Of course, we all knew this would become a big item.
Two things: a. We don't have all the facts yet. b. It's "Rodney King" all over again. I can only shake my head.
I was quite pleasantly surprised by the balanced coverage of this at earthlink news (via AP). AP has surprised me. But I remain wary. Nonetheless....Shooting in Iraq Mosque Angers Muslims this coverage shows some balance.
But so does this one at American Spectator: By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them.
Years ago when CNN continually blasted the Rodney King beatings -- I was horrified. I was shocked. I was angered. And THEN I learned the facts. I'll be politically incorrect here for the moment: Once I learned the facts, I saw the police side of events - not just Rodney King's. I saw a man who resisted arrest, foolishly. Rodney King wasn't just some innocent the Police dragged to an alley and beat up. But by the time these facts emerged -- it was too late -- public opinion was thoroughly in Rodney King's court. It was all very unfair to the full story. And I think it made the trials far more costly.. and of course, it inspired thugs to burn and pillage large portions of Los Angeles. The press followed up with: "Understand the Rage".
Oh bullpuckey.
No one has the facts YET about what went on in Fallujah in the mosque except the players. We are not France where the law posits one to be guilty until proven innocent. Although there are some who should just move to France, and stop pretending to be American.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Perhaps the most interesting observation is that, simultaneously, Islamo-militants executed Margaret Hassan, the British aid worker and long time Iraqi resident.
Such a contrast. An American soldier on the battlefield killing a known enemy combatant vs the senseless murder of a woman dedicated to humanitarian aid. Yet which gets more attention from the "blame America first" MSM?
Their choice of perspective never ceases to amaze me.
Obviously the MSM has learned something, albeit little, from the 2004 Presidential elections. While they still attempt to bash the US with their focus, they recognize they are less relevant than they thought. So they temper their flogging of the US military actions with a possibility that the soldier's act *could* have been self-defense instead of a war crime.
Well the misguided talking heads aren't fooling me. I can still tell, by their news coverage, that they think America is wrong, and the terrorists are right in saying we shouldn't be there.
BTW, I was surfing talk radio and heard that Michael Savage was planning on putting together a drive to fund any defense for the soldier. As usual, it will have to be the American public to put the media in it's place by leaping to the soldier's defense.
You are right, Rastus -- this Marine doesn't deserve this. You probably already caught the "data" that Sites (the photo-journalist) is clearly anti-war. Here's my thoughts: I don't want the Marine to catch flak; and this Marine did the RIGHT THING. What he did, kinda stirs me up, ya'know? :)
As to Bob's comments: I'm with you! Nuke the suckers! (said in my most casual way). Good thing I'm not there with a weapon. But then, if I were, I'd be having to follow orders, and given how these low-life scum, lying, bastard, murderous pig-snot so-called "insurgents" play.. Well. ahem. Takes an awfully disciplined soldier to not start cutting off the heads and limbs of these rats who love being called "freedom fighters" by the clueless in America, UK, and elsewhere around the world. I think our Marine is going to be okay. He did the right thing. And it appears he played by the rules of engagement.
Well, Rastus... I note occasionally rumbles... but nothing more on this case. On another note, today, I read that the usual "cast of characters" is trying to sue the US via Germany over Abu Ghraib. Riiiight. Like Germany has some real clout, huh?
Post a Comment