Pajamas has a great wrap-up of blog opinion. Already included – a podcast from Baghdad of Omar of Iraq the Model interviewed by our Richard Fernandez (Wretchard)! Do not miss. To be noted: the Iraqi parliament, on hearing the news, immediately filled those three missing cabinet posts. What a day!
AND THIS:
This is a great day for supporters of the War on Terror (really Islamism) but, as everyone knows, a bad day is right around the corner. Still surveying people’s reactions to this event is instructive. When the story of these incredible times is finally written (if it ever is), the more distant view will contain many surprises – about who was really liberal and who conservative and what (if anything) those terms have come to mean anyway, about who really cared about the Iraqis and who cared more for themselves and their own advancement or the advancement of their team, about democracy (its uses and, alas, limitations), but finally about whom you can trust in a foxhole. War cannot be pretty and many retreat at the first (or second) sign of blood. Increasingly, we know who they are.
AND ONE OTHER THING: If I were Bin Laden and Zawahiri, I’d be tightening up my already draconian security. One leader being ratted out could start a stampede.
AN EXAMPLE of what I mean about foxholes is here. It’s clear that not-so-deep-down Tim Russert doesn’t want us to succeed in Iraq. Reason: it wasn’t his team that advocated it. How completely pathetic is that!
MORE: I have been watching the White House press conference with Tony Snow and am more convinced than ever that Snow may be Bush’s best (and most important) appointment. Snow is superb at handling his media colleagues (suggesting his IQ is a bit higher). Good thing too. Given that the War on Terror exists more than anywhere in the realm of propaganda, the role of the Press Secretary is almost as crucial as the Defense Secretary.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
35 Comments
1. jedrury:NBC plays it with Matt Lauer yapping on about what this might do to the president’s cascading approval ratings and the resultant White House spin.
Russert on the West Coast looking grave and sleep deprived repeatedly echoing Lauer’s points with the teenage term for certitude ” Absolutely, Matt …”
Why do we need these two? Because GE/NBC has deemed that, in Katie’s absence, Lauer will not only be interviewing Jessica Simpson, but damning Donald Rumsfeld.
Entertainment, politics, foreign relations, they are all the same, right, Matt!!!
Jun 8, 2006 - 5:51 am 2. Bostonian:It occurred to me, on reading jedrury’s post, that the press really considers the War on Terrorism a distinct second to the Real War, the War on GWB, His Cronies, and Everyone Who Voted For Him.
Viewed this way, it is hardly surprising that the first topic to cover in any newscast, is “How does this affect our progress in getting rid of the monster-on-earth, George W. Bush?”
Yeesh.
Jun 8, 2006 - 7:12 am 3. Fausta:In the early hours of the morning, ABC news looked quite gloomy.
Jun 8, 2006 - 7:49 am 4. In Vino Veritas:BBCA’s newscast, however, had the good taste to broadcast live Tony Blair’s press conference, and he looked gleeful (to use the BBC anchor’s own words).
Pointing out that the capture of Saddam did not improve the situation on the ground in Iraq makes Russert a Democratic operative? What disdain for analytical intelligence conservatives show. You are advocating the media simply be a cheerleader for this Administration at all times.
I wonder, had John Kerry been elected, or, in 2008, if a Democrat is elected, will conservatives media fealty to that President as vociferously as they demand it now? Talk about partisan hackery.
Jun 8, 2006 - 8:01 am 5. jedrury:As much as it gives me indigestion, the nightly news must be watched since it indicates the mind set of media groupthink.
NBC’s motto is “Blood Sells.” Richard Engel is
on the scene in Baghdad for all bombings, car crashes, kidnappings and beheadings and since he speaks the language he’s given a certain star status; Jim Mickelshevski [spelling bad] is the phony Pentagon scandal monger who tattles on the joint chiefs interpreting the spin; Lisa Myers is the inside Washington scandalmonger; David Gregory is mano mano to the evil commander in chief who has nothing ever good to say about
the President and then there is the dim witted Russert who echoes the question by gravely announcing “Absolutely.”
