They're on the other side
"They" is The New York Times. On their online "Op-Ed" page, the Times has posted a nearly 7 minute video that is nothing more than a infomercial promoting the insurgency in Iraq.
To say that I'm furious would be an understatement. If the Times exposé of the terroist finance tracking program and its subsequent cancellation (after banks stopped working with U.S. authorities) wasn't bad enough. There was their decision to reveal the government's legal clandestine wiretapping program.
And now they're hosting what amounts to nothing more than terrorist propaganda videos?
How can you tell it's a propaganda film? I point you to 5:39 in the video where the following "factoid" appears:
100% of those polled disapprove of attacks on Iraqi civilians.
Yeah, and Saddam Hussein was always re-elected with 100 percent of the vote.
The clip also has an Iraqi "insurgent" saying that what they do is normal.
"Suppose Iraq invaded America. And an Iraqi soldier was on a tank passing through an American street, waving his gun at the people, threatening them, raiding and trashing houses. Would you accept that?"
Well, if that happened and President George W. Bush was strung up, I bet you the Times editorial board would gladly accept that. The San Francisco City Council would hold a parade and throw flowers at the Iraqi troops.
The Times has officially hit bottom ethically and morally.
0 comments on “They're on the other side”
Tags
We're in William Gibson's "Cold Civil War." There's no hope of getting them to switch sides. All they care about is winning.
They hit bottom quite awhile back; they're digging now.
I think it is optimistic to say the NYT has hit rock bottom. The NYT has some creative people (corrupt and genuinely evil, but creative). So, I think they will dream up even more vile, traitorous crap, and show their “patriotismâ€. They can ALWAYS go lower; and I am sure they will (as long as it undermines GWB and the troops).
terrence,
Exactly right. Things are going to get much, much worse. That's the point I tried to make in my post above. Follow the link, unfortunately hidden, in the words "Cold Civil War." Even Instapundit's getting concerned about civil conflict. That's another link in the words "civil conflict".
From an email quoted by Instapundit. "The left has made it perfectly clear that the only legitimate outcome of any debate is the one where they get their way." That's not good.
I disagree with the Instapundit on the necessity of "sitting down and shutting up" when the Democratic process is subverted. As with the Courts making law instead of interpreting it. Or when the MSM goes in the tank.