Yes, That Operation Against Sadr’s Militia Was Just a Disaster, Wasn’t It?
- 04.24.2008 - 3:41 PMJames Glanz of the New York Times, the chief peddler of the claim that the Iraqi government’s attack on the militia controlled by goon cleric Moqtada al-Sadr was a horrifying failures that called the entire surge into question, today files this dispatch from Baghdad:
Iraq’s largest Sunni bloc has agreed to return to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s cabinet after a nine-month boycott, several Sunni leaders said on Thursday, citing a recently passed amnesty law and the Maliki government’s crackdown on Shiite militias as reasons for the move….[S]uch a return would represent a major political victory for Mr. Maliki in the midst of a military operation that has at times been criticized as poorly planned and fraught with risk.
To sum up, then. The Shiite government proved itself willing and able to take on the most powerful Shiite militia. As a result, it has brought the Sunni bloc back into the government, which is a major step on the road to national reconciliation. And this was made possible by the passage of an amnesty law that is a key step in the benchmarks established to gauge Iraq’s political progress.
James Glanz, you got some ’splainin’ to do…
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
April 24th, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Splainin’? You got some resignin’ to do, Glanz.
Hack.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:17 PM
The NYT releases government secrets, presents biased reporting, and watches as it’s circulation (rightfully) drops.
Unfortunately MSM continues to base it’s coverage on the NYT’s “leadership”…..Unfortunately SHAME is a non-operative term in today’s world!
April 24th, 2008 at 4:18 PM
So let me get this straight:
As a condition of employment with the NYT’s “journalism”/”reporting” and “editorializing” departments, an individual must undergo flexibility training with the Cirque du Soleil crew, in order to better wear his/her own large intestine in the fashion of a ski mask?
I’ll admit, it sounded a little dodgy to me, but once I started reading that paper, it wasn’t so far-fetched after all…
April 24th, 2008 at 4:20 PM
This line, about the Iraqi anti-Muqtada Al Sadr offensive being a failure was parroted on NPR. I almost drove off the side of the road and was thoroughly pissed off all day.
Where do they get these mutts (Glanz, NPR). These people are nothing other than modern day variants of Goebbels. They are propagandists for the enemy.
Glanz is one thing, but my tax dollars go to NPR and I want it stopped.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:28 PM
The NYT (and as Paul notes, NPR) has been peddling the Basra disaster since the operation started. It is starting to appear that the Basra operation may be the tipping point that galvanizes the Iraqi political system. Glanz’s reporting has a distinguished lineage going back to Walter Duranty. The sooner this paper goes under, the better.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:36 PM
” ‘Splainin’ “???
You first….
http://www.amazon.com/Bush-Country-Century-While-Driving-Liberals/dp/B000H2MTCS/ref=sr_1_1/105-2177853-7955666?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209069324&sr=1-1
April 24th, 2008 at 4:38 PM
The NYTIMES, NPR, PBS, MSNBC, these folks have an agenda and it aint’s pro us. They lie, they twist, they distort “news” to fit their agenda…
Good news is that fewer are reading, listening, watching this garbage.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Glanz used to be a science reporter. He screwed the pooch on that gig, too.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Likewise, I was also surprised by how quickly NPR especially was reciting the Basra defeat narrative. As if the roundtable commentary preceded any reasonable assimilation of events. If memory serves me, Juan Cole was the quickest conduit of the defeat message, which isn’t surprising. He’s got some splain’n to do too. Like, whose water is he carrying?
April 24th, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Actually, I think the NYT coverage of combat in Iraq has been pretty good. If Mr. Glanz got this one wrong, it’s possibly just a fog-o-war thing, and now he’s doing something of a pullback. Why assume bad motives?