The NYT's comment below the picture reads: A sniper loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada al Sadr fires towards U.S. positions in the cemetery in Najaf, Iraq. Michele McNally: "Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage."
Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom comments:
Looks like the NYT has decided to go with neutrality over objectivity—essentially severing ties with their own country in the service of what they believe is a higher journalistic good: Pulitzer Prizes.
Writes Times assistant managing editor for photography Michele McNally of a photo taken by NYT photographer Joao Silva showing an al-Sadr army sniper in the act of firing on US troops, “Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.”
Incredible courage? Well, far be it for me to question such self-congratulatory enthusiasm, but it seems to me that actual “incredible courage” would have entailed, say, Joao Silva getting word to US troops, or bumrushing the sniper and beating him unconscious with a heavy telephoto lens.
Michelle Malkin and Charles Johnson have more on this.
Today nine people were killed by Hizbollah rocket attacks in Haifa. Israel's war against Hamas and Hizbollah savages is very much a part of the "War on Terror." However, the Lamestream media has another war to fight. On the same day in which the citizens of an ally are being killed in their homes by terrorists, the Washington Post decided to publish an article on, you guessed it, the "Zionist Lobby." The author of this thing, Glenn Frankel, openly pines for the "good old days," in his first paragraphs:
Israel's founding father, one of the indomitable political leaders of the 20th century, came to Washington in December 1941 yearning to present the case for a Jewish state directly to the American president. He took a two-room suite at the old Ambassador Hotel at 14th and K for $1,000 a month and cooled his heels for 10 weeks, writing letters and reports and making passes at Miriam Cohen, his attractive American secretary. But Ben-Gurion didn't get the meeting. Not then, not ever. Not even a pair of presidential cuff links. [Of course, the filth Frankel had to mention the expensive hotel room and Ben-Gurion's alleged romantic advances. It's totally irrelevant. Well, except for perpetuating anti-Semitic stereotypes that is.]
Frankel continues in his next paragraph detailing the access the current Israeli Prime Minister has to the President. While Frankel found space to detail Ben-Gurion's hotel bill and amorous attentions he neglected another historical fact that would have provided some actual, and necessary, historical context. The month after Ben-Gurion was snubbed by President Roosevelt there was a conference in a suburb of Berlin. On January 20, 1942 the Wannsee Conference was held. Heydrich and all the boys were there:
On January 20, 1942, 15 high-ranking Nazi party and German government officials gathered at a villa in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee to discuss and coordinate the implementation of the "Final Solution." Reinhard Heydrich, SS chief Heinrich Himmler's head deputy and head of the Reich Main Security Office, held the meeting in order to involve key members of the German ministerial bureaucracy, including the Foreign and Justice Ministries, whose cooperation was needed to implement the killing measures.
Heydrich indicated that approximately 11,000,000 Jews were eventually to be subjected to the "Final Solution," with the Nuremberg Laws serving as a basis for determining who was a Jew. "Under suitable supervision, the Jews shall be...taken to the east," Heydrich announced, "and deployed in appropriate work....Able-bodied Jews, separated by sex, will be taken to those areas in large work details to build roads, and a large part will doubtlessly be lost through natural attrition. The surviving remnants...will have to be treated appropriately..." Despite the euphemisms which appeared in the protocols of the meeting, the aim of the Wannsee Conference was clear: the coordination of a policy of genocide of European Jews.
I wonder what the human crap sack Frankel thinks of this Conspiracy? Probably nothing, assuming he believes it really happened. What shocks, SHOCKS, the Washington Post is that the President of the United States would meet with our only ally in the Middle-East in time of war.
Crossposted at The Dougout.
4 comments:
Frankel didn't fininsh off as badly as he started if you read the whole hting carefully, but where he was really disuguting was in parsing what Walt and Mearsheimer say .. which in reduced fashion REALLY is ..:
Jews control congress
Jews exert singular influence on the executive
Jews have execessive conntrol of the media, and manipulate it and all of these things are done to the detriment of the USA, since these people are really about Israel.
here
It looks like the New York Times longs for the days of Walter Duranty, the Pulitzer Prize winning stooge for Stalin. Only this time there is less ignorance, fewer excuses, and greater guilt.
For my fellow New Yorkers … consider the New York Sun.
Here's one tip-off the Frankel's article is nothing but a hit piece:
"Nevertheless, the Israel lobby, and AIPAC in particular, gained a reputation as the National Rifle Association of foreign policy: a hard-edged, pugnacious bunch that took names and kept score."
Invoking the NRA, the ultimate DEVIL of all left-liberal types.
Post a Comment