While we are armpits deep in Operation Iraqi Clusterfuck:
chicagotribune.com
Moscow OKs Missile Sale in $1 Billion Deal with Iran
December 3, 2005
MOSCOW, RUSSIA -- Russia has agreed to sell anti-aircraft missiles to Iran as part of a $1 billion arms deal that would significantly increase Moscow's military cooperation with Tehran, Russian news media reported Friday. The announcement of the sale coincided with a visit to Moscow by Nicholas Burns, the U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, who said in a radio interview that the U.S. had asked the Russian Foreign Ministry to explain the deal, reported by the newspaper Vedomosti and the Interfax news agency.
The missiles, known by the NATO designation SA-15 Gauntlet, are deployed on tracked vehicles and designed to strike aircraft or cruise missiles flying at altitudes up to 20,000 feet at a range of 7 miles, according to the Federation of American Scientists' Web site. Vedomosti, citing two unidentified sources, said Russia would sell 29 missile systems to Iran and that the weapons would complicate a potential air strike by the U.S. or Israel on Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant, which Russia is helping to build.
Saturday, December 03, 2005
Whack-a-mole, al-Qaeda style
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - The operational commander of al-Qaida, possibly the No. 3 official in the terrorist organization, was killed early Thursday by a CIA missile attack on a safehouse in Pakistan, officials have told NBC News.
Isn't it amazing how often we kill the "No. 2" guy or "Number 3?" It is al-Qaeda whack-a-mole! "I just whacked No. 2! Wait, I just whacked No. 3! I got No. 2 again!"
By the way, I have a pretty good idea who the "official" was that that sourced this story:
Besides, even suggesting that al-Qaeda has anything like an organizational structure:
merely shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of the beast.
Isn't it amazing how often we kill the "No. 2" guy or "Number 3?" It is al-Qaeda whack-a-mole! "I just whacked No. 2! Wait, I just whacked No. 3! I got No. 2 again!"
By the way, I have a pretty good idea who the "official" was that that sourced this story:
Besides, even suggesting that al-Qaeda has anything like an organizational structure:
merely shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of the beast.Friday, December 02, 2005
While on the topic of Jesus...
While browsing through some images for the Baby Jesus post below, I came across this:
Jesus is doing the secret sign of my college fraternity! (if I told you which one, I would have to kill you!)
I had no idea Jesus was a bro!
Jesus is doing the secret sign of my college fraternity! (if I told you which one, I would have to kill you!)
I had no idea Jesus was a bro!
Away in a manger...
Hi, I am Baby Jesus.
I wanted to thank Bill O’Reilly for saving me and Christmas from the infidel hordes!
John Ashcroft's Justice Department? Never!
Justice Staff Saw Texas Districting As Illegal
Voting Rights Finding On Map Pushed by DeLay Was Overruled
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark Texas congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo obtained by The Washington Post. But senior officials overruled them and approved the plan.
The memo, unanimously endorsed by six lawyers and two analysts in the department's voting section, said the redistricting plan illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts. It also said the plan eliminated several other districts in which minorities had a substantial, though not necessarily decisive, influence in elections.
More here.
John Ashcroft's Justice Department overruled the staff attorneys in favor of Tom Delay?
SHOCKING!
Voting Rights Finding On Map Pushed by DeLay Was Overruled
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark Texas congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo obtained by The Washington Post. But senior officials overruled them and approved the plan.
The memo, unanimously endorsed by six lawyers and two analysts in the department's voting section, said the redistricting plan illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts. It also said the plan eliminated several other districts in which minorities had a substantial, though not necessarily decisive, influence in elections.
More here.
John Ashcroft's Justice Department overruled the staff attorneys in favor of Tom Delay?
SHOCKING!
