Monday, February 7: Lucianne.com readers, please follow this link for breaking news on the Eason Jordan story.
—————————————————————————————————-
Note (2/6 @ 9:45 a.m.): Thank you, Lucianne. It’s good to finally get some high-profile credit for all this tracking and linking I’m doing. I’ll see you all when I return from church!
Note II: HaloScan users, to trackback to this post, use SimpleTracks. Word Press and HaloScan don’t get along well.
Self-Promotion Note III: To editors of all kind, television and radio talk show hosts: In addition to blogging, I’m also a freelance writer. If my widely expressed disappointment in the media isn’t a deterrent, and you’re looking for real diversity, I’m available for assignments and interviews. True diversity includes different points of view, not just different colored skin.
Readers: If you have exclusive news tips, please e-mail me by clicking the “Contact Me” button on the left.
Please scroll to the bottom for the latest developments. For background information all in one place, see the Easongate category.
Note IV (2/7): Scroll to the bottom for the latest developments. Find out what CNN’s Judy Woodruff had to say about the Eason Jordan story.
Breaking News: Michelle Malkin speaks to Rep. Barney Frank. See update below.
———————————————————————————————–
For background on the Eason Jordan controversy, see the original post, the Eason Jordan Repository Part I and Part II. You’re reading The Eason Jordan Repository III. Additionally, blogger Sisyphus will have the videotape of Jordan’s remarks next week.
If you have the time, check out those posts, which contain dozens of links. If not, the following chronology from press critic Jay Rosen’s blog may be more helpful:
* Do US Troops Target Journalists in Iraq? (Rony Abovitz, ForumBlog.org, Jan. 28)That’s the original account of Eason’s remarks. Abovitz, a vice president of a medical technology firm and a participant in the Forum but not a reporter, followed that up with:
* Journalists Killed in Iraq — The Core Issues. (Feb. 3)
Which was after he had returned to the United States. Then see:
* Rony Abovitz replies to Questions from Hugh Hewitt (Feb. 4)
Rebecca MacKinnon — journalist, blogger and Berkman Center fellow — was also there: “I was in the room and Rony’s account is consistent with what I heard,” she writes.
* Blogstorm descending on CNN (Feb. 2)
MacKinnon is a former correspondent for CNN: Eason Jordan was her boss then. She writes to him for an explanation and gets one:
* Response from Eason Jordan to MacKinnon. (Feb. 2)
Another statement from Jordan came to blogger Carol Platt Liebau:
* Response from Eason Jordan to Liebau. (Feb. 2)
In a nutshell: At the World Economic Forum (described as the “foremost global community of business, political, intellectual and other leaders of society committed to improving the state of the world”) Eason Jordan, a CNN executive and journalist, made the stunning accusation that American troops had targeted and killed journalists. These statements were made while on a discussion panel with journalist David Gergen, Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd.
Rony Abovitz wrote about it on the forum’s blog, and his account of Jordan’s statements was corroborated by journalist and blogger Rebecca MacKinnon. At the time Abovitz challenged Jordan on his assertion and asked if he had proof. Jordan said no and that he didn’t believe it himself. Abovitz adds:
[W]hen pressed by others, he [Jordan] seemed to waver back and forth between what might have been his beliefs and the realization that he had created a kind of public mess. His statements, his reaction, and the reaction of all in attendance left me perplexed and confused. Many in the crowd, especially those from Arab nations, applauded what he said and called him a “very brave man” for speaking up against the U.S. in a public way amongst a crowd ready to hear anti-US sentiments. (Source)
So why would Jordan say something like this, before an international audience, against his own countrymen fighting and dying in Iraq, if he had no proof and didn’t believe it anyway?
In the original post, I referred to Jordan as “some guy who works for CNN,” but we know at this point he’s much more than that. Back in 2003, he admitted to suppressing information about Iraqi thug Saddam Hussein’s murdering regime in,
The News We Kept To Ourselves. (Read the op-ed at Scripting News.)
Hugh Hewitt wrote about it in Cross-Examing Jordan. He asserts that the suppression, among other things, made Jordan complicit in Hussein’s regime. Based on Jordan’s own admission, Hewitt’s assertion is not an overstatement.
