Stories that have caught my eye recently

There's a lot here, and I doubt even the odd visitor is going to want to read all of these, so I'll synop them in a line or two. Of course, I think they're all worth reading, but maybe one or two will catch your eye.

The Iraqi War Quiz :
The Best type, because it cites and references all the required source material. This is a short quiz that asks the sort of questions the US media never seem to, and illustrates beautifully the difference between what the Bush Administration says, and what it does.

You just killed a family
I found it sadly ironic that only days after the US asked Israel for advice on roadblocks, the US shot and killed seven women and children. Was that quick study or what? This story in the Guardian points out how an eye-witness reporters version of what happened is ignored while the military gets to fudge the issue. Oh, the reporter in question works for the Washington Post.
Also of note in the story is how the internet and one dedicated reader managed to put the lie to the allies claim that it wasn't a US missile that hit the Iraqi marketplace.

The US doesn't want accurate reporting coming out of Iraq
The sacking and hiring of Peter Arnett was also worth noting. Nicely written piece from the Daily Times (Pakistan)
"Overnight my successful NBC reporting career was turned to ashes. And why? Because I stated the obvious to Iraqi television; that the US war timetable has fallen by the wayside." He added that he had made the same comments to television stations around the world. "The right-wing media and politicians are looking for any opportunity to be critical of the reporters who are here, whatever their nationality. I made the misjudgment, which gave them the opportunity to do so. I gave an impromptu interview to Iraqi television feeling that after four months of interviewing hundreds of Iraqis, it was only a professional courtesy to give them a few comments. That was my Waterloo."

BBC boss admits 'daily' mistakes in Iraq
In fairness to the BBC, they've been pretty good with the unbiased reporting. They've made mistakes, they admit it, but generally they've been reporting the good and bad pretty freely. Unlike SKY, say, who ignored Scott Ritter after the interview with him didn't go according to plan. His comments were reported by the BBC, and the credited Sky as the source.

Film of PoWs within Geneva rules
[T]he article [in the Geneva convention] does not prevent all photographs of prisoners, and newspapers and TV companies are not bound by the convention, which applies only to states or "detaining powers".
The defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, [...] condemned the parading of coalition prisoners of war on Iraqi television and the broadcast of film showing two dead British servicemen as "a flagrant and sickening breach of the Geneva convention". But article 13 does not seem to cover the bodies of soldiers killed in battle, since they are not prisoners of war.

British soldiers were NOT executed
This was after Blair had publicly said they were, when the families in question were told the truth. Sure enough, Blair had to retract the statement later.

Scott Ritter talks about the war
Scott is an electric speaker, very knowledgeable, very passionate. He's not a pacifist, believing war is sometimes justified, and he's not afraid to tackle complex issues. This story reflects his talk, and the way the he impressed the audience.

Support your troops
An interesting piece highlighting the discrepency between those people who want to support the troops by keeping them overseas in dangerous areas, and yet are strangely silent when the administration cut funding for veteran's health care and benefit programs by nearly $25 billion over the next ten years.

Scott Ritter, on why the US/UK may not actually win the war

This is one of those times when losing and not-winning, aren't exactly the same thing. He makes several interesting points about the type of warfare this is, and how superstates like Russia as well as America, have become embroiled in quagmire situations in the past.

And just because not everything about the war is deadly serious, a little humor :
Texas liberated in 2005.
The year is 2005. Now that UN troops have conquered the American homeland, ending a five-year reign of terror by the Bushites, the world can afford to catch its breath and try to understand how the nightmare started.


posted by Manchild at 1:52 PM