At least Bill O'Reilly is keeping the world safe for Christians
As Pete point out below, we know that Christians are oppressed everywhere you turn - they're not allowed to worship, their places of worship must be kept secret or they'll be closed down, the leaders of this country are vehemently anti-Christian, and of the 10 federal holidays, 9 of them are secular, with only one being saved for the oppressed. In fact, we know that Christians can barely wear the symbols of their religion without being beaten and killed regularly on the streets of our cities. So it's no wonder that Christmas is under attack. First it was the businessmen, when they decided to capitalize on the birth of Jesus with a crass money-making enterprise, and now it's the liberals, who don't understand that freedom means I get to do what I want, and if you don't like it, you're going to hell anyway, and besides, majority rules so na-na-boo-boo. There are places that now refer to the "Holidays", and not to Christmas*, and every time a Christian hears the words "Happy Holidays", an angel loses his wings and is condemned to a life in purgatory.
Thankfully, Bill O'Reilly has come to save the day. He took a break from defending the unjustly accused Bestester Presimident Ev-Uh! to make sure that Christmas Ornaments still got their due. See, FoxNews has an online store, and for a while they were advertising a heathen "Happy Holidays" ornament, designed to spread cheer to whoever received it, regardless of their religious background. But then Baby Jesus cried, and no one wanted that, so they changed it to a Christmas Ornament, and all was recovered, and the Lord spake unto Bill O' Reilly "Thank you, because without you, thousands of families who are gathered to mourn their loved ones who've died because of lies would be forced to see the words "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", and then the terrorists would have won."
* - Where the hell have these people been for, well, my entire life? I've been seeing Happy Holidays stuff as long as I can remember. Did they just notice?
Thankfully, Bill O'Reilly has come to save the day. He took a break from defending the unjustly accused Bestester Presimident Ev-Uh! to make sure that Christmas Ornaments still got their due. See, FoxNews has an online store, and for a while they were advertising a heathen "Happy Holidays" ornament, designed to spread cheer to whoever received it, regardless of their religious background. But then Baby Jesus cried, and no one wanted that, so they changed it to a Christmas Ornament, and all was recovered, and the Lord spake unto Bill O' Reilly "Thank you, because without you, thousands of families who are gathered to mourn their loved ones who've died because of lies would be forced to see the words "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", and then the terrorists would have won."
* - Where the hell have these people been for, well, my entire life? I've been seeing Happy Holidays stuff as long as I can remember. Did they just notice?
A personal note to Loree Kowalis of Orland Park, Illinois
If ignorance is bliss, Loree, you must be positively giddy!
Loree, obviously a deep thinker, complained in a letter to the Chicago Tribune that the big bad liberals are picking on Christmas. How could they do such a terrible thing? [First in the interest of full disclosure, be advised that I celebrate Christmas and, aside from crowded malls and commercial overkill, love the holiday]
Loree, using remarkably bad grammar, describes a frightening scene in which "recent malicious attempts by various anti-Christian or so-called civil liberties groups are proposing Christmas as offensive, and want all mention of it removed." I didn't realize that "recent malicious attempts" are capable of "proposing Christmas," but that is neither here nor there. But I do have just one quick question, Loree. Who are these "anti-Christian or so-called civil liberties groups?" When have they described Christmas as "offensive" and how do they propose to have "all mention of it removed?"
This great scholar goes on to describe how, "with pressure from these organizations, some businesses have given in to these demands and are now refusing to mention Christmas, and have replaced it with other titles and references to a seasonal holiday."
Oh the humanity......oh wait. One quick thing, Loree. The operative word here is BUSINESSES. These are presumably rational, competitive, profit-driven entities. They can't be "pressured" into saying "Happy Holidays," "Joyous Quaanza" or "Geez, Loree, that is the stupidest letter I've ever read" unless it BENEFITS THE BOTTOM LINE. If you don't like how you are greeted or how the store is decorated, SHOP SOMEWHERE ELSE.
She adds "why would any business want to mindfully neglect this large population, which is the major purchaser at this time of year, and, in effect, be intolerant of their customers’ celebration, which has led them to their stores?" See above. If it was hurting their sales, THEY WOULDN'T DO IT.
Oliver Wendell Loree continues with "These organizations with such agendas have a truly twisted idea of the Constitution when they want to hurt many who only wish to worship their religious beliefs. Isn’t this what our Constitution protects us against?"