On the NewsHour last night, Gwen Ifill was
asking questions of two retired Marine generals, Hoar and DeLong, and it was so obvious that she was seeking, without success, to uncover criticism of the Marines in Hidatha. She went on and on, repeating, reformating her questions thinking with the stupidity that can come only from the American press that these Marine general would rat out fellow Marines.
Gwen, listen, the Marines aren’t the Army!!!
Jun 8, 2006 - 8:05 am 6. Kevin Peters:VV:
Jun 8, 2006 - 8:43 am 7. Kevin Peters:The media and posters all over the internet have pointed to the failure to kill or capture Bin Laden and many of the other top AQ leaders as a sign that the war is a failure. “But you can’t even get Zawahri” or versions of that line have been repeated millions of times from virtually every pundit that has ripped the administration on it’s war effort. Now that the human cancer is dead it’s “well this makes little difference.” If this death is so trivial why was the failure to kill him pointed to so many times before he died. You have to answer this question. No one is saying the war is over. But this is a huge victory. This man was a brutal, misery causing, head sawing off blot on humanity and it is as great day that he is absent from this earth. No, the press should not be cheerleaders. They also shouldn’t be paid mourners for the Zawahri clan and cheerleaders for the Islamo fascist war effort.
Zarkawi, I was projecting.
Jun 8, 2006 - 8:46 am 8. chuck:I wonder, had John Kerry been elected, or, in 2008, if a Democrat is elected, will conservatives media fealty to that President as vociferously as they demand it now? Talk about partisan hackery.
Does a hypothetical count as a strawman? If Hitler had been a Democrat would he have been celebrated as a great man? Get serious, guy.
Jun 8, 2006 - 8:59 am 9. In Vino Veritas:Kevin, I don’t believe “well you haven’t killed Zarqawi yet” was repeated “millions of times.” Forget millions, one citation where that was said before would do. It’s been said with regards to bin laden, but that’s more a matter of revenge; we want the bastard’s head on a platter already.
I simply don’t believe what Russert said was any different in substance than what the President said this morning:
“Zarqawi is dead,” Mr. Bush said in early morning remarks at the White House. “But the difficult and necessary mission in Iraq continues. We can expect the terrorists and insurgents to carry on without him. We can expect the sectarian violence to continue.”
Does this statement mean the President “doesn’t want us to succeed in Iraq?”
Jun 8, 2006 - 9:00 am 10. chuck:Does this statement mean the President “doesn’t want us to succeed in Iraq?”
Tone, IVV, tone. And while Russert is attempting to deflate the success, Bush is using it to hearten the people for the remaining tasks. And speaking of tone, I think you need a drink.
Jun 8, 2006 - 9:19 am 11. Das:Did you catch the reporter who asked about Kennedy’s Rolling Stone article this morning?
I saw it coming before it hit and it was magnificent. Snow said (my paraphrase), “I’ll let you be the representative from Rolling Stone magazine today.” He might as well have lobbed a lemon pie in the reporter’s face for the reaction it got. Hilarious.
Jun 8, 2006 - 9:22 am 12. dclydew:It’s nice to know there’s one less crazy religious fanatic in the world. In fact, I think I’m most happy becase he had become soo crazy that his own people turned him in. Ya can’t beat that for good propaganda!
That being said, I think we all understand that he had already been somewhat sidelined by most of the actual ‘insurgents’ (aka Iraqis) and appeared (according to intelligence) to be influential among other outsider troublemakers like himself. I think this is heartening, in that with a madman like him gone, perhaps the Iraqi government can again offer some sort of reunion between Iraqis. Getting all Iraqis together to stand against foreign fighters would be of great value to the stability of the nation.