The aforementioned column by Jack Kelly was published today in the Toledo Blade. About the recent kidnapped GI Joe doll incident, Kelly writes: “[W]hy are major media so quick to disseminate anything that a terrorist group, or purported terrorist group, releases? For the terrorist, it is like being given millions of dollars in free advertising.”
Yes, why are mainstream media (MSM) so quick to report news releases from terrorists but not what I consider to be treasonous allegations made by an American journalist before an international audience of America haters during wartime? When it comes to anything even remotely damaging to U.S. involvement abroad, they’re all over it like flies on cow dung.
Now one of their own accuses the military of assassinating journalists, and it merits nary a paragraph. Why? In my assessment, they haven’t covered it because they know it’s not true. No American troops deliberately went after journalists, and they might be a tad embarrassed that Jordan “ran off at the mouth,” as they say.
In sharp contrast, MSM picked on statments made by Lt. Gen. James Mattis within 24 hours:
A senior U.S. Marine Corps general who said it was “fun to shoot some people” should have chosen his words more carefully but will not be disciplined, military officials said on Thursday.Lt. Gen. James Mattis, who led troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, made the comments at a conference Tuesday in San Diego.
“Actually it’s quite fun to fight ‘em, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up front with you, I like brawling,” said Mattis.
“You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil,” Mattis said during a panel discussion. “You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. (Source)
If one man’s statements merit so much attention, surely the same can be said for journalist-murdering American warriors, don’t you think?
But no. They go after a marine speaking at a conference: Washington Post, New York Times, Boston Globe and Los Angeles Times, just to name a few.
The flies-on-cow-dung image is as disgusting as MSM’s selective coverage and “objective” reporting.
Update: A commenter reminded me of MSM’s coverage of Lt. General Boykin back in 2003. Boykin said, correctly, that the war on terrorism is a religious war. It was an un-PC thing to say. Muslims and religious “freedom” groups complained, and MSM wrote about it for weeks on end. Selective coverage indeed.
Sources: General Seeks ‘Satan’ Speech Probe, Senator Feinstein’s statement, Thank God for General Boykin…
———————————————————————————–
Power Line, Wizbang, Ed Driscoll…
Update II (Sunday, February 6): Hugh Hewitt speaks out on MSNBC.
Rony Abovitz expresses frustration with us “right wing bloggers,” quoting the often misunderstood Scripture, “Before Eason is stoned, are we sure that we are all without sin?”
Hewitt replies:
I appreciate RA’s candor and willingness to answer all posed questions — we wouldn’t know of this story except for Rony’s original post — but George Bush’s Iraq policy has nothing to do with the issue today. No one is about to “stone” Eason Jordan — he is catching hell for slandering the good men and women in uniform. That’s all. You can’t blast heroes as killers and walk off the field to a cocktail parties in Davos and pretend nothing happened. This isn’t an ideological debate about whether it was wise to invade Iraq and whether 25 million Iraqis are better off today than they were two years ago, though they most certainly are. It is about whether a senior American news executive can slander the people who are fighting — and dying or being wounded — and do so without consequence. Don’t try and raise the issue to one of “blogosphere ethics.” It isn’t that at all. It is about what Eason Jordan said and the refusal — thus far — of MSM to call him on it. It is solely about MSM ethics, or lack thereof.
Jay Rosen as PressThink says, “Eason Jordan’s Job is the Political Job in TV News.”
Michelle Malkin:
Washington Post media reporter / CNN host Howard Kurtz is scheduled to do an online Q&A tomorrow at noon eastern. As Mickey Kaus helpfully points out, the Post is already accepting questions for Kurtz here. So if there’s anything you’d like to ask Kurtz — for example, if there’s a certain story you think he should be covering but isn’t — here’s your chance.
More from Captain Ed here and here. Are MSM’s lights coming on???
Update III (1:36 p.m.): Leave it to innovative bloggers to “cash in.” The newly minted Easongate blog is a must-read site if you’re following the blogger-generated story of Eason Jordan and his outlandish statements.
Mick Stockinger at Uncorrelated has as international commentary on Jordan translated from French.
