Instapundit does a little digging and essentially proves that the mainstream media are burying the Nick Berg story in preference to the massively guilt- and blame-inducing prison abuse scandal, and meanwhile some video emerges showing that the charges that Abu Ghraib measures were dictated from the top are most likely bogus.
The video, seen by members of Congress but not released to the world, shows Lynndie England having sex with multiple partners, apparently consensually. I’m sorry, anti-liberation crusaders, but Rumsfeld didn’t order her to have an orgy, and he shouldn’t resign on account of it.
For another perspective on Abu Ghraib, from someone who was actually there, go read Ali at Iraq the Model.
I don’t think I can find a mainstream media outlet that *hasn’t* covered the Berg story. But what do I know, I only watch TV and listen to the radio.
There are a lot of things Rumsfeld should resign for, but of course soldiers having sex with each other isn’t one of them. There’s plenty more reasons why Rumsfeld should be scolded/fired/poked at with a pointed stick. Here’s something to start with: it took 9 months before the military had body armor. I’m sure you can come up with your own. Try it, it’s fun!
The mainstream media have mentioned Nick Berg in passing, and they’re now back to the faked outrage over the prisoner abuse that took place at Abu Ghraib before January.
It’s great country.
Excellent country, indeed!
I see cnn.com, foxnews.com, washingtonpost.com, and nytimes.com with stories about the Berg case on their front page. Not sure how mainstream it can get, and I doubt anyone would say it’s in ‘passing’.
Not sure how one could possibly think that outrage about Abu Ghraib is “faked”, unless one is deaf and blind, or doesn’t understand the language of anyone commenting on it, which at this point, is just about every major language on earth.
And the pictures?
The British faked photos ? Yes, they’re fake. “Faked outrage” to me means you’re saying that the outrage at the abuse was faked.
If anything, the mainstream media took too long to get to the story, when reports have been coming about it for months before the photos (not the British ones, the real ones)…but now that they have it…no, there’s no one skipping over anything.
What we know now is that the mandate for the abuse behaviour did indeed come from above, and is not the result of imaginative meathead GIs looking for fratboy fun, although I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them were fine with carrying it out. Whether or not Rumsfeld should go down for it, I don’t know, but like I said before, I think it’s moot because there’s many other reasons why the guy should be canned.
“Why is it that there’s more indignation over a photo of a prisoner with underwear on his head than over the video of a young American with no head at all?” — Sen. Zell Miller
The Abu Ghraib outrage is fake because it’s so obviously partisan.
Zell Miller would be correct about wrongly placing more indignation, if:
1- the Berg case wasn’t in response to the abuse in question.
2- underwear on the head was the worst of the abuse.
3- the abuse took place somewhere besides Iraq.
none of which are true.
Partisan outrage:
R – Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
R – John McCain
R – Sen. Chuck Hagel
R – Senator John Warner
all of them have expressed their outrage. outrage does not equal requesting for Rummy’s resignation, and the Right is out to paint that all Dems and Left are asking for it, when they are not. are the people who *are* asking for him to leave Dems ? of course, and if that surprises anyone, they need to get smarter.
Mike, do you really believe that Berg was beheaded on account of Abu Ghraib?
I’m not sure, but it doesn’t really matter in the end. A better question might be: do you really believe that a majority of Iraqi citizens are happily thinking that we’re “liberating” them ? or “occupying” them ?
Polls suggest the latter.