Jun 8, 2006 - 9:40 am 13. Kevin Peters:VV:
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:06 am 14. patrick neid:You wanted a one citation. Read “Holy Zarqawi, Why Bush let Iraqi’s Top Terrorist Walk”, by Daniel Benjamin, Slate, Oct. 29th, 2004. It is a article ripping Bush for focusing on Saddam and ignoring “non-state” actors who are the “true” problem in Iraq. This was a quick google but I have been responding to the “why can’t we get the top terrorists, why are they able to put out their propaganda tapes” argument all over the blogosphere and most of the posters here have read it , yes, millions of times.It hasn’t been just Bin Laden the punditocracy has been complaining about. Now that Zarqawi is dead it becomes “oh, it’s no big deal.’
….”This is a great day for supporters of the War on Terror (really Islamism)”…..
you mean the two dozen or so of us that are left! i can’t even take good news anymore because of the ugly spin that follows it. ie Berg’s father comes to mind.
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:07 am 15. Steven Mitchell:Kevin, I wish you’d stop using “VV” to respond to our friend there. In the text, it looks like a “W” at first glance, which creates a minor association that I really don’t think is warranted.
OT: Hooray! Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. How deep does the press have to go before they stop digging? I’m guessing based on the common sense demonstrated so far, they may go deep enough to solve our dependence on foreign oil.
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:32 am 16. Kevin Peters:Steve:
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:40 am 17. pst314:IVV ok!
“It’s been said with regards to bin laden, but that’s more a matter of revenge”
Wrong. The failure to capture bin Laden has been frequently used as an indicator that the war is a failure.
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:50 am 18. pst314:“Pointing out that the capture of Saddam did not improve the situation on the ground in Iraq makes Russert a Democratic operative? What disdain for analytical intelligence conservatives show.”
It is absurd to claim that the capture of a leader does not help. End the war, obviously not, but help, certainly.
Jun 8, 2006 - 10:52 am 19. tim maguire:There’s nothing new about the anti-war reaction to Zarqawi’s death (I almost wrote “left’s reaction”, but there are a few leftists who realize what’s important). After every big victory in the GWOT, the anti’s respond, “oh, that wasn’t so important. Bush still hasn’t [insert...whatever here].”
Jun 8, 2006 - 11:32 am 20. jedrury:With the death of Zarqawi, the media will baptise a new Jesse James, a new Billy the Kid, a new evil doer to replace him, howling from the rooftops that the President’s announcement this morning was a new “Mission Accomplished” stunt.
Maybe today or tomorrow, after the next Baghdad atrocity, the media song will change to the refrain: this war – this chaos – is unwinnable… so when are the troops coming home?
The tension between the media and the President will continue in the meantime; each completely distrustful of the other. Each, according to James Bowman in the most recent New Criterion, trying to create their own relaity for the American people.
Jun 8, 2006 - 12:02 pm 21. Terrye:I am so glad this son of a bitch is dead.
Maybe the left will mourn him and try to make this all about them and their vendetta against Bush, but all that does is remind people why it is that leftists are not fit to run the country.
At least Harry Reid was smart enough to say Zarqawi got what he deserved.
Jun 8, 2006 - 12:05 pm 22. Anthony (Los Angeles):This is a great day in the war against Islamic fascism. Granted, he’s only one man and this was only on battle in what will be a long war, but it’s still a great day.
Congratulations to the US military and the Iraqi people.
Jun 8, 2006 - 12:12 pm 23. Bruce Wechsler:Can’t stop the spinners spinning. As Roger suggests, we need a time machine to know who and what ends up on the wrong side of history.
Whether or not the “War in Iraq” is viewed as won or lost down the road, let us pause a moment and be thankful that a disgusting murderer is no more. That is a win by any [reasonable] calculation.
May his virgins be Extreme Sadists
Jun 8, 2006 - 12:42 pm 24. PJ:What a moral lesson for the world, to see this monster delivered to his final place in Hell. Hurray for our troops and the brave Iraqis!