I didn't realize one worshipped "religious beliefs," I thought you worshipped God, but that is another story for another time. The real question is how are you or anyone else "hurt" by any of this? And no, Loree, the constitution prevents the GOVERNMENT from interfering with or establishing a religion, not with what the kid behind the counter at Burger Barn says to you.
"How can Americans allow a few groups with a twisted sense of righteousness eliminate our freedom of religious worship with the audacity to claim it on constitutional grounds?"
I have a tasty Scooby Snack for you, Loree, if you can cite ONE WAY in which your "freedom of religious worship" has been infringed.
"Those who don’t believe in Christmas are not forced to do so, just as Christians or those of other faiths are not forced to acknowledge the atheistic winter solstice as a celebration."
So?
"Christians should not be punished and nullified due to their numbers any more than any other group should be discriminated against."
Oh please, how are we "punished" or "nullified?"
"Businesses should not be pressured by groups that, in effect, want a religious day of celebration removed due to their intolerance."
Businesses are "pressured" every day to do this or that and the market presumes rational responses to these pressures. That is good old fashioned capitalism.
The first Americans came here so they could worship freely,
Actually, no, the first Americans came here in search of food and land from Asia thousands of years ago. If you are talking about the first EUROPEANS, the Spanish and in Florida and the English at Jamestown didn't care a whit about religious freedom. Our New England forebears certainly had an odd notion of religious freedom, where THEY were free to worship as THEY chose and others were free to be hanged.
"I find this entire attack on the Christmas holiday sinister in its intent—what meaningful effects could even be considered worthy of such an act of intolerance?"
Again, such beautiful writing, but how is there any "intolerance?"
And besides, even if you do celebrate Christmas, what is wrong with "Happy Holidays?" besides being inclusive, this is a festive SEASON. The bosses look the other way while we come in a little later and leave a little earlier, we meet family and friends, watch bad college football teams in meaningless bowl games. Bing Crosby said it, and wished that may the merry bells be ringin' HAPPY HOLIDAYS to you, so Loree,
Loree, obviously a deep thinker, complained in a letter to the Chicago Tribune that the big bad liberals are picking on Christmas. How could they do such a terrible thing? [First in the interest of full disclosure, be advised that I celebrate Christmas and, aside from crowded malls and commercial overkill, love the holiday]
Loree, using remarkably bad grammar, describes a frightening scene in which "recent malicious attempts by various anti-Christian or so-called civil liberties groups are proposing Christmas as offensive, and want all mention of it removed." I didn't realize that "recent malicious attempts" are capable of "proposing Christmas," but that is neither here nor there. But I do have just one quick question, Loree. Who are these "anti-Christian or so-called civil liberties groups?" When have they described Christmas as "offensive" and how do they propose to have "all mention of it removed?"
This great scholar goes on to describe how, "with pressure from these organizations, some businesses have given in to these demands and are now refusing to mention Christmas, and have replaced it with other titles and references to a seasonal holiday."
Oh the humanity......oh wait. One quick thing, Loree. The operative word here is BUSINESSES. These are presumably rational, competitive, profit-driven entities. They can't be "pressured" into saying "Happy Holidays," "Joyous Quaanza" or "Geez, Loree, that is the stupidest letter I've ever read" unless it BENEFITS THE BOTTOM LINE. If you don't like how you are greeted or how the store is decorated, SHOP SOMEWHERE ELSE.
She adds "why would any business want to mindfully neglect this large population, which is the major purchaser at this time of year, and, in effect, be intolerant of their customers’ celebration, which has led them to their stores?" See above. If it was hurting their sales, THEY WOULDN'T DO IT.
Oliver Wendell Loree continues with "These organizations with such agendas have a truly twisted idea of the Constitution when they want to hurt many who only wish to worship their religious beliefs. Isn’t this what our Constitution protects us against?"
