Fisking the growth of stunt?

Eric Boehlert complains that the Washington Times (in this article) smeared Democrats by claiming that some of them saw the Zarqawi killing as a "stunt":

Matt Drudge immediately posted the article up high on his site, while Power Line, Michelle Malkin and legions from the 101st Fighting Keyboarders touted the piece as proof Democrats can't even back Bush, let alone the U.S. military, when a ruthless terrorist is finally knocked out. That's how crazy conspiratorial Democrats are, they think the killing of Zarqawi was a stunt.

Slight problem. The Washington Times completely manufactured the story. Meaning the Washington Times article does not quote a single Democrat who thinks the Zarqawi killing was a "stunt." The article, as far as I can tell, was a pure Democratic hit piece from the right-wing daily owned by the Rev. Sung Myung Moon, who fancies himself to be the son of God. I realize it's not exactly news when the Washington Times adopts unique journalism guidelines, but this instance really did seem to break new ground for the money-losing newspaper since the piece appeared at first glance, based on the whiplash speed with which it made the rounds online, to have been part of an orchestrated campaign to damage Congressional Democrats.

This led Atrios (in a post titled "Lies and the Lying Liars") to counter the meme, and ratchet things up by accusing "the right" of having a "general love of authoritarian cultists":
I do wonder why the right loves Reverend Moon so much.

I guess it fits their general love of authoritarian cultists.

Oh yeah! (I've long been down with Moon's dung-eating dogs. My reasonable side is almost tempted to ask, since when does linking an article indicate love of the author, much less the publisher, but why ask reasonable questions when that mainly bores friends and irritates adversaries?)

Whether the Washington Times article was intended as a hit piece or not, I think it's fair to point out that not quite everyone sees the "stunt" allegation as a smear. In a piece headlined "Zarqawi Death Propaganda Victory for Bush," Islam Online cites the Times article with approval (along with quotes from the legendary Robert Fisk):

CAIRO — The death of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in a US air strike was seen by analysts, Democrats and ordinary Americans as another "mission accomplished" and a golden opportunity for the Bush administration to say once again "ladies and gentlemen we got him" in yet another propaganda victory for President George W. Bush.

They said the announcement on Thursday is a reminder of the US propaganda of the capture of ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein just to divert public attention from an unpopular war and the latest American disgraces in Iraq: the killing of innocent civilians in cold blood.

"So, it's another 'mission accomplished'," writes famed British columnist Robert Fisk in The Independent of Friday, June 9.

"The man immortalized by the Americans as the most dangerous terrorist since the last most dangerous terrorist, is killed - by the Americans. A Jordanian corner-boy who could not even lock and load a machine gun is blown up by the US Air Force - and Messrs Bush and Blair see fit to boast of his demise," he said.

To this have our leaders descended. And how short are our memories. They seek him here, they seek him there."

Lay people in the United States believe that Zarqawi's death will have more value for Bush and his supporters that it will for anyone else.

"A major propaganda victory on the home front, but, as with Saddam's capture, not much else," says one American in a discussion forum posted by The Houston Chronicle on Zarqawi's death.

While Eric Boehlert claims that the only evidence for the stunt claim was "a cut-up quote from a single Democrat," Islam-Online offers more:
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, said Zarqawi was a small part of "a growing anti-American insurgency" and that it is time to get out.

"We're there for all the wrong reasons," Kucinich said.

"Where is Osama? Where are the battalions of trained Iraqis? Doesn't matter, we got this guy, right? We wrote a 25 million check as a reward, and get a new headline to bump off Haditha."

"Just as the American public begins to look into Haditha, this happens. I'm going to be interested as to how Bush's approval rating changes, as well as how long we've known where this guy was," a Democrat told The American Inspectator newspaper.

If I didn't know any better, I'd swear the stunt meme was already growing. Maybe not where and in the exact manner it's supposed to grow, but don't blame me. (I never linked the piece until I saw the Atrios tripe about authoritarian Moon love.)

What is this Reverend Sun Myung Moonbat trying to do, anyway? Make the Democrats look good?

MORE: The Zarqawi stunt meme spreads to Turkey.

And Australia.

Actually, unless I am reading this wrong, the Democrats right now seem united in making one thing abundantly clear: the Zarqawi killing was NOT A STUNT.

I think that's good.

posted by Eric on 06.10.06 at 02:24 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/3703






Comments

I have a modest proposal. I enjoy reading not only your posts but also the comments you seem to generate (and how you do that is a question for another day). With that in mind, I'd submit that any future redesign would optimize notification/viewing of new comments. A little column on one side with links to recent comments, that sort of thing.

And, I must say, I've never been impressed with Kucinich. After all, his name rhymes with spinach (no great crime in and of itself), and this seems to amuse him to no end.

Jon Thompson   ·  June 10, 2006 10:30 PM
Whether the Washington Times article was intended as a hit piece or not, I think it's fair to point out that not quite everyone sees the "stunt" allegation as a smear. In a piece headlined "Zarqawi Death Propaganda Victory for Bush," Islam Online cites the Times article with approval...

What's your point? Islam Online and the Washington Times could both have an interest in pretending Dem leaders said the hit was a stunt. Not the same interest: IO wants its readers to think the hit actually was a stunt; and the Times wants its readers to think even Democratic pols are nut jobs.

So the fact that two opposed parties promote the same meme lends it no credence at all. The meme is bogus if it's not backed up by evidence. Is it? Well, the Washington Times doesn't offer any, just a "cut-up quote", as you seem to accept. But you think the IO piece does. Well, look closely at the portion you cite:

Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, said Zarqawi was a small part of "a growing anti-American insurgency" and that it is time to get out.

"We're there for all the wrong reasons," Kucinich said.

"Where is Osama? Where are the battalions of trained Iraqis? Doesn't matter, we got this guy, right? We wrote a 25 million check as a reward, and get a new headline to bump off Haditha."

"Just as the American public begins to look into Haditha, this happens. I'm going to be interested as to how Bush's approval rating changes, as well as how long we've known where this guy was," a Democrat told The American Inspectator newspaper.

Read hastily, that passage looks like an extended quote from Democratic rep Dennis Kucinich.

The first two paragraphs actually are. But they don't quote him saying, or even implying, that the hit was a stunt. In fact, these two paragraphs are cut-and-pasted directly out of the Washington Times article.

The third paragraph's placement makes it look like its a continuation of Kucinich's quote. But its placement is deceptive: in fact its a separate, unattributed quote. Anyone could have said it.

The quote in the fourth paragraph is actually attributed to a "Democrat" in an American Spectator article. I looked up the original article, and the "Democrat" is actually Imagine1989, a poster on Democratic Underground.

So what's to be learned from this? The Washington Times remains guilty of smearing Democrats without basis. IslamOnline.net appears to have been even more brazenly disingenuous, though it had a different motive. And no-one has yet discovered a whit of substance behind the bogus meme that Democrats think the Zarqawi killing was a stunt.

vakelis   ·  June 11, 2006 01:17 AM

Vakelis: You've convinced me.

Jon Thompson   ·  June 11, 2006 06:20 AM

But, I still don't like Dennis Kucinich.

Jon Thompson   ·  June 11, 2006 06:21 AM

By citing the Washington Times and Islam-Online, I didn't vouch for the accuracy and reliability of either, nor did I argue that the word "stunt" accurately characterizes views of certain Democrats.

I argued:

1. that the stunt meme is spreading; and

2. that it is not fair to characterize people citing the Washington Times as Moon followers or authoritarian cultists.

(I'm neither a Moonie for citing the times, nor an "Islamist" for citing Islam-Online.)

Eric Scheie   ·  June 11, 2006 11:48 AM

Let me make one thing perfectly clear!

The Democrats didn't say the Zarqawi killing was NOT a stunt; only that they never SAID it was a stunt.

Tricky Dick   ·  June 11, 2006 06:56 PM

Speaking of Moon what you think about this?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/6/11/16911/9571

Newdle   ·  June 11, 2006 08:32 PM

I get a "page cannot be displayed" error code.

Eric Scheie   ·  June 11, 2006 11:52 PM


December 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits