in a meeting in davo, switzerland about u.s. forces targeting journalists.

if i recall correctly. he had been bureau chief in baghdad.

his remarks in davo were taped, perhaps by some by a right-wing apparatchik (or a cnn opponent).

why wouldn't u.s. forces try to intimidate journalists? in war you try to control as much as you can. u.s. forces are in a postiton where they can't control much in the field, but they can intimidate journalists and local politicians.

when actions like this constitute your "proactive" policy, things are not going good for you side.

Posted by: orionATL on January 9, 2006 at 8:57 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm:

I have mentioned such a concern in the past, although maybe not here.

Two things I have been concerned about in the future of Iraq is overcoming a culture of corruption, common in any totalitarian society, and the danger of insurgent "ringers" in the security organizations.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

Really, just who was Bush wiretapping? Terrorist or journalist that dare to look at Bush's corruption and lies.

Remember the US tank that targeted and bomb the Palestinian hotel in Baghdad, where everyone knew that journalist stayed? The Paris press that photographic the whole thing said it was VERY deliberate that the US tank fired on hotel. The shooting of a Spaniard press agents rescuer after securing her release from Insurgence with the US roadblock whereby the US was warned of the journalist escape and her present shot the on coming car anyway?. Remember the American journalist that got beaten by US troops? And now we have stories about Bush wiretapping a CNN journalist. Bush wasnt wiretapping terrorist at all only people Bush thought of as HIS enemy, and that would be any press agent with negative reports on Bush and his little criminal war and corrupt government in Iraq.

Posted by: Cheryl on January 9, 2006 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm:

U.S. government and GOP are infected with unprecedented corruption right now?

"Unprecedented?" How old are you?

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 9:01 PM | PERMALINK

Honestly tbrosz, I don't know we plan on changing the culture, which includes rampant corruption, in Iraq. It's been endemic there for centuries. We should have not expected great change in this area, and thus should have planned for this in our use of public dollars over there.

Further, how can we with a straight face tell the Iraqis they have to stop corruption and embrace transparency and accountability when we are infected with such problems at an unprecedented level right now? Clearly we're a lot further along than the Iraqis, but we seem to be moving backwards when it comes to transparency, accountability, and corruption.

I realize (remembering now) that you're not American, so perhaps it's not your problem.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

Tbrosz, because he's an Iraqi and they can do what they like with Iraqis.

Posted by: Boronx on January 9, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

Welll ...
The same thing happens here more often than it should. The "War on Drugs" don'cha know. I seem to recall that there is someone on death row right now because they (effectively) returned fire, claiming that no valid announcement was made after his door was broken down. It seems that the warrant issued was a bit dodgy too.
As for targeting, two words, bushco - Al Jeezera.

Posted by: jay boilswater on January 9, 2006 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

I realize (remembering now) that you're not American, so perhaps it's not your problem.

Me? I live in northern California. Oh, okay, maybe you have a point.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

"Unprecedented?" How old are you?

Are you saying this is par for the course for the GOP to be involved in what is effectively racketeering?

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

If I were a corrupt Iraqi official with an enterprising reporter sniffing around my rice bowl, I just might mention to some intel types that the reporter was actually an Al Queda operative, and watch what happens. After all, I could be wrong, but who knows. Don't blame Bush/ Cheney for this one, yet.

Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech on January 9, 2006 at 9:05 PM | PERMALINK

The French have a phrase, the jist of which is "for the edification of the others". Think intimidation is new to the current lot in charge, tbrosz ?

Posted by: opit on January 9, 2006 at 9:05 PM | PERMALINK

If I were a corrupt Iraqi official with an enterprising reporter sniffing around my rice bowl, I just might mention to some intel types that the reporter was actually an Al Queda operative, and watch what happens. After all, I could be wrong, but who knows. Don't blame Bush/ Cheney for this one, yet.

Yes, but this is an obvious scenario. What are we, Inspector Clousseau over there? This is what I mean by doing and being accountable for at least a little of our own due diligence when it comes to intelligence and reconnaissance (homework). Otherwise, we're admitting that we have no power over whether we are just being used as foot soldiers for various Iraqi factions' enemies and laundry.

How pathetic would that be? That we're being ordered around and committing crimes for corrupt Iraqi officials' payback?

We should pull out tomorrow if this is the case.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:08 PM | PERMALINK

Me? I live in northern California.

My bad. I'm not sure why I was thinking that. Glad to know you're an American though...it makes the debate more germane.

Peace.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:10 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm:

I have no problem with people who don't live in the U.S. commenting on our nation's policies. Heck, if we can give France as much crap as we have been--well-deserved IMO--we sure should be able to take a little.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 9:21 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm: Good point. I suppose it would depend on the story being told, how reliable the source, etc. We don't have alot of independent information on the ground, as you well know. Sort of makes due diligence difficult. I just don't buy this deliberate targeting of journalists crap. It's not like the journalists wear bright yellow jumpsuits or something so you know who they are.

Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech on January 9, 2006 at 9:28 PM | PERMALINK

I don't see a problem with it either, but it's not as relevant to argue with a guy from Singapore or France about his support for the GOP. He's got his own country and domestic politics to worry about and vote on. I'm not saying it's worth discussion at all, just noting that it's more germane.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:28 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not saying it's worth discussion at all, just noting that it's more germane.

Oops. I'm not saying it's not worth dicussion. Um, I'm saying it's worth discussion, but not as germane when speaking of varying political parties and who one supports and votes for.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK

It's unfortunate, but this isn't the first time our people have taken action against journalists in Iraq. And, given Bush's ill-conceived "joke" to Blair, it shouldn't surprise anyone that people suspect a pattern.