I didn't realize one worshipped "religious beliefs," I thought you worshipped God, but that is another story for another time. The real question is how are you or anyone else "hurt" by any of this? And no, Loree, the constitution prevents the GOVERNMENT from interfering with or establishing a religion, not with what the kid behind the counter at Burger Barn says to you.
"How can Americans allow a few groups with a twisted sense of righteousness eliminate our freedom of religious worship with the audacity to claim it on constitutional grounds?"
I have a tasty Scooby Snack for you, Loree, if you can cite ONE WAY in which your "freedom of religious worship" has been infringed.
"Those who don’t believe in Christmas are not forced to do so, just as Christians or those of other faiths are not forced to acknowledge the atheistic winter solstice as a celebration."
So?
"Christians should not be punished and nullified due to their numbers any more than any other group should be discriminated against."
Oh please, how are we "punished" or "nullified?"
"Businesses should not be pressured by groups that, in effect, want a religious day of celebration removed due to their intolerance."
Businesses are "pressured" every day to do this or that and the market presumes rational responses to these pressures. That is good old fashioned capitalism.
The first Americans came here so they could worship freely,
Actually, no, the first Americans came here in search of food and land from Asia thousands of years ago. If you are talking about the first EUROPEANS, the Spanish and in Florida and the English at Jamestown didn't care a whit about religious freedom. Our New England forebears certainly had an odd notion of religious freedom, where THEY were free to worship as THEY chose and others were free to be hanged.
"I find this entire attack on the Christmas holiday sinister in its intent—what meaningful effects could even be considered worthy of such an act of intolerance?"
Again, such beautiful writing, but how is there any "intolerance?"
And besides, even if you do celebrate Christmas, what is wrong with "Happy Holidays?" besides being inclusive, this is a festive SEASON. The bosses look the other way while we come in a little later and leave a little earlier, we meet family and friends, watch bad college football teams in meaningless bowl games. Bing Crosby said it, and wished that may the merry bells be ringin' HAPPY HOLIDAYS to you, so Loree,
HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Pssst..wanna buy some bullets?
From Juan Cole:
The strategy of the Bush administration in Iraq depends heavily on standing up battle-ready units of the new Iraqi army. The USA Today quotes experts on how unrealistic that plan is in the short to medium term. I have heard from contacts in Iraq that the soldiers in the new army often don't get their paychecks, and aren't properly equipped, and sometimes are reduced to selling their bullets on the black market. Guess who buys them?
The strategy of the Bush administration in Iraq depends heavily on standing up battle-ready units of the new Iraqi army. The USA Today quotes experts on how unrealistic that plan is in the short to medium term. I have heard from contacts in Iraq that the soldiers in the new army often don't get their paychecks, and aren't properly equipped, and sometimes are reduced to selling their bullets on the black market. Guess who buys them?
Poodles on Linoleum, Part Three
You can see this one lining up nicely. The White House has given its talking points to its media hacks. For example, in this morning's Chicago Tribune, Armstrong Williams--ooops, I mean Mark Silva---writes about "burgeoning Iraqi battalions" and delivers the expected cheap shot that "Democrats have struggled for months to articulate their own strategy for success in Iraq."
The clincher is that the Trib also includes a nifty graphic in the print version showing how there are more than 212,000 "trained" Iraqi troops in place, and they source it to an impressive-sounding authority..The Multi-National Security Transition Command. They must be important. After all, they have a cool seal:
After weeks of exhaustive research (actually, one Google click), I found out who the "Multi-National Security Transition Command" is...the envelope please...the winner is...
Wow, what a stunner!
The clincher is that the Trib also includes a nifty graphic in the print version showing how there are more than 212,000 "trained" Iraqi troops in place, and they source it to an impressive-sounding authority..The Multi-National Security Transition Command. They must be important. After all, they have a cool seal:
After weeks of exhaustive research (actually, one Google click), I found out who the "Multi-National Security Transition Command" is...the envelope please...the winner is...
Wow, what a stunner!
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
A deadly serious thought
There are so many things this president says that make me want to scream and laugh and cry, but undoubtedly one of the most maddening and revolting shibboleths he trots out is the one that surfaced again today:
There is only one way to honor the sacrifice of [insert name of wasted life here] and his fallen comrades and that is to take up their mantle, carry on their fight, and complete their mission.
