The $134 Billion Defeat
Jews' Jaws Zero/ Adjusted to One
Shark America Ten/ Adjusted to Nine
Number of Earthquakes in the Past Seven Days: 151
I remain skeptical of the story of recent days that 600 members of a hitherto unknown Muslim cult had massed near Nagaf, and hundreds were killed and over a hundred captured in a huge battle involving US tanks and air cover; and I seem to be the only American journalist expressing skepticism.
I wrote about this briefly on Sunday. This is what I said:
"The news reported today that 250-300 Iraqi resistance fighters were killed by US-backed Iraqi forces in a pitched battle in open terrain outside the city of Nagaf; and that the resistance had amassed a force of some 600 to attack religious pilgrims in that city.
"This may be true; but I do not believe it. It is too convenient at a time when George W. Bush sorely needs an Iraqi army victory; and it implies the resistance forces have changed from a winning tactic to a losing tactic.
"The Americans control the air, Dear Reader; it is not likely 600 resistance fighters are going to mass in treeless country, that would have been too dangerous even for the Viet Cong in thick Vietnam jungle.
"I may be wrong, but I think this is a phony story."
Helped along with the fact that my distribution of that report seems to have been uncharacteristically tampered with, I continue think this is a bogus news story, and to find great flaws in news coverage of it. Today I am left with the opinion this story is 2% true and 98% false.
The lack of solid, on-the-spot journalistic reporting of this story boggles my mind. I realize the American news media is intimidated by the rise of Republican American Fascism, and at best it can be gadfly more of ritual than substance, but I did not realize American journalism has fallen into reporting phantom news.
When it was my honor to be a combat correspondent in Vietnam such a battlefield victory which we have been spoon-fed by the military's Press Information Office would have sent hordes of reporters to the scene.
Indeed, even a battlefield disaster would have send hordes of reporters to the scene.
What, Dear Reader, do we see? Not one eyewitness report has come from the scene; and we have seen only reporters reporting the Party Line.
We are told that a massive battle took place, involving American tanks and aircraft, killing hundreds and capturing over one hundred, but there has been absolutely no, repeat no, photographic or video evidence presented.
Sure, we have seen the phone-cam video of what seems to be a squad-sized unit of Iraqi soldiers positioned behind a hill, none of them up on the line and shooting; and another video of Iraqi soldiers standing over a couple of men forced to lie on a highway next to what appears to be their vehicle; and we have seen a crashed motorcycle; and we have seen smoke from what is said to be a crashed US helicopter.
Other than the two-man crew of the helicopter being dead, there have been reports of absolutely zero, repeat zero, casualties on the American-Iraqi side.
Look at this from what you know about current America. If this battle had really taken place we would have a mountain of film and video on it; and if there had been hundreds of the other side killed and captured we would be seeing video of bodies and prisoners. If there were tankers in the "battle" we would be seeing them interviewed by the networks; and the tankers would be stoked by the victory, telling how they mowed the ragheads down.
No, there is something fishy about this story.
In TV-ruled America, for America to win a major battle and control the battlefield at the end, killing hundreds and losing only two Americans and zero Iraqis; for there to be no video is unthinkable.
I think American journalism has just bought the Brooklyn Bridge; and I think American journalism bought that bridge because the Republican American Fascists offered American journalism a deal it could not refuse.
Shark America Ten/ Adjusted to Nine
Number of Earthquakes in the Past Seven Days: 151
I remain skeptical of the story of recent days that 600 members of a hitherto unknown Muslim cult had massed near Nagaf, and hundreds were killed and over a hundred captured in a huge battle involving US tanks and air cover; and I seem to be the only American journalist expressing skepticism.
I wrote about this briefly on Sunday. This is what I said:
"The news reported today that 250-300 Iraqi resistance fighters were killed by US-backed Iraqi forces in a pitched battle in open terrain outside the city of Nagaf; and that the resistance had amassed a force of some 600 to attack religious pilgrims in that city.
"This may be true; but I do not believe it. It is too convenient at a time when George W. Bush sorely needs an Iraqi army victory; and it implies the resistance forces have changed from a winning tactic to a losing tactic.
"The Americans control the air, Dear Reader; it is not likely 600 resistance fighters are going to mass in treeless country, that would have been too dangerous even for the Viet Cong in thick Vietnam jungle.
"I may be wrong, but I think this is a phony story."
Helped along with the fact that my distribution of that report seems to have been uncharacteristically tampered with, I continue think this is a bogus news story, and to find great flaws in news coverage of it. Today I am left with the opinion this story is 2% true and 98% false.
The lack of solid, on-the-spot journalistic reporting of this story boggles my mind. I realize the American news media is intimidated by the rise of Republican American Fascism, and at best it can be gadfly more of ritual than substance, but I did not realize American journalism has fallen into reporting phantom news.
When it was my honor to be a combat correspondent in Vietnam such a battlefield victory which we have been spoon-fed by the military's Press Information Office would have sent hordes of reporters to the scene.
Indeed, even a battlefield disaster would have send hordes of reporters to the scene.
What, Dear Reader, do we see? Not one eyewitness report has come from the scene; and we have seen only reporters reporting the Party Line.
We are told that a massive battle took place, involving American tanks and aircraft, killing hundreds and capturing over one hundred, but there has been absolutely no, repeat no, photographic or video evidence presented.
Sure, we have seen the phone-cam video of what seems to be a squad-sized unit of Iraqi soldiers positioned behind a hill, none of them up on the line and shooting; and another video of Iraqi soldiers standing over a couple of men forced to lie on a highway next to what appears to be their vehicle; and we have seen a crashed motorcycle; and we have seen smoke from what is said to be a crashed US helicopter.
Other than the two-man crew of the helicopter being dead, there have been reports of absolutely zero, repeat zero, casualties on the American-Iraqi side.
Look at this from what you know about current America. If this battle had really taken place we would have a mountain of film and video on it; and if there had been hundreds of the other side killed and captured we would be seeing video of bodies and prisoners. If there were tankers in the "battle" we would be seeing them interviewed by the networks; and the tankers would be stoked by the victory, telling how they mowed the ragheads down.
No, there is something fishy about this story.
In TV-ruled America, for America to win a major battle and control the battlefield at the end, killing hundreds and losing only two Americans and zero Iraqis; for there to be no video is unthinkable.
I think American journalism has just bought the Brooklyn Bridge; and I think American journalism bought that bridge because the Republican American Fascists offered American journalism a deal it could not refuse.
posted by Virgil Kret at 3:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home