Blogger David asks why bloggers are all over Jordan but not Ward Churchill, who made some boneheaded remarks about victims of the 9-11 terrorist attacks:
[B]oth of these guys have said things that are beyond the pale. Both are suffering from intellectual dishonesty to say the very least. But the bloggers I mentioned above, and the blogosphere in general seem to be treating them differently.While condemning what Churchill said, it appears that most bloggers are defending his right to say it and saying that it would be wrong to fire him for his “free speech.” But at the same time, these bloggers seem to be all for CNN firing Jordan for exercising the same free speech rights.
Actually, the blogosphere has been covering the Churchill story. (See AcademicBias.com as an example.)
The difference I see is that while Churchill’s nasty remarks about American victims of the war against Islamofascism are just that, nasty, Jordan’s remarks are much more damaging to our efforts.
Jordan is (or was) an internationally respected journalist and CNN executive, and I’m sure he wields a lot of influence. Before an international audience that already appeared hostile to the U.S. and our efforts in Iraq, he said that American troops are murdering journalists. It’s a slanderous charge, and whether or not he believed it, he should not have said it. No one is curtailing is freedom to speak, but speaking has consequences.
Jimmie as The Sundries Shack notes that today on Howard Kurtz’s show, there was no mention of Eason Jordan. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer had Sen. Chris Dodd on his show, one of the men present when Eason Jordan made the allegations, and didn’t ask him about Jordan. Nothing. Well, can you blame Blitzer? Jordan is his superior. And I’m certain CNN doesn’t have its story together yet. Yes, we’re all waiting for the videotape, but CNN should release a statement before then, and not the same canned e-mail statement they’ve been sending to bloggers.
Side note: Trey Jackson has compiled a birthday tribute to Ronald Reagan.
American Digest believes nothing will happen with the Jordan story:
You see you can blast heroes as killers and walk off the field to cocktail parties in Davos and pretend nothing happened if you and your cohort control the careers of all that might expose you…That’s how, absent a net worth of at least $500 million, you get to Davos in the first place.
My Sandmen has a good round-up of links.
More on Jordan v. Mattis from Malkin.
Update IV (3:30 p.m.): Hugh Hewitt interviews Rebecca MacKinnon, the blogger and journalist who corroborated Rony Abovitz’s version of Eason Jordan’s remarks. An excerpt:
Q: Is the blogopshere being “fair” to Mr. Jordan? Ought he to give an interview to one or more bloggers who are pursuing this story?A: We can’t deny that there is a lot of herd and mob behavior in the blogosphere. Having been attacked in the past by real-life mobs as well as by blog-mobs, I feel pretty confident in saying this (and I say this as someone who is proud to be a blogger). I think there are definitely some mob dynamics going on with this story. That said, there are also many bloggers who are trying to get to the bottom of this in a fair and rational manner. It would make sense for Jordan to speak to those bloggers.
(Via Power Line)
Resonant Information defends Eason Jordan’s claims:
[T]o all the bloggers and commenters out there that never bothered to look this up, all out of easily found information, you have no room to talk about sloppy journalism or make accusations against Eason Jordan. It’s one thing to be wrong; it’s another entirely to not even try, and then decry others for their errors, and make accusations about “treason” and “slander”. I find it telling that out of all the blogs I saw talking about this, of all the comments, only one blogger and one commenter even bothered to look up the deaths in even a casual fashion…
Zed misses the point. It’s not that we need proof of journalists’ deaths. I’m certain journalists were among the collateral damage. But Jordan used the word targeted.
Hewitt responds to Zed:
Perhaps the new group will turn its attention to this pathetic attempt to buttress Jordan’s claim by attempting to provide evidence for the claim via the collection of data bursts on journalists’ deaths in Iraq. Keep in mind that Jordan specifically asserted that what he was talking about was not the sort of “collateral damage” death that folks know have happened. Jordan employed “targeted” which means the intentional killing. It will be interesting to see if this list and the “analysis” it offers is what Jordan had in mind.
Unasked question: Why isn’t Matt Drudge talking about this? Does he know something we don’t know?
A poster at Free Republic speculates about the death of journalists in Iraq. Captain Ed adds his own comments.
