LATimes "Eve of Destruction" Continues
From long before its "Gropinator" expose attempted derail Schwarzenegger in the final days of the Davis recall, right up through its vacuous but vicious slam on Condi on the eve of her confirmation hearings, the LA Times has always been up for a last minute body slime ... er, slam.
Today, on the eve of the election in Iraq, the LAT did its best to fuel anti-American feelings in Iraq by breaking a story that no doubt will be the lead on Al Jazeera tonight ... yup, there it is, their second Iraq lead. Acting again as handmaiden for the ACLU, the LAT splashed across the front page yet another story from the ACLU's strategic, carefully timed release of data on prisoner conditions in Iraq from its Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
(Just an aside ... does anyone else find it ironic that the ACLU is so bent on destroying, in their jihad for their version of "civil liberties," a country that has a Freedom of Information Act?)
As with the Condi story, in which the LAT reached back six years to her tenure at Stanford to dredge up a few hypersensitive profs who didn't care for her style, the LAT is dishing out thin gruel on this story.
It tells almost entirely of alleged abuse, some of it quite alarming if true, of prisoners at the hands of Iraqi interrogators. Only one mention of the possible presence of a US soldier is mentioned in the entire, droningly long piece. And where did the allegations come from? From the stories alleged victims told to US investigators -- not ACLU attorneys -- who were investigating the allegations.
Sure, if it's true, then someone needs to be watching those interrogators more closely, but really, what's the point?
The point is clear. The ACLU wants to make "collaborators" look bad just before the election, so more radical parties can win more power in the new Iraqi government. This is classic ACLU strategy, since it would result in greater difficulties for the administration and, quite possibly, in deaths of more US soldiers.
And when the remains of those brave soldiers are shipped home, who will the LATimes blame? The ACLU? Not a chance.
Today, on the eve of the election in Iraq, the LAT did its best to fuel anti-American feelings in Iraq by breaking a story that no doubt will be the lead on Al Jazeera tonight ... yup, there it is, their second Iraq lead. Acting again as handmaiden for the ACLU, the LAT splashed across the front page yet another story from the ACLU's strategic, carefully timed release of data on prisoner conditions in Iraq from its Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
(Just an aside ... does anyone else find it ironic that the ACLU is so bent on destroying, in their jihad for their version of "civil liberties," a country that has a Freedom of Information Act?)
As with the Condi story, in which the LAT reached back six years to her tenure at Stanford to dredge up a few hypersensitive profs who didn't care for her style, the LAT is dishing out thin gruel on this story.
It tells almost entirely of alleged abuse, some of it quite alarming if true, of prisoners at the hands of Iraqi interrogators. Only one mention of the possible presence of a US soldier is mentioned in the entire, droningly long piece. And where did the allegations come from? From the stories alleged victims told to US investigators -- not ACLU attorneys -- who were investigating the allegations.
Sure, if it's true, then someone needs to be watching those interrogators more closely, but really, what's the point?
The point is clear. The ACLU wants to make "collaborators" look bad just before the election, so more radical parties can win more power in the new Iraqi government. This is classic ACLU strategy, since it would result in greater difficulties for the administration and, quite possibly, in deaths of more US soldiers.
And when the remains of those brave soldiers are shipped home, who will the LATimes blame? The ACLU? Not a chance.
posted by Laer at 3:27 PM
<< Home