Whose Side Are They On?

From the beginning of the War on Terror, the mainstream media has been working to bring home the bad news on the war, virtually to the exclusion of any good news. Even if they've had to fabricate it on occasion. Surely this is an exaggeration, isn't it?

Do you remember the "Mai Lai Massacre of the Iraq War?"

It was a Time Magazine cover story in June of 2006. Christopher Matthews interviewed Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA) on national television, and Murtha said that Marines, "in cold blood", had executed more 20 innocent civilians in Haditha, Iraq.

The media's story has been falling apart ever since.

"No Murder Charges Filed In Haditha Case"
"The Haditha Libels Require Investigation"
"Is the Haditha Story Falling Apart?"
"Time Magazine Massacres the Truth"
"Tim McGirk Re-Invents Haditha Video Source"

Starting in mid 2007 things have been going our way a little more in Iraq. Because of this, the war has largely disappeared from the front pages of the nation's newspapers. In place of disaster stories from Iraq, we find stories about profound problems within the military or we read about our hapless soldiers/veterans caricatured as victims, a favorite theme of the MSM. These stories have covered such topics as the spike-up in suicide rates among our soldiers, to the Army being forced to lower recruitment standards in order to meet manpower goals; from the (by now notorious and utterly discredited) multipart New York Times series on our murderous Iraq War veterans to the Army's inability to retain its captains.

Each of these stories is at best highly misleading. At worst they're utter fabrications. Let's take a look at what passes for "journalism"...

[long, precise, damning - recommended to anyone who thinks the opening statement to be an exaggeration]

READ MORE