Update V (6:17 p.m.): The Press-Enterprise (fee registration required) has written an editorial about Eason Jordan:
If U.S. troops in Iraq targeted journalists for assassination, that would be a huge story. If the source of the story were a top cable news executive, it would earn continuous coverage.CNN’s chief news executive, Eason Jordan, said Jan. 27 on a world stage that “he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops, but they had in fact been targeted,” according to Rony Abovitz of the World Economic Forum’s weblog.
Problem is, Jordan has provided no facts to substantiate this very serious charge. Now the claim, which Jordan floated at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, is spreading through anti-American circles in Europe and the Middle East.
Jordan’s words matter because CNN is, in the eyes of much of the world, the “voice of America.” If its news chief is reporting fabrications to global leaders at elite summits, it’s another blow to media credibility at home, and to the United States’ reputation abroad.
(Via Easongate)
The Lone Star Times has a blog, and they’re blogging about Eason Jordan.
——————————————————————————————
Update VI (Monday, February 7): Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd were present at the World Economic Forum where Eason Jordan accused our military of targeting journalists for slaughter. What do these politicians have to say? Contact them and find out.
STATUS OF THE VIDEOTAPE: Blogger Sisyphus, who is trying to obtain a copy of the videotape of the conference, updated his post early this morning:
I just got off the phone with Mr. Adams. [Media Director at the World Economic Fourm] He confirmed again that he has the video. He also confirmed that he will provide the video, but they need to first unpack the boxes of 200+ videos from the conference today.He will call me back today and confirm arrangements for delivery.
He also confirmed that I’m “not the only one who wants it”.
Tick, tick, tick,…
Many of us are wondering why Adams is making copies of a videotape and why the recording is not digitized for disemination online. Yesterday Sisyphus wrote:
I spent much of today on the phone with Robert Cox from Media Bloggers Association. We are trying to get a footprint in Geneva to work directly with Mr. Adams to get the video digitized and in our possession. Starting around 2:00AM EST tonight (8:00AM Geneva time, Superbowl should be over by then), we will be working contacts in Geneva and trying to reach Mr. Adams to expedite getting the video digitized and hosted online.
Make sure you read the whole post.
GayPatriot wrote about Eason Jordan back on January 31. He credits Rep. Barney Frank for pressing Jordan for proof that American troops were killing journalists. Check it out. (Hat tip: Myopic Zeal)
Update VII (8:50 a.m.): Nothing in the papers on Eason Jordan, but Hugh Hewitt will be on Bill Bennett’s show this morning, no doubt talking about the media blackout.
The latest from Captain’s Quarters:
UPDATE X, 2/7 06:39: Still nothing on any of the search engines. They continue to ignore the story…and us. We should be expanding our demands past CNN to all news agencies now, asking for answers for the dearth of honest reporting on Eason Jordan.
The Bear blogs about the controversy.
Press critic Jay Rosen has more. Also see Captain Ed’s comments.
Cassandra at Villainous Company has a hilarious take on the whole mess.
Update VIII (10:23 a.m.): From Hewitt:
Jon Lauck just talked to Judy Woodruff in the hallway and asked about Eason Jordan. Woodruff told Jon that she had not heard of the story, and after a quick summary, Jon reports she appeared to be stunned by the idea that Eason Jordan, with whom she talks nearly every day, would say that the American military targeted journalists.
Update IX (11:51 a.m.): Rep. Barney Frank confirms that Eason Jordan said the American military had targeted journalists. (Hat tip:Power Line)
Bill Roggio of Easongate will on Kevin McCullough’s radio show today to talk about the story.
{ 18 trackbacks }
{ 35 comments }
A prime case of “US bad, Global approval good”.
I wonder what other backroom deals went into CNN and Al Jeezera’s cozy content sharing relationship?
I guess in Eason’s mind, 300+ million americans are a drop in the bucket to the 1 billion plus and growing market share of the rest of the world. Follow the money. Maligning America = Mo’ money.
There were also remarks by a general named Boykins, I believe — another interesting contrast. A practicing Christian the general was offering “testimony” before fellow believers and made some remark about the “false god” of the Muslims. Of course the MSM was all over that in a heartbeat.
But a true-believing secular leftist speaking before his co-religionists enjoys a privacy comparable to the seals of a priest’s confessional.
Double standards abound.
