She is not a crook
: The half-hearted apology that includes such phrases as, “If I made a mistake…” usually precedes the resignation under continued fire by only a few days. Tick. Tick. [via Glenn Reynolds]
8 responses to “She is not a crook”
-
WOW! After reading Linda foley’s *apology* I am dumbfounded. This is the president of the Newspapers Guild? Her article read like a screed from a left wing nut-job. The audacity of the left seems to know no bounds. To accuse our American troops or government of actually targeting jounalists in Iraq is absurd. That people, soldiers, citizens, and journalists get killed in Iraq is a given. There is a WAR going on over there. Although I am one of the first to want good objective news of the war in Iraq, I believe if non-military personel put themselves in harms way they are there at there own risk. But what is unbelievable to me is that a journalist of her caliber can make such audacious unfounded accusations and expect no backlash. The hate filled bile that is being spewed by the likes of Foley, Durbin and Dean are doing great damage to this country and THEY should be held accountable.
-
so hypothetically, lets say that it was discovered that a few members of the military were instructed to target certain journalists, and those troops obeyed that illegal order. what would you call a right-wing journalist who broke the story? a lefty?
how about sometimes reporters get the story correct and sometimes they dont. and sometimes they have it correct but their source backs out.
not everything is a conspiracy. sometimes people just dont do their jobs very well. i love it how those who identify themselves as Right wing allow Bush to fail at just about everything that he attempts, including talking on a microphone, but if any so-called Lefty bungles they’re hurting america.
for the record i believe that the reports that troops have targeted journalists were just as incorrect as the reports that saddam had wmds. i also believe that those mistakes came with vastly different repercussions of which the president has yet to pay for and people like you tonynoboloney continually give him a pass on.
this is the era of the hypocrite. -
Shorter Tony – Saddam NEVER had WMD’s.
Congrats. Even the brain damaged DUMB kidz won’t step into that tar pit. -
“To accuse our American troops or government of actually targeting jounalists in Iraq is absurd.”
No… read again:
Fourteen of those deaths, involving U.S. forces, have been inadequately explained or investigated by the U.S. military.
Big difference. No accusation of “targeting” there, just a criticism.
Maybe you should write her a nasty letter also, calling her a lefty bitch journalist that SHOULD be killed.
Then you’d fit right in… -
“Big difference. No accusation of “targeting” there, just a criticism.”
Maybe. But she goes on to say “[a]s a result, many journalists around the world wonder if the U.S. military is targeting journalists.” This is the refuge of a scoundrel, to claim that she doesn’t think it, but other people do. This is just code for “I think it’s true, but I want some plausible deniability if my comment bites me in the ass.”
Many readers around the world think that Ms. Foley is a traitorous scumbag who should be flogged. Ha ha, can’t hold me accountable for that. -
Tony, I stand by my original stance, the advisorioal politics of todays journalist are damaging to the U.S. and puts our troops at risk. The idea that I would call a “right wing” Journalist a “lefty” for reporting a TRUE story is just not right. But what I see in the press these days is a bunch of reporters with an agenda who continually throw sh*t against the wall to see if it will stick. As to a full investigation of charges of journalists being targeted by U.S. troops, I believe there will be plenty of time for this when our government is not so busy trying to win a war. The continual harping and comparison to WMD’s story seems to give the press the right to tell any lie.
Angelos, The criticism that these jounalists deaths have been inadeqetly explained or investigated falls on *my* deaf ears. What is it you don’t understand about being at war? It is not the time yet to expend time and energy on un-founded accusations, there will be plenty of time when the war is over. As to writing a nasty letter to Ms. Foley calling her anything, means you do not know me. Surmising that I would even consider targeting a jounalist for death means you are a fool. I do not understand your reference to *fit right in*, are you suggesting that because of my stance I can be compared to a terrorist? TONY -
Foley’s original accusation that journalists were being targeted can be read here.
To date, Foley has provided one specific case of alleged targeting — the Palestine Hotel incident she finally mentioned in the Guild backpedal. The U.S. military may not have explained it (and would Foley believe it if they did), but the accounts of reporters from the Boston Herald and the Los Angeles Times who were actually there demonstrate that Foley is wrong about it. Indeed, although Foley would like to dismiss the criticism of her smear as a right-wing screed, it should be noted that a similar claim by Eason Jordan was criticized by Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd.
That Foley is now claiming that she really meant something quite different from what she originally said is an implicit admission that her original smear was just that — a smear. And she does not apologize for it. Nevertheless, I would predict that she will not resign or be forced out, based on my assessment of the Newspaper Guild. -
To date, Foley has provided one specific case of alleged targeting — the Palestine Hotel incident she finally mentioned in the Guild backpedal
Uh, no, she provided two, actually. The killing of Al Jazeera journalist Tariq Ayoub, also on April 8, 2003, but not a the Palestine Hotel.
And although she did not give details on others, she did, in fact, “mention” a total of 14 reporters killed by our fire.
As a military PAO — and as someone who has done academic research on the issue, I can attest that Ms. Foley makes some very valid points in her “apology.”
While it was certainly irresponsible for her to allege that journalists were intentionally targeted (and if you belive anything this officer with over ten years in the military — seven as a PAO — says, believe this: we would NEVER do such a thing), her assertion that many of these cases have been “inadequately explained” or investigated is right on the mark. However, I think the Palestine hotel incident was an exception to that — not a perfect explanation, but certainly more forthcoming than usual.
What disgusts me most about this — particularly in the case of Tariq Ayoub — is that I know there are reasonable explanations for these deaths, but our responses quite frankly have been dismissive at best. The response to the guild’s latest plea, by Bryan Whitman, is a perfect example, and it’s embarrassing to read. I got a similar response from my colleagues when doing graduate research on the subject. We can do better, and if the public deserves better from journalism, they also deserve better from public servants like Whitman.
One final point: I would certainly not include Buzzmachine in this, but there is an awful lot of venom (as opposed to responsible criticism) of reporters, and more than a few thoughtless and irresponsible allegations of “staging” photos and actually promoting the terrorists. As an example, how many times has LGF used “The Media Are the Enemy” as a post title? And I also happen to recall people calling Kevin Sites a “traitor.” So why should we surprised when reasonable people — to say nothing of an ideologue like Foley — see some level of intent in these incidents?
Just something to think about.