I would imagine lots of terrorist sympathisers will be changing their tune soon, now that it’s common knowledge that the troops got Z’s hard drives…
Jun 8, 2006 - 12:48 pm 25. Buddy Larsen:Tim & Matt, re Zarkawi:
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:12 pm 26. TomTom:“No joy in America allow we!”
More than one of the websites I checked to see how the Zarkawi story was reported stated baldly that among those killed was the Zark’s “spiritual advisor”, a Sheik Something-or-other.
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:22 pm 27. Buddy Larsen:Sheik Rat’l n R’ohl?
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:27 pm 28. David Thomson:I am hoping that Zarkawi was the heart and soul of Iraqi terrorism. He was a charismatic leader—and not easily replaceable. There is a possibility that the remaining terrorists will be unable to stage further major coordinated attacks.
I also noticed that the stock market went up slightly today. Is there a connection? Could Zarkawiís death positively influence the investment community?
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:27 pm 29. Buddy Larsen:It was more than that, David. The mkts began with the margin clerks selling off yesterday’s forced plays from around the world, but once that pressure concluded, the Dow bounced up over 200 points off session lows–and on the highest volume in many months.
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:34 pm 30. Fausta:It gets even better:
Zarqawi’s death allowed coalition forces to go after his network – those people who had been used to establish his movements, patterns and habits, Gen Caldwell said.
Coalition and Iraqi forces moved quickly, conducting 17 simultaneous raids in and around Baghdad within hours of Zarqawi’s death.
“And in those 17 raids last night a tremendous amount of information and intelligence was collected. It is presently being exploited and utilised for further use. I mean it was a treasure trove, no question,” the general said.
Jun 8, 2006 - 2:43 pm 31. Charlie (Colorado):… the role of the Press Secretary is almost as crucial as the Defense Secretary.
Frightening, but true.
Jun 8, 2006 - 3:57 pm 32. jedrury:The President of the United States on the lawn of the White House this morning announces the death of the monster. No smiles, his face stern, calm and coldly unemotional. A little grey in the hair, blue tie. There will be no questions from the tittering scribbling press.
The poker player, el supremo.
Jun 8, 2006 - 6:43 pm 33. E'sdaughter:I’m new to this blog stuff but had to respond to this one, just to say “Amen to that.”
An avid supporter of The (long overdue)War on Terror
Jun 16, 2006 - 1:04 am 34. Jim Hoppe:Avoiding attacking suspected terrorist mastermind
Abu Musab Zarqawi blamed for more than 700 killings in Iraq
By Jim Miklaszewski
Chief Pentagon correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 3:14 p.m. HT March 2, 2004
With Tuesdayís attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq.
But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself ó but never pulled the trigger.
In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.
The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.
ìHere we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didnít do it,î said Michael OíHanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.
Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.
The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.
ìPeople were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the presidentís policy of preemption against terrorists,î according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.
In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.
The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.
Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawiís operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late ó Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. ìHereís a case where they waited, they waited too long and now weíre suffering as a result inside Iraq,î Cressey added.
And despite the Bush administrationís tough talk about hitting the terrorists before they strike, Zarqawiís killing streak continues today.
Apr 6, 2007 - 11:16 am 35. Jim Hoppe:Cheney reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam link
18 minutes ago
WASHINGTON – Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his assertions of al-Qaida links to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq on Thursday as the Defense Department released a report citing more evidence that the prewar government did not cooperate with the terrorist group.
Cheney contended that al-Qaida was operating in Iraq before the March 2003 invasion led by U.S. forces and that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading the Iraqi branch of al-Qaida. Others in al-Qaida planned the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
“He took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the al-Qaida operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June,” Cheney told radio host Rush Limbaugh during an interview. “As I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq.”
However, a declassified Pentagon report released Thursday said that interrogations of the deposed Iraqi leader and two of his former aides as well as seized Iraqi documents confirmed that the terrorist organization and the Saddam government were not working together before the invasion.
….
Apr 6, 2007 - 11:19 am