” When it comes to anything even remotely damaging to U.S. involvement abroad, they’re all over it like flies on cow dung.”
I like the comparison , it’s a little bit rude but real! The truth hurt.
J’aime bien la comparaison , c’est un peu dur , mais vrai! La vérité blesse.
Thank for your vigilance .
Eason has made similar statements before; the most recent being in Oct just before the election. He was hired by Ted Turner because Turner hates America. Eason has not been and will not be punished because he is doing what CNN wants him to do – smear America. Just like Dan was not fired for Rathergate, Viacom also wants to smear America. If you have not figured it out yet – the MSM has had for 60 years and anti-America bias.
My copy of Rules for Radicals is in storage, so I can’t get the exact quote. In it Saul Alinsky writes about the dark side of capitalism saying that an American business man would be willing to sell arms to any country on Friday and if he made money on the deal even if he knew those arms would be used against America on Monday. Jordan’s comments are nothing more than CNN in a ratings cellar in the US trying to make big bucks in the global market. Sadly, many leftists will only see CNN’s America bashing as an example of their “high principles.”
What I want to know is why the media blackout? Does CNN have something on the other networks so they dare not cover this? Or is this just an example of professional courtesy?
Howard Kurtz is being forced to write about the scandal now or else risk career-damaging ridicule from bloggers like this:
Priceless
Do you notice how the MSM covers for its own?They love to break those stories about crooked businessmen, lecherous priests,rolling SUV’s, Alar on apples(remember that one?)and anything that shows corruption in an institution that they choose.But when it comes to corruption inside their own institution they circle the wagons and turn a blind eye.The double standard and lack of introspection is appalling.
Hypothetical questions,
If I see a US soldier shoot a journalist, should I report it? Or should I keep quiet about it because it would ’slander the good men and women in uniform’?
If I see US soldiers acting inhumanely to prisoners, should I report it? Or should I keep quiet so as not to hurt the reputation of America in the world?
Or should I keep quiet because I don’t want to be attacked by a ‘blog-swarm’?
Conservatives seem to want to impose a speech code on public discourse in order to protect the good image of America, but what they don’t seem to remember is that nothing could be more UN-AMERICAN than a speech code.
Conservatives seem to want to impose a speech code on public discourse in order to protect the good image of America, but what they don’t seem to remember is that nothing could be more UN-AMERICAN than a speech code. by miguel
Oh this one is classic, it is all Americas fault.
don’t these so-called journalists, and I use the term very loosely, have a Right to be there, well certainly they do but they also have an obligation to their country.
When has any recent Journalists reported anything but lies and half-truths, from the alphabet networks, they are their with the attitude that they have an obligation to demean, and to destroy the President of the United States, as indirectly as they can and sometimes it is not so indirectly.
The So-called prisoner abuse scandal is one huge example of this and the way the press and the extreme left handled it should have been grounds for being charged with sedition.
It used to be the press that went with the troops were called, ‘Reporters’, today however, they have been elevated to Journalist, with an ‘F’ after there name to imply Fiction because this is where they are coming from, the land of Oz.
Gone are the days of the Ernie Pyles and Bill Mauldins, who actually tried to see it from the common ‘grunts’ point of view. Now we have their replacements, the ones who prompt a young soldier to ask questions at Battalion size meeting about Armor retrofits, which the journalist had prompted him on to make the Secretary of Defense look bad this was the sole purpose of that one.
A speech code ?, you ever hear of National Security ?? Obviously the press either has NOT or just plain don’t care, after all its all Americas fault.
These modern journalists are the same kids who when in High School were the ones who got stuffed into the wall lockers because they were such jerks then and they still are, Speech code ???
Maybe the bottom line is they should NOT be there in the first place.
I dont’t believe Eason Jordon, he is your typical left-wing and the attitude of ‘My countrys fault, right or wrong.’ Ramsey Clark incarnated. To even imply that the troops are targeting journalist is absurd, the common soldier has enough trouble taking care of his own well-being let alone worry about some nitwit journalist, who is always in the way and asking dumb questions. These are the same experts who berate the President for any mistakes in Iraq that don’t which end of a rifle the bullet comes out of.
Speeh Code at least send some reporters over there that have a clue of what is really going on and are not afraid to report the TRUTH. For a change..
Mark
“If I see a US soldier shoot a journalist, should I report it?”
Absolutely. So why didn’t he report it? Because he is a coward, a liar, or both?
Hey, There’s a war over there. If you’re a soldier in a firefight for your life and bullets are whizzing by your head, you’re first instinct, and duty BTW, is ’survival’, duh. You’ll have to try it yourself sometime Eason, to get what I really mean. As if.
What are your reporters doing in the line of US fire, Eason. Wouldn’t that put them on the ‘other side’. When a soldier is under fire and people on the other side are pointing things at them, like a ‘camera’ maybe, the soldier will shoot first to survive the fight, then find out what was being
pointed later.
I know in your comfortable armchair warview and international cocktail circuit politics, this may seem like your guys are being targeted. The rest of us want to ask why you came to such a bizarre and negative conclusion about your own countries fighting forces? Isn’t it saying a little more about you than them?
Isn’t it funny how journalists expect us to blindly believe anything they say? That time has come to an end.
“Conservatives seem to want to impose a speech code on public discourse in order to protect the good image of America, but what they don’t seem to remember is that nothing could be more UN-AMERICAN than a speech code.”
No, what conservatives want is someone making allegations in front of an international audience to actually have evidence behind his allegations. If you’re going to accuse US soldiers of purposefully killing journalists, you better bring more than “well, I think it’s happening” to the table. Otherwise, you’re just committing slander.
“Gone are the days of the Ernie Pyles and Bill Mauldins, who actually tried to see it from the common ‘grunts’ point of view.”
I would imagine that the common grunt wasn’t very impressed with the shenanigans at Abu Ghraib, which have lead to a conviction.
Mark,
Miguel does ask some fascinating hypothetical questions. Questions that those on the right seem uninterested in answering.
I agree with the attention the blogosphere has paid this Eason Jordan debacle and am quite upset at the lack of time it’s been afforded in the press.
The key word in Jordan’s statement is “targeted.” Unless Jordan has concrete evidence to back up such a harsh charge then I feel he should be looking for a new job.
Perhaps targeted should be replaced with some variant on the word accidental? In which case, I would probably believe that it could be feasible for a journalist to get caught in some crossfire and be killed ACCIDENTALLY.
But, Miguel’s questions are still very important.
The torture at Abu Ghraib should’ve come out months earlier. It was a scandal that deserved all the attention it got. Just as much attention as should be afforded this Eason Jordan fool.
The Abu Gharaib “scandal” was a farce, and the “torture” nothing more than humiliation. MSM is extremely selective about what is newsworthy and what’s not. The whole thing was blown out of proportion. Forget Miguel’s questions. Commenters Jim and Mark responded to him, and I suspect that Miguel hasn’t read the links I’ve been collecting for the past two days.
Regular readers know that I lose patience with commenters who don’t read the whole post or the links I include, but then question something or raise issues already answered/addressed in the post.
La Shawn,
I suppose this is simply where we will have to disagree ideologically. I agree with your comments on Jordan (and the handy links you’ve gathered for us).
But, I will still have to disagree with your assertion that Abu Ghraib was a farce. Torture or humiliation, it was disgusting for our fine soldiers to participate in such filth.
On a lighter note, La Shawn…who are YOU rooting for tonight? Or, like me, are you totally uninterested?
Totally uninterested. I kicked my football addiction two years ago.
‘The Abu Gharaib “scandal” was a farce, and the “torture” nothing more than humiliation. ‘
Did you read the Tabuga report? Thats by a US general. Not the MSM or CNN (Communist News Network).
Mike M, instead of going thru the rigamore of “fact-checking and sourcing my assertions below, I’m simply going to recap the basic chain of events surrounding Abu Grhaib. If you want to know more, Google is your friend, provided you include “.mil” or “.gov” in your search. Anything else is recycled news after it had gone thru the horse’s mouth. W/o further ado.
1) A very small group of individuals, a clique actually, decided to have some fun with prisoners entrusted to their care.
In spite of MSM/DMC ballyhooing, the Army concentrated on following established procedures that have, or will, culminated with the arrests, trials and conviction of the guilty
2) The clique was lead by a reservist who was a prison guard back home in his civilian life. Coinicdently, this “leader” also had brushes with allegations of abuse towards prisoners entrusted in his care. Furthermore, the bully had domestic issues as well.
3) A fellow soldier from the same unit that this clique belonged to, found out and properly reported it to his chain of command.
4) Like any bureaucracy, theis information percolated to the top as proscribed by military law and investigations launched.
5) Upon conclusion of the IG’s investigation, a report was made and duly publicized in a news release.
6) Almost a month after the news release, the MSM suddenly “discovered” the abuses. Actually, they ignored the story until they got their hands on the photos. As you know, a picture is worth…
7) All the allegations of following orders and coverup conspiracies are just that. Allgeations tossed out by squirming defendants looking to redirect blame.
So the answer to Miquel’s facetious question is this: Duuuuh!! Of course one should report it because misconduct reflects poorly on the military. There is no upside to ignoring bad conduct.
With or without MSM/DNC’s attention, justice would have prevailed because a soldier did what was right, what was moral and what he was supposed to do.
Of course the MSM/DNC discounts the process because in their warped sense of importance, the right thing to do is pick up the phone, or shoot an email to the MSM, before going to the chain of command.
Rather than pointing at the mote in conservative eyes, the illiberals should remove the 2×4 of “blame America first” from their own eyes.
Miguel, next stuuupid question.
Mike M.
Did the relentless media coverage of Abu Graihb and it’s pursuit of the “truth” cause American casualties?
If so, how many?
Did it increase the level of support the terrorist/insurgents received?
Look at when the dramatic upturn in terrorist/insurgent violence in Iraq to answer that question.
Yes, it needed to be told, but when? How? That’s how I reflect about this as I can not quote or speak or link to anyone who has publicly said this or even a passing post to the same thought.
Now with Eason using the word “targeted” sends our common enemies more ammuition to use against us. That’s what some of have been saying all along and the MSM in this country is not getting it.
La Shawn, only the last sentence is addressed to Miquel.
The meat of my comment was addressed to Mike’s “The torture at Abu Ghraib should’ve come out months earlier. It was a scandal that deserved all the attention it got.” statement. I can understand his sincerity, however, it is misguided considering that meme originated with MSM/DNC.
Thanks
Mike, Andy:
Abu Ghraib prison or whatever it is called, was a farce, as Lashawn said it was phoney sham created by the leftist democrats and one bloated Senator from Massachusetts comes to mind, where criticising the government is one thing but what these Morons did is nothing short of sedition.
The ‘Scandal’ should have come earlier ? The Army was investigating long before the main stream democrat patsies even got wind of it. The Military will always prosecute its own, and it became nothing but a political football, with the democrats long association with Larry Flynnt and that slime Michael Moore, I am even surprised Ted ‘hick’ Kennedy would have even noticed. But he did and went in front of the world and proclaimed for the enemy to take solace in the fact that he is on their side and would do anything it takes to destroy this country, and he is trying to do the same thing to todays troops that he did 32 years ago, when he and Hanoi John Kerry did to us but this time he will not get away with it. For 35 some years we have put up with this crap and enough is enough, there were and still are a couple of million angry Vietnam Vets that finally let their voices be heard, and we will not stop this time not until OUR country Wins the War on terror. These people are not insurgents they are terrorists plain and simple.
Try rooting for our side for a change.
Mark
Keep 5 yards
Mark, I think you’re mistaking me for someone else. My sequence of events only emphasizes the fact that Abu Ghraib was indeed an aberation and a farce at that.
Cheers
To all and Andy, found this one on one of my sites, and this nails it. I don’t know who wrote it.
We suffered in silence for 30+ years
Scorned and ridiculed, we shed a few tears
Jane Fonda, John Kerry what do you hear ?
The millions of Vets singing out-loud and clear
When all of the votes were finally tallied
Some will asked perplexed, why Kerry never rallied
Pundits and pollsters will be confused
While we Vietnam Vets will be simply amused
For we will know the reason you see ?
It is no mystery for you and me
All the other hurdles Kerry was able to surmount
It was the 58,000 Votes he thought would NOT count.
Mark
Keep 5 yards
Mark,
If “our side” is to not punish the wrongs committed at Abu Ghraib, then I’m afraid I don’t want to be on “our side.”
What was done was done. It was shameful and disgusting. I will continue to root for “our side.” But, when “our side” screws up, I will afford it the criticism it deserves.
Thanks for the link, LaShawn. Enjoyed your post – I was too busy with work last week to cover the Jordan thing, so it was great to come here and find it handled so thoroughly: one-stop shopping
Nice post.
Sorry Mike
You are not getting off that easy. I never said they should not be punished. The Army will take care of that mess and the people involved will probably spend the next 20 years in Leavenworth.
To clarify what I said, it does NOT rate the kind of press it has been given. The pictures appearred to be more of a sexual cult than it did a prison embarassing yes abuse not hardly. Since Toady Kennedy was the big supporter of this being such an abusive scandal why was there no investigation of a young girl left in the back seat of his automobile to drown ever brought up now that certainly could be called abuse wouldn’t it.
No word mentioned (during the ‘Abu grab’) was ever mentioned about the civilian contractors who were murdered their bodies burnt to a crisp and then hung onto bridges for all the world to see, there was not mention as ABUSE, the beheading of innocent contractors, soldiers and any other poor schmuck they could get their ‘Islamo-fascist hands on was also never mentioned, it was on Al jazeera network but our big scandal was what amounted to a Clinton oval office scandal that took place in some Iraqi prison NOW this is News and you think this has priority above the real abuse done to fellow citizens Oh no this is just because ”America started this thing and it is all our fault” Well the Americans did NOT start this, the Islamo-terrorists did and with the help of G-d we will finish it.
There is a good poster out and it reads over the background of ‘ground zero’ “All I ever needed to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11″ . The sooner you people on the left realize this the better off you will be. Because we the ‘Red States’ are well aware of it.
I have been all over the world, and the biggest thrill I had ever experience was coming back to ‘Conus’ by ship and on the horizon all you can see coming up out of the ocean is a single American flag, you are not close enough to see any land, at sea on a calm day the horizon is about 11 miles, then land begins to appear and at that point the chills start and you realize you are finally home. There is no other country in the world like the United States of America nor was there ever.
You obviously agree with the likes of the left which is fine, freedom is broad and almost all encompassing but don’t forget where you live and who has granted you the freedom to disagree and where that fine line is between disagree and the poiint where you are actually doing damage to your country and our troops who are putting it on the line everyday.
As I said, try rooting for OUR side for a chage.
Mark
‘In the end some people wonder if they ever made a difference,.. Marines don’t have that problem.
‘No word mentioned (during the ‘Abu grab’) was ever mentioned about the civilian contractors who were murdered their bodies burnt to a crisp and then hung onto bridges for all the world to see,’
Its probably because they don’t have a damn thing to do with one another.
Its probably because they don’t have a damn thing to do with one another.
Comment by actus — 02.07.05 @ 11:23 am
Oh I get it, this stuff only counts when Americans are acused of atrcities. You keep believing that.
And the bigger the MSN and the leftists can make it all the better for you. Another way of saying this is whats bad for America is good for the democrats.. Good way to look at it.
Mark
La Shawn…
You are my first trackback and it WORKED!!!!!
Ok, so I changed the title of my site back to Down with Absolutes! so it doesn’t take up so much space.
Ok…I’m thrilled.
I don’t know why my pingback reads 8:44 pm…I checked my personal settings on my site and I have it set to GMT minus 5 hours. Any help anyone?
I fixed it Mike.
‘Oh I get it, this stuff only counts when Americans are acused of atrcities. You keep believing that.’
wether we americans should be ashamed of what american soldiers do? ya. that only applies when american soldiers are doing it.
This might be news to you, but we don’t expect american soldiers to do these things. Dem or GOP.
The real story now is the cover-up. The virtually total silence of the MSM. And part of that is the BBC – their head of world news services, Richard Sambrook, was on the davos panel. Does the name ring a bell ? many of us thought he should have resigned over his central part in the gilligan affair at the BBC; he was trenchantly criticised by Lord Hutton’s enquiry that led to the resignations of the Chairman and the director general of the BBC. Sambrook is now putting his own gloss on Jordan’s remarks. Pure sophistry, in my opinion.
Comments on this entry are closed.