Posted by: Mark on January 9, 2006 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK

I'm pretty sure I don't buy the targeting journalists crap at least in this case, since there may be other relevant explanations. But we're fortunate perhaps it was a journalist with an axe to grind so that we can hear about what we're doing over there, because at first glance it seems shady if not criminal, let alone potentially devastating to our reputation and so-called purity of our militayr line of command.

Whether we're targeting journalists, or effectively being foot soldiers for partisan and factional squabbles at the orders of corrupt foreigners, or we're just sweeping through whole neighborhoods without inadequate intelligence doing home invasions with guns blazing, none of these sound good.

Pick your poison.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINK

Whether we're targeting journalists, or effectively being foot soldiers for partisan and factional squabbles at the orders of corrupt foreigners, or we're just sweeping through whole neighborhoods without inadequate intelligence doing home invasions with guns blazing, none of these sound good.

I'm having terrible troubles with double negatives today...of course I mean "without adequate intelligence", or, if you prefer, "with inadequate intelligence".

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:34 PM | PERMALINK

The occupation must be awash in corruption. The Leiter Reports blog had a sad note about this on Dec. 14, referring to the suicide of Col. Ted Westhusing, a Professor at West Point who volunteered to serve in Iraq. He was esp. concerned about the misappropriation of funds and the fact that not much was being done about it. Here's quote from his suicide note:

"I cannot support a msn [mission] that leads to corruption, human rights abuse and liars. I am sullied.... I came to serve honorably and feel dishonored. Death before being dishonored any more."

Posted by: otherpaul on January 9, 2006 at 9:43 PM | PERMALINK

A note to any who are a bit fuzzy-headed: the troops wouldn't have consciously been thinking, "This is a journalist who is exposing corruption in BushCo's Iraq and needs to be silenced!" They would have been told that a "suspicious person" was at X and to pick him up. It isn't their fault in any case. Look up the chain of command. Hence, dolts who have been accusing Kevin of casting creepy aspersions on "our troops" are about at the wisdom level needed to, ahem, be Bush supporters - it fits.

Posted by: Neil' on January 9, 2006 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK

Aw, jeez, soon these agitators will be trying to convince us that, erm,
Al Jazeera is being targeted intentionally....

Posted by: adios on January 9, 2006 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK

Make that this.

Posted by: adios on January 9, 2006 at 9:49 PM | PERMALINK

tbrosz: You should know that the current levels of corruption, when it is all put together, are worse than anything recent - even if not literally "unprecedented" in US history. In any case, it's time to throw those rascals out most tainted by it - and you know who they are, dark helmet.

Posted by: Neil' on January 9, 2006 at 9:50 PM | PERMALINK

If you can get money from the Liconln group for writing articles from home, why would any journalist risk his life investigating the Iraqi government?

This journalist deserved what he got.

Posted by: lib on January 9, 2006 at 9:51 PM | PERMALINK

Jill Carroll, 28-year old freelance writer working for Christian Science Monitor, was kidnapped on Saturday. Her interpreter was murdered. Let's keep this targetted journalist in our thoughts and prayers.

Posted by: Marla on January 9, 2006 at 9:55 PM | PERMALINK

Off - topic (sorry) Targeted archeologist Susanne Osthoff was a German spy? UPI
This is weird. The woman was practically incoherent when interviewed on television after her release.

Posted by: Marla on January 9, 2006 at 10:02 PM | PERMALINK

Why is it so hard for some to believe this 'allegation'? Is it really so difficult to consider the possibility that a thug with connections and history in crime might be trying to 'defend his interests' by threatening a journalist? Come on, this guy claims he's spoken with god! Eh?

"Benefit of a doubt for our armed forces..".. what? Can somebody please cut the chain of this patriotic nonsense?! Please!? No, sweetheart, we are not insinuating that teenagers from (mainly) poor families that can't afford either college tuition or support the drinking habit are to be held accountable for what's happened...

;) Kay? Kay...

Posted by: Mishka on January 9, 2006 at 10:13 PM | PERMALINK

tbrosz: You should know that the current levels of corruption, when it is all put together, are worse than anything recent - even if not literally "unprecedented" in US history. In any case, it's time to throw those rascals out most tainted by it - and you know who they are, dark helmet.

Unless you can point to any other instance in our history in which criminals stole $9 billion of US taxpayer money then it is, quite literally, unprecedented. The Republican heist of Iraqi reconstruction money is the biggest heist in our history.

Posted by: Stefan on January 9, 2006 at 10:16 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican heist of Iraqi reconstruction money is the biggest heist in our history.

I was about to snark about this, but it exceeds my capacities. GWB has surpassed Hoover, Grant, and Taft. He has indeed crafted a legacy that will forever be enshrined in American history. Caligula should be so proud.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 9, 2006 at 10:31 PM | PERMALINK

"I were a corrupt Iraqi official with an enterprising reporter sniffing around my rice bowl, I just might mention to some intel types that the reporter was actually an Al Queda operative, and watch what happens."

And I were an insurgent, working as a reporter. I'd claim I was persecuted for my keen anti-corruption views everytime they picked me up....
I'd even ask a few questions to make it look good.

Disinformation goes both ways.

Why not google this guy and see if his articles are really about corruption?

Posted by: McAristotle on January 9, 2006 at 10:37 PM | PERMALINK

Quite a bit more on Ali Fadhil at War on the Press

Posted by: The Heretik on January 9, 2006 at 10:37 PM | PERMALINK

Me? I live in northern California. Oh, okay, maybe you have a point.

Tom, sell the house. With what you realize you can get a palatial estate in West Texas, Mississippi, or Oklahaoma. Granted you might miss a few cultural advantages, but hell, you wouldn't have to put up with those socialist sushi eaters. Lubbock is particularly beautiful on a hot August afternoon, the heat waves blending the array of browns into a shimmering panoply of suffocating petroleum infused monotony. Of course Mrs. Brosz might have to wear a little more make-up than she is used to, but I am sure the local Mary Kay representative will be more than willing to help out.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 9, 2006 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

Why is it so hard for some to believe this 'allegation'? Is it really so difficult to consider the possibility that a thug with connections and history in crime might be trying to 'defend his interests' by threatening a journalist?

Posted by: Mishka on January 9, 2006 at 10:13 PM | PERMALINK

And is it so hard to believe that the insurgency, would read anti-war material and play to the crowd? How hard is to be a journalist anyway?

Posted by: McAristotle on January 9, 2006 at 10:41 PM | PERMALINK

LW Phil:

I'm fine where I am, thanks. I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINK

The military. like the paramilitary police forces in corrupt city administrations, are quite often the "muscle" in the illegal transactions. Sometimes wittingly, sometimes unwittingly, but they are often used simply because they are lawfully armed and trained to follow orders blindly and hold extreme unthinking right wing attitudes of supporting authority at all costs against any reason. They are the perfect tools for King George W the First and his Unmerry Band of Thieves

Posted by: murmeister on January 9, 2006 at 10:51 PM | PERMALINK

If the guy's really an insurgent, McAristotle, then why did the military release him a few hours later?

Posted by: KCinDC on January 9, 2006 at 10:53 PM | PERMALINK

Biggest scandals? Hard to say, except for their eerie correlation with Republican Presidents: Grant(Jay Gould), Harding (Teapot Dome), Bush no. 1 (S&L Bust). Probably the last one is the biggest of all time, but it wasn't a centrally organized heist--just a bunch of bandits hitting the wall after being green lighted by the Reagan Administration.

Posted by: bobbyp on January 9, 2006 at 10:57 PM | PERMALINK

"Still, this whole "targeting journalists" thing is starting to look more credible every day, isn't it?"

Yes, along with targeting women and children. Looks like the Democrats and the Al Qaida were right about America afterall.

Posted by: Freedom Fighter on January 9, 2006 at 10:59 PM | PERMALINK

haha!

tbrosz, who thinks that desegregation may not have been all good, thinks that liberals have a superiority complex.

Posted by: nut on January 9, 2006 at 11:00 PM | PERMALINK

I'm fine where I am, thanks. I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINK

But no doubt armed fully with the spiteful projection and total lack of empathy that seems to be an inbred personality trait of nearly all conservatives.

Posted by: bobbyp on January 9, 2006 at 11:06 PM | PERMALINK

I'm fine where I am, thanks. I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

Tit for tat Tom. You weren't being a leetle nasty about the Bay Area ??? I have spent a lot of time in Texas. It is a complex place, and has some of the best regional cuisine in America (as long as you aren't vegetarian). But, as you yourself have evinced, Lubbock, despite its staunch support for Mr. Bush, is no place to live compared to NoCal.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 9, 2006 at 11:06 PM | PERMALINK

I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

This remark appears to have an air of superiority about it.

Posted by: craigie on January 9, 2006 at 11:08 PM | PERMALINK

Clownie,

Condescending liberals. Wasn't it the president's pr flack who just said DeLay was too blue collar to be one of the president's friends?

Posted by: End the Reign of the Candyasses on January 9, 2006 at 11:13 PM | PERMALINK

tbrosz, lover of all things human, casts wide his enfolding verbal embrace to encompass all his brothers and sisters.

Yes, he lives life with his arms stretched out, eye to eye when greeting, enters rooms with great joy shouts, happy to be meeting.

Posted by: shortstop on January 9, 2006 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

McAristotle... USA ain't the good guy in this one... number one. I know, watching certain kind of movies (it was actually all of them, right?) does create a certain kind of paradigm of thought... Gotta rid yourself of that, that was film, this is reality. Number two... if Dr. Fadhil (I hope the spelling's right) were an insurgent or so, why would army release him shortly thereafter? Does that make sense? Nope... So drop it, it ain't going anywhere. Stop excusing crimes of your government that you're supporting with your dollars. That ain't going anywhere either. Why can't we be a little more critical of what our threatened hegemony's causing around the world? Desperate acts, desperate measures. The Roman empire's about to fall. I have a feeling we have a lot more desperate/pathetic acts to see going down. You know... the drowning person ain't thinking too clearly while taking down their would-be-rescuer.

Posted by: Mishka on January 9, 2006 at 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

Since Republicans are on board with the supremacy of the executive branch, the legality of extrajudicial spying, torture and intimidating journalists I am serioulsy thinkg about running again.
Gore/Hoffa 2008 - Payback is a Bitch

Posted by: Angry Gore on January 9, 2006 at 11:19 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, he lives life with his arms stretched out, eye to eye when greeting, enters rooms with great joy shouts, happy to be meeting.

What don't you do? Diver, poet, caped and booted reformer, straw man slayer...happily married windy city denizen. Dear me, no wonder craigie is so stricken...

Posted by: LW Phil on January 9, 2006 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

You are far too kind, Phil. I am not the author of those fabulous lines. I stole them from The Innocence Mission.

Posted by: shortstop on January 9, 2006 at 11:34 PM | PERMALINK

I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

How about the air of superiority and amused condescension you constantly display towards those other Americans who ARE liberals? You lily-white, chardonnay-drinking, government-contract-employed Northern California elitist?

kisses,
your friend Brooksfoe

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 9, 2006 at 11:35 PM | PERMALINK

p.s. better not put words in craigie's mouth! he may not like that at all!

Posted by: shortstop on January 9, 2006 at 11:35 PM | PERMALINK

What don't you do? Diver, quoter, caped and booted reformer, straw man slayer...happily married windy city denizen. Dear me, no wonder craigie is so stricken...

Posted by: LW Phil on January 9, 2006 at 11:35 PM | PERMALINK

I'm fine where I am, thanks. I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 9, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, indeed. Better to stay where you are and keep your cherished paranoid sense of schizoid detachment. The irrational hate towards non whites and people not as priviledged stays stronger that way.

Posted by: Sigmund Freud on January 9, 2006 at 11:36 PM | PERMALINK

brooksfoe, heh.

Posted by: shortstop on January 9, 2006 at 11:37 PM | PERMALINK

"I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals."

Funny, I thought sure you were going to end that statement with the word 'Texans'.

Posted by: Kenji on January 10, 2006 at 12:01 AM | PERMALINK

the guy's really an insurgent, McAristotle, then why did the military release him a few hours later?

Posted by: KCinDC on January 9, 2006 at 10:53 PM | PERMALINK

No idea. Maybe they got nothing. But there's no reason to assume he isn't someone who might hide an insurgent.

Note- I can't find the anti-corruption articles he's written.

---------------

McAristotle... USA ain't the good guy in this one...

Posted by: Mishka on January 9, 2006 at 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

You don't have to be the good guy to be on the side of the greater good sometimes.

I have no illusions British colonization was for resources and subsequent support for former colonies, was carried out to stop Communism. I'm still better off as a result.

Bush maybe fixing the Middle East to stop the attractiveness of Osama's ideas and doing so as humanely as possible (to protect himself against politics at home)...but he's still fixing the Middle East..

I can tell you that the guys who behead their captives and suicide bomb Muslim civilians aren't the good guys either...

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 12:02 AM | PERMALINK

Guardianfilms journalist wins foreign press award

Sam Jones
Wednesday November 30, 2005
The Guardian

Ali Fadhil of Guardianfilms was named young journalist of the year last night at the Foreign Press Association awards for his coverage of the US attack on Fallujah and his expose on the ensuing mass civilian casualties.

-Besides this was the guy 'embedded' with insurgents in Fallujah. It isn't unbelievable he has a few friends in the movement.

Posted by: Mcaristotle on January 10, 2006 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK

Funny, I thought sure you were going to end that statement with the word 'Texans'.

Oh, come on. We're ganging up. The lovely thing about blogging is that there is a built in excuse not to answer. Something might have come up. God knows, I've used it. Tom will be back tomorrow, and in rare form.

On topic, for the first time tonight, let me say...nope, it makes me sick to think of it.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 10, 2006 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK

But there's no reason to assume he isn't someone who might hide an insurgent.

And there's no reason to assume US troops wouldn't be ordered to carry out an intimidation mission against a persnickety journalist poking into military contractors who've stolen tens of millions of dollars.

In fact, there's no reason to assume anything. So until you have something concrete to contribute, keep your keyboard silent.

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 10, 2006 at 12:08 AM | PERMALINK

-Besides this was the guy 'embedded' with insurgents in Fallujah. It isn't unbelievable he has a few friends in the movement.

Please, if you are going to parody an idiot, get his handle correct - it is McAristotle, not Mcaristotle. Not that he deserves the respect...but we do things better than they do.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 10, 2006 at 12:12 AM | PERMALINK

-Besides this was the guy 'embedded' with insurgents in Fallujah. It isn't unbelievable he has a few friends in the movement.

This sort of thinking is what keeps conservatives ignorant. If someone was reporting from behind enemy lines, they are an enemy sympathizer, and thus unreliable, perhaps even in league with the enemy.

We still have judgement here, that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
To plague the inventor.

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 10, 2006 at 12:20 AM | PERMALINK

McAristotle: Note- I can't find the anti-corruption articles he's written.

Because he hasn't written one; the investigation is in progress. Also, he's best known for film, not writing; for some of his recent work (well worth the time) see here.

Posted by: has407 on January 10, 2006 at 12:29 AM | PERMALINK

I'm not so sure the insurgent sympathizer label is accurate. A quick google for Ali Fadhil indicates that his journalist of the year award was for his work documenting what happened to the civilian population during the attack on Falluja. It just so happens that Mr. Fadhil is also a doctor and was pressed upon to help the many wounded, maimed and traumatized civilians. Maybe this is a presumption on my part, but how could he not be affected by what he experienced?

Since then, he and his brother have established an Iraqi blog site that, according to an article in USA Today 4/20/2004, happens to be unusally pro-American. Ali and his brother are on record as wanting to provide their readers and posters a forum to freely discuss their reality...the good and the bad.

Okay...I admit I do not have the guy's current and complete CV, but his history that has been read so far does not paint a picture of someone dedicated to the destruction of America.

Posted by: jcricket on January 10, 2006 at 12:34 AM | PERMALINK

"I'm not so sure the insurgent sympathizer label is accurate. A quick google for Ali Fadhil indicates that his journalist of the year award was for his work documenting what happened to the civilian population during the attack on Falluja. :

Then explain how this "Journalist'; gets so many picutures UP CLOSE AND PERSONAl of 'the insurgents"? Its not rocket science. Lets be serious here. Something smells FISHY in Denmark.

----------------------

'Ever seea LIBERAL on a donkey? STop lookin' at my ass!' - GastroGuy269

Posted by: GastroGuy269 on January 10, 2006 at 12:39 AM | PERMALINK

...Two things I have been concerned about in the future of Iraq is overcoming a culture of corruption, common in any totalitarian society... tbrosz

Abramoff is an Iraqi?

Who knew?

Posted by: floopmeister on January 10, 2006 at 12:49 AM | PERMALINK

Gee Gastro -- exactly how many pictures of the insurgents did he get? Have you seen them? How many insurgents are depicted ? Have you seen the film that got the award?
If so, where? How many insurgents star in it?

But I doubt sincerely if you have seen anything remotely like photos of insurgents from Mr. Fadhil or the awarded film. You are blowing smoke out of that ass you somehow think is the object of attention.

By the way would your name being "gastroguy" have anything to do with that ass? Thought so. P.U!!


My statement still stands.


