When will they learn?
CNN Story
[ May 17, 2004, 06:43 AM: Message edited by: bobby78751 ]
Full Version: Iraqi Governing Council President Dead
Who? When will "who" learn? The U.S.? The people on the Governing Council? The Iraqi people? The insurgents? The Baathists? Al Qaeda? Your statement is way too vague.
QUOTE
fantomas:
Who? When will \"who\" learn? The U.S.? The people on the Governing Council? The Iraqi people? The insurgents? The Baathists? Al Qaeda? Your statement is way too vague.
Do I have to eat your food for you, too? Who? When will \"who\" learn? The U.S.? The people on the Governing Council? The Iraqi people? The insurgents? The Baathists? Al Qaeda? Your statement is way too vague.
[ May 17, 2004, 10:07 AM: Message edited by: bobby78751 ]
Yep, everythings going great in Iraq.
"Mission Accomplished"
"Mission Accomplished"
You would think this would have been a huge heading on Drudge, but, instead, he had the awesome NY Post-like heading "Kerry Daughter Shows Cannes!"
Drudge is a W supporter, isn't he? So of course he'd show Alexandra Kerry's breasts--work, Alexandra!--rather than announce what certainly marks yet another a dramatic and horrible setback in the Iraq situation.
I will give Drudge credit for 1) making my favorite liberal fatso Michael Moore's acclaimed new film the major lede (and lead) on his page and 2) linking to Blix's and Kay's critique of the sarin bomb as a sign of WMDs right below the link to the story on that bomb.
What really isn't being discussed is whether 1) someone like Zarqawi is behind this killing; 2) Baathists are behind it; 3) rival Shiites are; or 4) someone high up, like Chalabi, who is now tied in with the Iranians, is behind it. I rarely hear any news commentators addressing the complexity of the political situation there; I understand that questions about the U,S.'s role are paramount, but certainly if we are to be turning sovereignty over to the Iraqis in a little over a month and placing this country on a firm democratic footing, shouldn't we be sorting through the web of politics and the political dangers faced by all parties at the same time?
I will give Drudge credit for 1) making my favorite liberal fatso Michael Moore's acclaimed new film the major lede (and lead) on his page and 2) linking to Blix's and Kay's critique of the sarin bomb as a sign of WMDs right below the link to the story on that bomb.
What really isn't being discussed is whether 1) someone like Zarqawi is behind this killing; 2) Baathists are behind it; 3) rival Shiites are; or 4) someone high up, like Chalabi, who is now tied in with the Iranians, is behind it. I rarely hear any news commentators addressing the complexity of the political situation there; I understand that questions about the U,S.'s role are paramount, but certainly if we are to be turning sovereignty over to the Iraqis in a little over a month and placing this country on a firm democratic footing, shouldn't we be sorting through the web of politics and the political dangers faced by all parties at the same time?
re: I rarely hear any news commentators addressing the complexity of the political situation there.
That's because no one knows anything. The situation changes daily. No one knows who most of the players are, and no one has the time or energy to invest in trying to figure it all out because it changes so much. It's not easy to break into a lot of the groups, especially if you don't know the language. And when you're relying on a contact to get you in, then you have to contend with the spin from that contact, the bribes, etc.
The people who do know what's going on have too much at stake/too much to do to blab. Decisions are made behind closed doors late at night. There's no upside to blabbing about it in the press the way there is here, espically if your intention is to destabilize/get more power for your group.
Moreover, the violence has many journalists largely confined to Baghdad. Kept in dark and fed shit comes to mind.
Here's something on what the increased violence means for journalists in Iraq in this WP item.
That's because no one knows anything. The situation changes daily. No one knows who most of the players are, and no one has the time or energy to invest in trying to figure it all out because it changes so much. It's not easy to break into a lot of the groups, especially if you don't know the language. And when you're relying on a contact to get you in, then you have to contend with the spin from that contact, the bribes, etc.
The people who do know what's going on have too much at stake/too much to do to blab. Decisions are made behind closed doors late at night. There's no upside to blabbing about it in the press the way there is here, espically if your intention is to destabilize/get more power for your group.
Moreover, the violence has many journalists largely confined to Baghdad. Kept in dark and fed shit comes to mind.
Here's something on what the increased violence means for journalists in Iraq in this WP item.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.