Oh please. The only way to honor those who died pointless deaths is to serve up more human sacrifice on the bloody altar of vainglorious foolishness. That is tragic and mindless and brutal and criminal.
I am reminded of a Union captain at the Civil War battle of Cold Harbor, in which the Federal troops faced withering fire from entrenched Confederate forces (one soldier said it was "not war, but murder). Witnessing the POINTLESS slaughter, Captain, T.E. Barker said that "I will not take my regiment in another such charge if Jesus Christ himself should order it!."
Jesus isn't giving any orders, and we should not make `another such charge.'
You reap what you sow, then and now....
There is only one way to honor the sacrifice of [insert name of wasted life here] and his fallen comrades and that is to take up their mantle, carry on their fight, and complete their mission.
Oh please. The only way to honor those who died pointless deaths is to serve up more human sacrifice on the bloody altar of vainglorious foolishness. That is tragic and mindless and brutal and criminal.
I am reminded of a Union captain at the Civil War battle of Cold Harbor, in which the Federal troops faced withering fire from entrenched Confederate forces (one soldier said it was "not war, but murder). Witnessing the POINTLESS slaughter, Captain, T.E. Barker said that "I will not take my regiment in another such charge if Jesus Christ himself should order it!."
Jesus isn't giving any orders, and we should not make `another such charge.'
You reap what you sow, then and now....
Alex, may I have new meaningless words for $100?
From Fearless Leader today:
"The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists."
REJECTIONISTS?????????????????????
"The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists."
REJECTIONISTS?????????????????????
When a headline doesn't mean what you think
From Reuters, via Yahoo! News: Bush pitches war strategy.
Okay, so I know what they mean. The Lying Murdering Terrorist masquerading as a Human, otherwise known as President Duhbya, is trying, once again, to sell people on his unjust and evil war.
I, rather, would like to read it with the second definition here:
as in, "Bush gets rid of his current war strategy, which has led to over 100,000 deaths, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, with no end in sight and chaos in the Middle East, and replaces it with something developed by somebody who didn't shove their own head up their ass so far they could french kiss the ulcers in their stomach left over from years of self-abuse".
Of course, that would presume that he *had* a war strategy, and we all know that such a thing is second cousin to Harvey the Rabbit.
Okay, so I know what they mean. The Lying Murdering Terrorist masquerading as a Human, otherwise known as President Duhbya, is trying, once again, to sell people on his unjust and evil war.
I, rather, would like to read it with the second definition here:
pitch
v. pitched, pitch·ing, pitch·es
v. tr.
1. To throw, usually with careful aim. See Synonyms at throw.
2. To discard by throwing: pitched the can out the window.
as in, "Bush gets rid of his current war strategy, which has led to over 100,000 deaths, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, with no end in sight and chaos in the Middle East, and replaces it with something developed by somebody who didn't shove their own head up their ass so far they could french kiss the ulcers in their stomach left over from years of self-abuse".
Of course, that would presume that he *had* a war strategy, and we all know that such a thing is second cousin to Harvey the Rabbit.
Minority Report
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended the unlimited detention of suspected terrorists saying, in an interview published on Tuesday, that it benefitted the United States and the entire world. “You can’t allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them, because if they commit the crime, thousands of innocent people die,” she told the USA Today daily.
The audience
The president has announced the invited guests who will be in the audience to hear his next major policy address on Iraq:
Even more from the Secretary of CYA
From the War Room at Salon.com (membership req.):
Asked about torture by Iraqi authorities, Rumsfeld said that "obviously, the United States does not have a responsibility" beyond objecting. Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disagreed, saying that each and every U.S. soldier has an "absolute responsibility" to stop inhumane treatment if he or she sees it. Rumsfeld disagreed, saying, "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it. It's to report it." Pace fired back: "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it."
So, according to Rumsfeld, if a soldier walks into a room and sees an Iraqi with a car battery attached to his genitals and water dripping on his head, he's supposed to leave, let someone know, and that's it? This would be a difference between the soldiers, who by and large I respect incredibly, and men like Rumsfeld, who did everything they could to avoid serving the country, but have no qualms about sending others off to suffer and die in their place. The soldiers understand how damaging war is, even to those who are physically unhurt, and fight to keep some sense of morality in their lives. Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the chickenhawk yellow elephants see the soldiers as expendable, and anyone on the "other side" as even lower. That's not just wrong, that's inhuman. Not inhumane, inhuman - Rumsfeld, etc, forfeit their status as human beings, in my eyes.
Asked about torture by Iraqi authorities, Rumsfeld said that "obviously, the United States does not have a responsibility" beyond objecting. Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disagreed, saying that each and every U.S. soldier has an "absolute responsibility" to stop inhumane treatment if he or she sees it. Rumsfeld disagreed, saying, "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it. It's to report it." Pace fired back: "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it."
So, according to Rumsfeld, if a soldier walks into a room and sees an Iraqi with a car battery attached to his genitals and water dripping on his head, he's supposed to leave, let someone know, and that's it? This would be a difference between the soldiers, who by and large I respect incredibly, and men like Rumsfeld, who did everything they could to avoid serving the country, but have no qualms about sending others off to suffer and die in their place. The soldiers understand how damaging war is, even to those who are physically unhurt, and fight to keep some sense of morality in their lives. Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the chickenhawk yellow elephants see the soldiers as expendable, and anyone on the "other side" as even lower. That's not just wrong, that's inhuman. Not inhumane, inhuman - Rumsfeld, etc, forfeit their status as human beings, in my eyes.
Yet another "sign" of the impending apocalypse?
Back in May, the Mother of God (tm) "appeared" under a highway viaduct in Chicago. After a couple of months of planning, she persuaded her Son to join her in an appearance in East Chicago, Indiana. Now apparently, She's "upped the ante" in California
Not to be outdone..... in Nepal a new incarnation of Buddha has been discovered.
Not to be outdone..... in Nepal a new incarnation of Buddha has been discovered.
Poodles on Linoleum, Part Two
Remember below, how I suggested how the administration is scurrying like the above-referenced canines to find a way out of Operation Iraqi Clusterfuck? From this morning's paper:
"On the eve of a presidential policy speech on the future of U.S. forces in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters Tuesday that Iraqis soon would shoulder much of the future work for securing and rebuilding their country, which U.S. forces invaded in March 2003."
From the same edition, though, we have this:
Iraqi government officials failed Wednesday to deliver the promised results of an investigation into alleged torture at an Interior Ministry jail in Baghdad. U.S. and Iraqi forces discovered 173 malnourished Iraqi detainees when they went into the facility on Nov. 13. Some inmates showed signs of torture, U.S. and Iraqi officials said. A U.S. general was so concerned with what he found that he took immediate control of the jail but the military has released few details about it since.
and this:
As part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq. The articles, written by U.S. military "information operations" troops, are translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times. Many of the articles are presented in the Iraqi press as unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists. The stories trumpet the work of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and tout U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country.
Makes you proud, doesn't it?
"On the eve of a presidential policy speech on the future of U.S. forces in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters Tuesday that Iraqis soon would shoulder much of the future work for securing and rebuilding their country, which U.S. forces invaded in March 2003."
From the same edition, though, we have this:
Iraqi government officials failed Wednesday to deliver the promised results of an investigation into alleged torture at an Interior Ministry jail in Baghdad. U.S. and Iraqi forces discovered 173 malnourished Iraqi detainees when they went into the facility on Nov. 13. Some inmates showed signs of torture, U.S. and Iraqi officials said. A U.S. general was so concerned with what he found that he took immediate control of the jail but the military has released few details about it since.
and this:
As part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq. The articles, written by U.S. military "information operations" troops, are translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times. Many of the articles are presented in the Iraqi press as unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists. The stories trumpet the work of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and tout U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country.
Makes you proud, doesn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