Posted by: jcricket on January 10, 2006 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK

floop: happy New Year. Haven't had a chance to express it yet, but all the best.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 10, 2006 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK

This sort of thinking is what keeps conservatives ignorant. If someone was reporting from behind enemy lines, they are an enemy sympathizer, and thus unreliable, perhaps even in league with the enemy.

That's why CNN (aka 'The Liberal Media') was the enemy in the first Gulf War.

;)

Posted by: floopmeister on January 10, 2006 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK

LW Phil: the same to you, my friend!

Hope you had a good NYE party - it was 35 degrees (centigrade) here at 2 am in the morning on New Year's Day. Hottest NYE since records began...

Hangover heaven, let me tell you ;)

jcricket: he's obviously called 'Gastroguy' because he'll swallow anything.

Posted by: floopmeister on January 10, 2006 at 12:56 AM | PERMALINK

-Besides this was the guy 'embedded' with insurgents in Fallujah. It isn't unbelievable he has a few friends in the movement.
Posted by: Mcaristotle

I wonder if there's a picture of him shaking hands with saddam ...

Posted by: Nads on January 10, 2006 at 12:57 AM | PERMALINK

Nads: touche.

Posted by: floopmeister on January 10, 2006 at 12:58 AM | PERMALINK

p.s. better not put words in craigie's mouth! he may not like that at all!

Oh, that's all right. I just viewed that remark with, you know, amused condescension.

Posted by: craigie on January 10, 2006 at 1:06 AM | PERMALINK

Hey, I'm really a reporter.

Therefore I can't lie and you liberal scum bags are targeting me with verbal harassment to silent by stunning denunciations of your conspiracy.

You guys are actually pawns of Bush, setting up liberalism for failure to undermine true progressive politics.

I have a secret leak from a senior figure in the conspiracy that supports my position!

--------------

If someone was reporting from behind enemy lines, they are an enemy sympathizer, and thus unreliable, perhaps even in league with the enemy.

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 10, 2006 at 12:20 AM | PERMALINK

Well, he was behind enemy lines with a movement that likes to try and suicide truck bomb the Baghdad hotel where the journalists stay.
Its amazing how he's stayed neutral in the war.
I mean, everything he writes is totally unbiased.

Its just that the truth is that the occupation.
is always wrong and life was good under Saddam.
When he is released or Zarqawi takes control of Iraq, it will be a socialist paradise with flowers in the streets!

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 1:22 AM | PERMALINK

When he is released or Zarqawi takes control of Iraq, it will be a socialist paradise with flowers in the streets!

Will those be the same flowers we were greeted with?

Posted by: craigie on January 10, 2006 at 1:23 AM | PERMALINK

The grunts are on the front lines of a war predicated on a lie, with a CIC who is charitably described as a yuppie deserter, a VP who is a war profiteer, and a secretary of defense who is a war criminal.

I don't insinuate anything about the troops on the ground, but their chain of command isn't very inspiring. ... or trustworthy.

Posted by: Nads on January 9, 2006 at 8:25 PM | PERMALINK

Yup. So the people who cut people's heads off and dig more graves are more trustworthy and would never infiltrate the media. That sounds totalitarian. The former President for life would turn in his cell!


Posted by: Mcaristotle on January 10, 2006 at 1:25 AM | PERMALINK

Will those be the same flowers we were greeted with?

Posted by: craigie on January 10, 2006 at 1:23 AM | PERMALINK

Heck yeah! If you cheer both sides and don't reuse flowers the back and forth can break the bank.

To save money, sometimes we steal them from Saddam's mass graves.

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 1:27 AM | PERMALINK

his history that has been read so far does not paint a picture of someone dedicated to the destruction of America.

Posted by: jcricket on January 10, 2006 at 12:34 AM | PERMALINK

He works for the Guardian. There are two Ali Fadhil's btw. One's the journo. One's a famous blogger.

Posted by: McA on January 10, 2006 at 1:37 AM | PERMALINK

Glad to know you're an American though...it makes the debate more germane.

Posted by: Jimm on January 9, 2006 at 9:10 PM | PERMALINK

Why? Isn't the denate about Iraq?

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 1:40 AM | PERMALINK

""By the way would your name being "gastroguy" have anything to do with that ass? Thought so. P.U!!:

Why do liberals alwasy have to attack the man or the group? Not the arguement? Taht's called "mis-direction. P.U! to that sort of dishonesty. And lefitists like jcriket do it ALL THE TIME. Hey Im used to that sort of thing. You can use porofanity. You can censor my comments. Dont hide the truth though. This guy may have picutres of socalled 'insurgents" or not. Taht burden of proof is on you, the one who started this thread. My job is to ask you quaestions: CAN YOU HANLDLE THE TRUTH? ABOUT LEFTISt BIAS? There is an answer you can'st find, my friend. Or I'll bet dollars to donugts you cant find it. Silly liberals when will you ever learn?

--------------------

":Give me liberals or give me ... on seoncond thought, just give me death.'? - GastroGuy269

Posted by: GastroGuy269 on January 10, 2006 at 1:43 AM | PERMALINK

Go go Gastro! Speak truth to power!

Posted by: McA on January 10, 2006 at 1:45 AM | PERMALINK

amused condescension.

Oh dear. That's not a sentiment I generally associate with you. More like our friend Mr. Brosz. Have I missed something?

Posted by: LW Phil on January 10, 2006 at 1:46 AM | PERMALINK

it was 35 degrees (centigrade) here at 2 am in the morning on New Year's Day

It was 35 Fahrenheit where I was (Montana). Too damned hot, as you were experiencing. Glad to know you enjoyed the heat, but it ruined the snowboarding for me. Nevertheless, best to you and all down under, even fricking McA.

Posted by: LW Phil on January 10, 2006 at 1:52 AM | PERMALINK

The purpose of embedding the reporters is to censor their reports and prevent the truth from being discovered or printed. One cannot have rogue Iraqis roaming around upsetting this plan. Journalist or not, he has to learn a lesson. This time he lived. Next time....the punishment is graduated for whomever failed to learn.....America watched Saddam Hussein and learned well that if you kill a man, kill all of his family as well so that you leave no vengeance seekers...that's why you do the home invasion....a lesson from one dictator to another

Posted by: murmeister on January 10, 2006 at 2:26 AM | PERMALINK

Still, this whole "targeting journalists" thing is starting to look more credible every day, isn't it?

I thought that it was your opinion that U.S. troops rousted thousands of innocent Iraqis every week? What makes you think a journalist was "targeted" on a day that saw dozens of such raids? What makes you think that the American soldiers actually "blasted" their way into an undefended home?

Really, this story demands some of your ironic detachment, instead of your credence. It does raise the profile of the missing millions though, doesn't it?

Posted by: contentious on January 10, 2006 at 2:42 AM | PERMALINK

you kill a man, kill all of his family as well so that you leave no vengeance seekers...that's why you do the home invasion....a lesson from one dictator to another

Posted by: murmeister on January 10, 2006 at 2:26 AM | PERMALINK

So why let him go?

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 2:46 AM | PERMALINK

This is a graduated lesson. The first lesson is that your family is not safe. the next lesson wil be for other journalists....we are not kidding.....look at the bodies

Posted by: murmeister on January 10, 2006 at 3:19 AM | PERMALINK

Why do people assume the corruption he found was Iraqi?

He specifically says it has to do with US & UK handling of funds.

There's plenty of shit to go around.

Posted by: Tilli (Mojave Desert) on January 10, 2006 at 4:03 AM | PERMALINK

Why? Isn't the denate about Iraq?

No, Tom and I were discussing rampant corruption in American politics and the GOP, and Tom seemed to suggest that this was nothing unusual for American politics and the GOP. So I asked him if he was implying that the GOP has been besot with corruption as a norm.

Posted by: Jimm on January 10, 2006 at 4:14 AM | PERMALINK

And, I did present that to Tom with amused condescension.

Also, the regulars here at Washington Monthly are in rare form and hilarious tonight.

Cheers!

Posted by: Jimm on January 10, 2006 at 4:15 AM | PERMALINK

Tit for tat Tom. You weren't being a leetle nasty about the Bay Area ??? I have spent a lot of time in Texas. It is a complex place, and has some of the best regional cuisine in America (as long as you aren't vegetarian). But, as you yourself have evinced, Lubbock, despite its staunch support for Mr. Bush, is no place to live compared to NoCal.

I was poking a little fun at my own area. Looking back at your post, which was more humorous than anything else, I probably overreacted. I hear so much belittling crap directed at middle Americans sometimes. Ironic, I suppose, considering I recently accused someone of "hair-trigger sensibilities" or something along those lines. Sorry.

I've worked in Texas for a short while, and thought the place was great, if muggy. Where I live in the south Bay Area is great, too. I can go downtown and hit thirty ethnic restaurants in five blocks, and the place is mostly liberal, but the schools are good, and it's downright "red" compared to San Francisco.

Come to think of it, everyplace I've traveled has been pretty decent. Even France, where despite the stereotypes, I (an obvious American) was never treated with anything other than courtesy.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 10, 2006 at 4:24 AM | PERMALINK

I'll second the comment about France. People there, like most people anywhere, seem pretty easy-going. Bostonians are the most agressive drivers I've ever encountered, but they too are pretty friendly face to face.

It may be a matter of attitude. Angry, aggressive people probably have as negative a reaction to the locals as the locals have to them.

Posted by: bad Jim on January 10, 2006 at 4:47 AM | PERMALINK

On the posted topic, Juan Cole wrote:

This is very troubling on all sorts of levels. US troops do not have a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq and do not have a constitutional right to arrest civilians without a warrant. And, the US military should not be harassing journalists reporting on contract fraud.

The fact that the tapes have yet to be returned is rather suggestive.

Posted by: bad Jim on January 10, 2006 at 4:50 AM | PERMALINK

The fact that the tapes have yet to be returned is rather suggestive.

Posted by: bad Jim on January 10, 2006 at 4:50 AM | PERMALINK

The fact that he's alive to tell of them is also suggestive. Saddam Hussein isn't in power.

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 5:02 AM | PERMALINK

Thanks McAristotle. We should wish our lucky stars that Saddam Hussein is no longer under the bed (or in the closet:).

Posted by: Jimm on January 10, 2006 at 5:08 AM | PERMALINK

"I'm fine where I am, thanks. I'd like to think if I did move to Texas, I'd do it without the air of superiority and amused condescension towards other Americans that seems to be a hallmark of many liberals."~tbrosz

Boys, I think we're looking at irony.

Posted by: Ace Franze on January 10, 2006 at 8:33 AM | PERMALINK

They had this guy (the journalist) on NPR's Morning Edition. He believes the US when they said it was a case of mistaken identity, and gave him $1,500 ($1,000 for damage to his house, and $500 for his time keeping him over night). They have his tape (footage of the Green Zone).

Not sure what I make of all of this.

Posted by: OwnedByTwoCats on January 10, 2006 at 9:21 AM | PERMALINK

Ah, yes, McAristotle, I forgot the new right-wing standard for behavior. As long as you're not as bad as Saddam Hussein, it's okay.

Posted by: KCinDC on January 10, 2006 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

Sick and tired of all of the liberals knocking our administration of our 51st state. Have you not considered the "freedom and democracy" we have spread to Afghanistan? "Freedom" abounds throughout their land. Why Karzai's Supreme Court and his hand picked Chief Justice have announced that the two journalists who were critical of Islam should receive death sentences. Why, in the past, the Taliban would have killed them without a trial. Freedom is on the march.
The Chief Justice wants amputation and stoning for thievery and adultery, respectively. Freedom is on the march.
The Chief Justice wants co-ed schools closed. Freedom is on the march.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on January 10, 2006 at 9:58 AM | PERMALINK

LW Phil: amused condescension...Oh dear. That's not a sentiment I generally associate with you.

Me neither. Ouch!

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 10:04 AM | PERMALINK

thethirdpaul, just like every other buttinsky liberal, you simply want to impose your social-engineering values on others. Typical.

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

The Chief Justice wants co-ed schools closed. Freedom is on the march.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on January 10, 2006 at 9:58 AM | PERMALINK

Democracy is democracy.

The left is ridiculous. No change except instant transformation into a liberal european society is worthwhile, and since that change is impossible, no change is good.

The third world belongs in a ghetto with not
trade in the first world for not having unions and lesbian marriage.....

At the end of the day, its all a pretext for not exposing your unions to competition.


Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

Ever since LW Phil went to Big Mountain to snow board and had to kayak down the raging glacial streams to the airport, he has been become a changed man.

Posted by: stupid git on January 10, 2006 at 10:13 AM | PERMALINK

Ever since LW Phil went to Big Mountain to snow board and had to kayak down the raging glacial streams to the airport, he has been become a changed man.

Curbside check-in was loads easier that way.

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 10:14 AM | PERMALINK

Not sure what I make of all of this.

Monty Python is 2066: "No one expects the American Inquisition!"

Posted by: Tripp on January 10, 2006 at 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

I can't put my finger on the statistics, but more journalists have been killed so far in Iraq than in the entire Vietnam war (which was noted for its up front reporting & far more graphic photo journalism than we have seen come out of Iraq) -- that could a be coincidence, but I don't really believe that.

Posted by: Prior Aelred on January 10, 2006 at 10:23 AM | PERMALINK

The NPR story is online here.

Meanwhile, American journalist Jill Carroll, in the hands of people who have routinely killed journalists, is still missing.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 10, 2006 at 10:38 AM | PERMALINK

I believe that the BBC and Editor and Publisher have listed the number of journalists killed in the Viet Nam conflict as 63. As of late 04, the number of journalists killed in Iraq had reached 66. The latest numbers are around 100.

However, journalists are being killed and imprisoned around the world. Last year 7 were killed in the Phillipines. China has imprisoned at least 15. We take freedom of the press for granted. In foreign lands, one can be killed or imprisoned for writing anything critical of the government, the drug trade and/or corruption.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on January 10, 2006 at 11:06 AM | PERMALINK

Me neither. Ouch!

It was a joke, people! Crikey, I can't even poke fun at my own team anymore!

Posted by: craigie on January 10, 2006 at 11:10 AM | PERMALINK

Tbrosz:
Even France, where despite the stereotypes, I (an obvious American) was never treated with anything other than courtesy.

Yeah, damn those French for not being the cardboard cutouts we want!

What was it that gave you away, Tom? Was it when you said "Luke, I am your father" in your best scuba voice?

Posted by: craigie on January 10, 2006 at 11:14 AM | PERMALINK

The military. like the paramilitary police forces in corrupt city administrations, are quite often the "muscle" in the illegal transactions. Sometimes wittingly, sometimes unwittingly, but they are often used simply because they are lawfully armed and trained to follow orders blindly and hold extreme unthinking right wing attitudes of supporting authority at all costs against any reason. They are the perfect tools for King George W the First and his Unmerry Band of Thieves.

Thanks murmeister. Even though the men and women in the military are trained to obey orders, they must take responsibility for their actions if they are unlawful or immoral. In this case they should have arrested their commanders instead of the journalist. I blame the men and women who have chosen to follow our evil leaders, and their parents for raising such ignorant children, for giving the US the capability to wage war. Citizens must stop venerating their service and condemn their willingness to obey.

Posted by: Powerpuff on January 10, 2006 at 11:15 AM | PERMALINK

McA grasps for straws...But there's no reason to assume he isn't someone who might hide an insurgent.

when he's not erecting strawmen. Pretty lame even for you McA.

Posted by: ckelly on January 10, 2006 at 11:47 AM | PERMALINK

...but he's still fixing the Middle East..

Oh I think that's open to debate.

Posted by: ckelly on January 10, 2006 at 11:48 AM | PERMALINK

You know, when the DoD does stuff like this, it only adds fuel to the fire...

William M. Arkin on National and Homeland Security
The Army's Buying PR

Word comes from RL that the Army has hired PR firm Hass MS&L of Detroit to offer "exclusive editorial content" to blogs willing to run government propaganda.

"The Army believes that military blogs are a valuable medium for reaching out," account executive Charlie Kondek has written to a number of pro-military blogs in a January 6 Email.

"To that end, the Army plans to offer you and selected bloggers exclusive editorial content on a few issues youre likely to be interested in," Kondek says. The Email has been mentioned in Black Five, One Hand Clapping and Fuzzilicious Thinking.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 10, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

But Pale Rider, Red-State Mike, or is it Mike K (I can't recall) is always telling us that the unvarnished truth can be found in milblogs.

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 12:17 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop,

I believe tbrosz upbraided me for trolling on milblogs, and specifically cited BlackFive. The Pale Rider is banned from commenting on BlackFive because he went in there and explained that they were really just racist little wannabes who knew nothing about reality. The collective military experience of BlackFive is laughable when you look at the bios that they have posted on there.

Now, they went and passed "The Pale Rider Law" which means that if you anonymously annoy people on blogs, you can be held liable.

What's a troll to do? I get in trouble for damned near everything these days. I can't even put up song lyrics without someone bitching at me.

I guess I better go back to work here at the bottle washing factory...

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 10, 2006 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

craigie:

What was it that gave you away, Tom? Was it when you said "Luke, I am your father" in your best scuba voice?

Hey, all I had to do was open my mouth. I don't speak French, although as Heinlein once said, learning things like "please" and "thank you" in French (and later Italian) are easy enough, and go a long way to help make a good impression. My main problem in Italy was not slipping into Spanish (of which I speak very little). I was over there during the Great Heat Wave, and my wife, who struggled with a walker through the tour, had to be hospitalized in Italy for the night. Word to the wise--when a tour offers that "extra insurance?" Take it. I'm damn glad I did. The entire thing cost me absolutely nothing, and national medical care or not, this would not have been the case otherwise.

thirdPaul:

I believe that the BBC and Editor and Publisher have listed the number of journalists killed in the Viet Nam conflict as 63. As of late 04, the number of journalists killed in Iraq had reached 66. The latest numbers are around 100.

A recent story on this can be found here, including a number of important details, like who did the killing, and who was being killed. You see, this number includes Iraqi journalists. The Vietnam one is just The website is a good source for tracking this information.

The AJR cites about 15 of these deaths out of the 100 resulting from American military action. The "sound bite" that will probably be carried away from this particular article will be "American firepower has been the second-leading cause of the fatalities (after death at the hands of the insurgents)." Mathematically, of course, this is technically true. The numbers 85 and 15 aren't likely to make the cut.

Posted by: tbrosz on January 10, 2006 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

"To that end, the Army plans to offer you and selected bloggers exclusive editorial content on a few issues youre likely to be interested in," Kondek says."

So there's something wrong with this, but posts reprinting the seemingly endless output of "anonymous sources," speeches by politicians, or items out of a book that is basically a political hit piece, are all just fine, and perfectly objective. Am I getting this right?

Posted by: tbrosz on January 10, 2006 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

So there's something wrong with this, but posts reprinting the seemingly endless output of "anonymous sources," speeches by politicians, or items out of a book that is basically a political hit piece, are all just fine, and perfectly objective. Am I getting this right?

Yes. You're a master of the obvious today. But if you think the DoD and the US Army should get into bed with milbloggers, fine.

It does sort of blow your worldview into a million disappointed little pieces, doesn't it? I mean, up til now, wasn't BlackFive just the coolest thing since sliced bread? Now they get their bread courtesy of some public affairs hack working in the A-ring of the Pentagon.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 10, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

Am I getting this right?

Whenever you feel the urge to ask that question, Tom, just skip ahead to the "No." For a guy who supposedly distrusts Big Brother, you keep knocking the other kids down in your stampede to show obeisance to the (current) federal government.

Do you have any critical analysis skills left at all?

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 1:09 PM | PERMALINK

This thread so far can be summed up in two points:

McAristotle: any atrocities or suffering that happen in Afghanistan or Iraq are OK because they're not as bad in my opinion as the atrocities and suffering that used to happen there.

tbrosz: I will try and engender some goodwill by talking about all the nice places I've visited. Oh -- and now that I've been proven wrong on the whole "milblogs are the objective truth" issue I feel compelled to say that other sources of information aren't objective either -- so it doesn't matter.

Posted by: trex on January 10, 2006 at 1:17 PM | PERMALINK

I've always admired your ability to cut to the chase, trex.

Posted by: shortstop on January 10, 2006 at 1:27 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin,

I've always considered you one of the more rational moonbats, kind of like Moe being the smartest of the stooges, but this entry should explain to you why you guys will not be allowed near the levers of power in this country for many years. If you honestly believe there is a conspiracy so vast that some flunky from the Guardian is considered more important than the guys who blew up the police ceremony you need to take another vacation. It is tragic that in 60 years the media of this country has gone from Ernie Pyle to Ernie Pile-on.

Posted by: minion of rove on January 10, 2006 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

Mike K: Especially journalists with terrorist connections.

Just another dishonest piece of sh*t from a lying assh*le, as usual.

Posted by: Advocate for God on January 10, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

...but he's still fixing the Middle East..

Oh I think that's open to debate. - ckelly

But he's beating it with a hammer so obviously he's fixing it. Why else would you beat something with a hammer?

Posted by: Eric Paulsen on January 10, 2006 at 5:00 PM | PERMALINK

McAristotle: any atrocities or suffering that happen in Afghanistan or Iraq are OK because they're not as bad in my opinion as the atrocities and suffering that used to happen there.

Posted by: trex on January 10, 2006 at 1:17 PM | PERMALINK

Close. Replace 'quite a lot' with 'any' and add ' There is more improvement now under Bush than under any previous administration, more good done than by the loudest liberal'.

Liberals, raising the bar on change to support inaction. Loud, whiney and ineffective.

Posted by: McAristotle on January 10, 2006 at 10:02 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not so sure the insurgent sympathizer label is accurate. A quick google for Ali Fadhil indicates that his journalist of the year award was for his work documenting what happened to the civilian population during the attack on Falluja.

I will remind you insurgent is not the same as terrorist, despite how the US media has begun to use these words interchangeably. An insurgent can be any civilian who opposes or attacks a US soldier for any reason.

If US soldier's shot a boy's dog and the boy chucked a rock at a soldier's head in retaliation, the boy would be an insurgent.

Posted by: Mr. D on January 11, 2006 at 4:30 AM | PERMALINK

An update on this story. I just heard an NPR interview with the journalist in question, and he doesn't believe he was targeted by US forces. He believes he was a victim of mistaken identity. They let him go after a few hours with a cash reimbursement of $1500 for the damage to his apartment and his time. The thing he was still pissed off about was that the occupants of the other houses on his block that were raided have not been released, and were not compensated for the damage to their homes, which was much more extensive. He attributes this to the fact they were not journalists working for western media. He believes that if were an innocent average Joe, he would still be in custody.

Posted by: doktorwise on January 11, 2006 at 11:10 AM | PERMALINK

歌曲和歌手列表
music and singer list

map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map

Posted by: music actor on January 11, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly