Zarqawi’s Corpse Not Even Cold & MSM Returns to Anti-Bush Bias
The terrorist Zarqawi’s corpse isn’t even cold and AOL decides to replace its news story announcing the death of this top terrorist with a headline about the pessimistic views of the father of a man murdered by the now-dispatched Zarqawi. Michael Berg doesn’t
“see any good coming from al-Zarqawi’s death.” So much does this man hate Bush that he can’t appreciate the importance of the death of the man responsible for countless murders, including that of his own son.
The U.S. scores a major victory in the war in Iraq, indeed, in the War on Terror and AOL focuses on one angry man’s narrow view. This is the guy who blamed President Bush for the murder of his son and not the man who, in all likelihood, wielded the murder weapon. As our troops score a major victory, certain to dishearten an already increasingly disheartened enemy, AOL highlights a piece about a man with a severe case of Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Earlier today, Glenn (AKA Instapundit) linked Tim Graham’s comment:
It’s sad that within minutes of announcing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s death, the network morning shows were already carrying criticism of the Bush administration. Not only did NBC invite Sen. Joe Biden so he could attack Bush incompetence (funny day for that!)
Glenn quipped:
It’s transparent stuff like this, of course, that gets them accused of spinning war news to make things look worse than they are, and to hurt Bush. Because, you know, that’s what they do, every day. It’s just more noticeable at times like this.
Exactly.
The MSM may not be able to ignore this good news, but they are certainly going to do everything in their power to downplay it.
UPDATE (@ 4:20 EST): AOL has since changed its news lead on its Welcome Page back to an article on the successful U.S. airstrike which took out this terrorist.
UP-UPDATE: At Lifelike Pundits, Aaron offers a tribute to those who helped dispatch this terrorist thug to the darkest circles of hell — and points out that the murderer had been living in Iraq prior to the American liberation of that once Stalinist nation. Read the whole thing!
UP-UP-UPDATE: Over at Real Clear Politics,Tom Bevan finds that the Minneapolis Star-Tribune “seems able to muster only a bare minimum of enthusiasm and unable to focus, even for a single day, on the hugely positive aspects of Zarqawi’s death.” (Via Powerline.)
UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Hugh has more on the media’s defeatism even in the wake of this significant victory. Not only did we take out the leader of the enemy forces in Iraq (and a leader in the worldwide terrorist movement), but we also captured a treasure trove of intelligence while providing a moral boost to our troops. And encouraged other “insurgents” to cooperate with the U.S. military and provide further tips. The war may not be over, but we’re in a much stronger position than we were five days ago.
Rather than attempt to summarize all the links to the downbeat reports Hugh provides, I’ll just encourage you to read the whole thing!!
39 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
and the right wingers are celebrating in their customary fashion, bashing liberals. Are republicans good for anything other than pyschological study (herd mentality ) these days?
Comment by lester — June 8, 2006 @ 2:36 pm - June 8, 2006
“So much does this man hate Bush that he can’t appreciate the importance of the death of the man responsible for countless murders, including that of his own son. ”
I didn’t know Ann Coulter was blogging here these days.
Comment by Jeremy — June 8, 2006 @ 2:41 pm - June 8, 2006
Moo.
And a reporter asked Tony Snow if this was just a ploy by some underling who wanted Zarqawi’s job. LOL!
Comment by Synova — June 8, 2006 @ 2:56 pm - June 8, 2006
yep , the body isn’t even cold yet and gaypatriot is bashing the ol “msm”
Comment by lester — June 8, 2006 @ 3:22 pm - June 8, 2006
I’m a liberal – and I rejoice that the swine Zarqawi is dead – props to our military – but the war is far from over. More Zaqawis will arise because the administration has handeled this war soooooo incompetently.
Comment by David — June 8, 2006 @ 3:33 pm - June 8, 2006
Michael Berg’s only comment about Bush was:
Thats all he said about Bush. You may not agree with his opinion, but that doesn’t make him a foaming-at-the-mouth Bush-hater. He is a liberal (member of the Green Party), but you are ascribing to him a lot more motivations and opinions than there actually is evidence of, at least in this article.
That shows a little media bias of your own I think, GPW. -not that the man isn’t an idiot btw.
Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — June 8, 2006 @ 4:05 pm - June 8, 2006
this is funny. from http://www.theatlantic.com
“Despite their enthusiasm, al-Zarqawi, al-Maqdisi, and Abu Muntassir did not appear to be natural revolutionaries. Their first operation was in Zarqa, in 1993, a former Jordanian intelligence official told me, when al-Zarqawi dispatched one of their men to a local cinema with orders to blow it up because it was showing pornographic films. But the hapless would-be bomber apparently got so distracted by what was happening on the screen that he forgot about his bomb. It exploded and blew off his legs. “
Comment by lester — June 8, 2006 @ 4:15 pm - June 8, 2006
#6 Patrick, I just heard Michael Berg being interviewed by Michael Medved. the man is a nutcase. his BDS is so strong, he feels more strongly that President Bush killed his son, not Zarqawi.
All he could do for the 20 minutes he was on the radio was bash Bush, our government and our military.
I understand that Nick and his Dad disagreed on politics before Nicks murder. Nick was a supporter of President Bush. Clearly Michael probably told Nick at some time that supporting the President would lead to no good. Had his son followed in his footsteps, he would be alive today. But Nick was not his fathers clone, he chose his own path in life.
So all Michael Berg has left is placing all his anger on America. His son is dead, he can’t say to him: I told you so. Very sad, but all the sadder that MSM feels that we as Americans need to be subjected to this vile spewing of hate.
Comment by Leah — June 8, 2006 @ 4:19 pm - June 8, 2006
My media bias, Patrick? The guy blamed the president for a murder committed by a man since dispatched to the darkest circles of hell.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 8, 2006 @ 4:24 pm - June 8, 2006
oh, and, lester et al., if the MSM is going to return to his pattern of Bush-bashing, then, yes, I’ll take them on. And as the quotes included in this post show, I’m not alone.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 8, 2006 @ 4:28 pm - June 8, 2006
#6 – Gryph -
Anyone who would compare Bush to Zarqawi, painting them as equivalent, has one huge moral equivalence problem. And is a Bush-hater.
Zarqawi was a monster. Comparing Bush to him is hardly different from comparing Bush to Hitler. Reality check: both are deeply irresponsible acts, committed by people who have gone well over the cliff.
If you want to join Berg there – be my guest. It would fit to what I think/know of you already.
Comment by Calarato — June 8, 2006 @ 4:32 pm - June 8, 2006
Move over Cindy Sheehan, Michael Berg will now join some of the 9-11 widows and demand his 15 minutes in the limelight of shining opinions.
Michael Berg dishonors all parents, all Dads with his assinine comments about Bush.
Gramps, you got it wrong again and show a decidedly poor capacity to judge people, motivations and the value of informed opinions. But I love the “both sides of your mouth move”… Berg is a BushHater (btw, you are the LAST person on Earth to be able to judge that issue with credibility) but he’s also an idiot.
Both sides of the mouth? The tricks they learn on the Democrat Plantation porch these days… my oh my.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 8, 2006 @ 4:32 pm - June 8, 2006
Yes, lester, that actually *is* funny.
Of course, it’s funny in a “dead baby” joke sort of way. If he’s not a natural revolutionary, he was apparently a natural sociopath who thought that the proper response to sin was to blow people up.
Ka-BOOM.
This time it was him, his assistants, and his spies.
#5 No… more Zarqawis will not rise up. Other men will take his place but they will be themselves and not him. It sounds like we raided all of the *other* places we knew of but hadn’t raided while watching for Zarqawi after he was killed so chances are we got a lot of those who might have been prepared to move up in the organization as well as good deal of intelligence, documents, etc.
Actually, blowing up the porn theatre is really important. The people we are fighting believe in murder as a (if not *the*) means of enforcing morality. They really don’t care if they can take over a government if they can intimidate locals with beheadings (they are finding crap loads of heads in Iraq). Probably they will not ever go away entirely since even one hold out can plant a bomb or murder a sinner.
IT’S WORTH FIGHTING THESE PEOPLE.
The idea (not expressed here that I’ve noticed, at least not today) that we *create* these terrorists when we kill some of them ignores the fact that they aren’t political fanatics, they are *religious* fanatics who think that watching a porno movie is something that warrants murder. Whatever attracts them to this, what they are attracted to, at least in the case of AQ, is a religious cause and that would exist equally even if they had no martyrs. They would *still* be blowing up porno theatres, beheading women accused of infidelity, and attacking the decadent West.
Unless you’all want to stop being decadent?
The secular Baathists and local militants might be convinced to eventually get on with their lives. The radicals aren’t going to stop trying to enforce the will of Allah no matter if we stop killing them. Did the fellows in the porn theatre threaten them?
Stopping our “agression” won’t impact Islamist recruiting because that’s not what it’s about. Liberty and prosperity might reduce recruiting because people building their lives don’t blow stuff up.
Comment by Synova — June 8, 2006 @ 4:46 pm - June 8, 2006
and if people want to criticize michael berg they can. personally the guy ’s son was beheaded and there are videos of it on the internet. to me, he can say what ever he wants
But the point is it would be APPROPRIATE because he made the statement TODAY. Ann coulter is criticizing statements people made two years ago apropos of NOTHING.
Comment by lester — June 8, 2006 @ 4:56 pm - June 8, 2006
#6 – Gramps, you ignorant slut.
Here is MORE of what Moonbat Daddy Berg said on CNN, which you should take as the truth since it is not the dreaded “Fox News.” This is an EXACT TRANSCRIPT:
“I’m not saying Saddam Hussein’s a good man, but he’s no worse than George Bush. Under Saddam Hussein, no al-Qaeda in Iraq; under George Bush, al-Qaeda. Under Saddam Hussein, relative stability; under George Bush, instability. Under Saddam Hussein, 30,000 deaths a year; under George Bush, about 50,000 deaths. I don’t understand. Why is this better to have George Bush be the King of Iraq rather than Saddam Hussein?”
THIS GUY IS AN ASSHOLE IDIOT RED DIAPER DOPE-SMOKER. And the sad fact is that like the Jersey Girls, the drive-by-media will give him props and full credibility.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 8, 2006 @ 5:25 pm - June 8, 2006
Zark’s dead as a doornail; lefties are fit to be tied because they’re delusional with Bush Derangement Syndrome and therefore unable to perceive how tremendous this victory is; and the War in Iraq just improved dramatically with the death of this single mass murderer of thousands.
Yes, sensible Amercians have a lot to celebrate today: Zark was killed by our intrepid military forces; we’re winning in Iraq; life is improving for the long-suffering Iraqi people; and lefties who whine that the Bush Administration is badly “mishandling” this war are still free to vote for someone else in 2008.
Comment by Butch — June 8, 2006 @ 6:20 pm - June 8, 2006
we’re winning in iraq eh? how do you figure
Comment by lester — June 8, 2006 @ 6:36 pm - June 8, 2006
Actually the Michael Berg interviews prove that AnnCoulter is 98% correct.
Comment by paulnashtn — June 8, 2006 @ 6:38 pm - June 8, 2006
Actually the Michael Berg interviews prove that AnnCoulter is 98% correct.
Which doesn’t excuse the supposed remaining 2%.
Comment by John (AGJ) — June 8, 2006 @ 7:03 pm - June 8, 2006
I listened to the press conference with Tony Snow today and wasn’t surprised by the nonsense from some of the MSM. I believe the correct term is “idiot savants”.
Comment by John (AGJ) — June 8, 2006 @ 7:05 pm - June 8, 2006
MiM says:
Oh bull@#$%, sorry, but not liking Bush is not the same thing as “dishonoring all parents… etc.” What an overwrought drama queen you are. Are you doing Ann Coutler in drag? Get a better wig.
Speaking of “Bush Derangement Syndrome” a lot of you have a severe case of it. Only you have the symptoms wrong. You can REALLY tell when someone has it when they start slandering wives, parents, etc. of victims of terrorism because they don’t toe the GOP party line.
Equating dislike of Bush with treason… really, what a moral vacuum you must be living in. The guy had to watch and listen to his son having his head slowly sawed off of his body on national TV. When is the last time you went through something as painful as that? Yet the instant anyone dares criticize St. Bush they instantly get vilified as if they were the one doing the beheading instead of the one watching it. As an example of the moral degeneracy of GOP partisans it doesn’t get much clearer than that.
Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — June 8, 2006 @ 7:33 pm - June 8, 2006
We’re winning, all right.
The tip about Zark’s whereabouts came from people who were close to him. A major victory. We’ll likely be hearing more about that soon.
A new, freely elected Iraqi government has approved a Cabinet. By any measure, that’s a victory for Iraq and for the Coalition. (Assuming, of course, that one approves of representative government.)
Coalition deaths are decreasing monthly. Military reenlistment is meeting targets, and the quality and morale of retained troops is very high. This is huge.
Al Q’aeda is getting the living crap kicked out of them daily. The vast majority of Iraqi territory is stable.
No one did more to murder Iraqis and undermine their efforts at self-government than Zark. He personally selected the UN mission in Baghdad for bombing with military-grade ordnance, which was probably provided by disaffected Ba’athists. He was instrumental in fomenting the sectarian violence that could have erupted into a full-blown civil war; and insofar as it didn’t, he failed. His vicious jihad against the Shiites is finished, and his 3 1/2 years of thuggish brutality in Iraq is over.
Yes, the Iraqis and the Coalition are winning. This is a great day.
Comment by Butch — June 8, 2006 @ 7:44 pm - June 8, 2006
If anyone is wondering how deeply deranged some Democrats are, just check this out:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060608-041042-9038r.htm
Rep. Pete Stark seriously agrees with Kos/DU fans that the Zarqawi success was somehow a timed White House political conspiracy. Nuts!
Rep. Kucinich seriously thinks the terrorist murderers in Iraq are a “growing” (not shrinking) “anti-American insurgency”. He can’t bring himself to see what cheap, psychopathic killers they are, nor to side with Iraq’s elected unity government. Sick!!
Sen. Kent Conrad seriously thinks that nailing Zarqawi AND his top staff AND 17 other AQ cells (in the other raids) should be pooh-poohed because they still haven’t gotten bin Laden who today is only a figurehead. Nuts!
The Zarqawi news is good by itself – but in addition, it has been fun today to see just how undeniably, provably d-e-r-a-n-g-e-d some Lefties are.
Comment by Calarato — June 8, 2006 @ 9:02 pm - June 8, 2006
It’s true. The media should be dancing in the street and casting Bush flowers after this triumph. How dare they attempt any analysis of the effect on the insurgency or reflect anything less than GPW’s viewpoint!
Yes, Zarq’s corpse is not even cold and good ole GPW wants the media to play lapdog.
Comment by donny — June 9, 2006 @ 12:53 am - June 9, 2006
#8 by Leah — June 8, 2006 @ 4:19 pm – June 8, 2006
I just heard Michael Berg being interviewed by Michael Medved. the man is a nutcase….
I’ve never heard of Michael Berg, but you are correct that Michael Medved is a nutcase. He is nothing more than a former/failed/whatever movie reviewer who apparently got himself a gig on right-wing talk radio.
Kind of like Rusty “LameBrain” Limbaugh, except that Lamebrain was a failed sports announcer.
Comment by raj — June 9, 2006 @ 2:06 am - June 9, 2006
” Zarqawi’s Corpse Not Even Cold & MSM Returns to Anti-Bush Bias”
I’m sorry, but where was the President while the military and intelligence folks tracked down Zarqawi and killed him?
You make it seem like George W. Bush found him and killed him on his own. What, after all, is the link between a warm corpse and George W. Bush?
Comment by jimmy — June 9, 2006 @ 8:28 am - June 9, 2006
Tell me if this is too simplistic:
modern day liberals really feel the USA is the reason for a lot of the evil in the world. That America is to blame for most problems from 3rd world poverty to warming of the earth by 1.5 degrees. Modern day conseratives know that America is the reason for growing democracies and human freedom spreading in the world. Liberals look at every news item and find the American evil. Even the death of an obviously evil man like Zarquai…is somehow twisted to be a stain on the USA.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — June 9, 2006 @ 11:39 am - June 9, 2006
It’s called “Blame America First”.
And yes, the Left is totally into that.
Comment by Calarato — June 9, 2006 @ 12:33 pm - June 9, 2006
P.S. Victor Davis Hanson discussed it insightfully on Hugh Hewitt’s show yesterday. http://www.radioblogger.com/#001682
“…it’s almost a Pavlovian response that whatever the United States does, there’s going to be a cadre of pretty sophisticated, elite, leisured people who are protected by other types of people who don’t share their beliefs, and they’re always going to be critical, they’re always going to be cynical, because let’s be honest. It fills some deep, psychological need in these people to hate the very system that created them, and makes life good for them…
“…It’s kind of like rust. You know, it just keeps creeping, and it always has to be dealt with and addressed. [The Administration rightly] thought that by going into Afghanistan and Iraq, that these were facistic regimes, we were going to try and implement democracy, it was a no-brainer that this was a moral, humane idea. And [the Administration wrongly thought] they did not have to respond to these left wing blogs, New York Times, National Public Radio, New Yorker Magazine, Harper’s [who are always critical and cynical]. These were all elites that were in a minority now in this country. And [the Administration] forgot just how influential and pernicious these people can be. And you always have to address them…it’s like scrubbing rust off iron. It has to be done every day, or they take over the dominant conversation.”
Comment by Calarato — June 9, 2006 @ 12:50 pm - June 9, 2006
butch- again, how do you figure the coalition (he he) is winning? by “we” do you mean the insurgency? your english is excellent.
Comment by lester — June 9, 2006 @ 1:07 pm - June 9, 2006
Calling Rush Limbaugh a “failed sports announcer” is like calling Harry Truman a “failed haberdasher.” Somehow it just doesn’t quite hit the nail on the head.
Comment by Butch — June 9, 2006 @ 2:04 pm - June 9, 2006
Lester, if you want to visit a place where “we” refers to Islamist thugs, I’m afraid you’ll have to go somewhere other than an American Web site called “Gay Patriot.” Have you tried doing a Google search on “we terrorists”?
Oh, and I’m glad you appreciate good English. There’s all sorts of good English being written on this site, every day. By the way, “Coalition” is capitalized because it’s a formal arrangement of willing nations that are doing serious and dangerous and necessary work, and because the Coalition deserves respect as such. I hope “we” can agree on that.
Comment by Butch — June 9, 2006 @ 2:13 pm - June 9, 2006
If anyone has the stomach for it, here is a picture ian, gryph and raj’s idea of the president and first lady. You may need a barf bag afterwards.
http://www.exposetheleft.com/2006/06/08/gibson-berg/
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 9, 2006 @ 3:29 pm - June 9, 2006
butch- when you said “we” we winning in Iraq , the only logical assumption was you were a member of a militia there. Last month was the deadliest month ever for the US. or are you some kind of extreme s & m guy?
Comment by lester — June 9, 2006 @ 4:41 pm - June 9, 2006
Gramps, when I wrote that Michael Berg dishonors parents & dads I was writing not about his BushHatred (which you are still the LAST person on Earth to judge criitically, effectively or accurately) but about the use of his son’s brutal death to play out his own VictimCard and grab the microphone for 15 minutes of fame –just like some of the 9-11 widows, Cindy Sheehan… etc.
I love how you and lester will give just about anyone a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card for reaching responsible commentary and proper conduct in civil discourse IF that person is a victim. Victim, victim… here’s your mike; tell us how you feel. Oh please, oh please.
No, Gramps, politically aggrieved victims have no more right to the public square than any other group… THAT IS precisely where your education on the Democrat Plantation fails you and lester. They told you being a victim and fighting for compensatory relief made your cause more important than others… ergo, gay marriage for all, gays in the military, affirmative action at others’ expense, slavery reparations, stop offshore drilling but pay $3/gal for gas, etc.
No Gramps. You can rail away but it’s still true: Michael Berg dishonors all parents, all Dads by the way he uses his son’s death to grab the microphone. And speaking as a Dad, I know how important that honor is… you, alas, do not.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 9, 2006 @ 5:02 pm - June 9, 2006
So sorry to disappoint you, Lester, but last month wasn’t even close to being the “deadliest month ever for the US.” I appreciate the kind thought, though.
Coalition fatalities by month this year:
Period….US..UK..Other..Total..Avg…Days
6-2006….17…0….2…….19……2.11.. 9
5-2006….69…9….1…….79……2.55.. 31
4-2006….76…1….5…….82……2.73.. 30
3-2006….31…0….2…….33……1.06.. 31
2-2006….55…3….0…….58……2.07.. 28
1-2006….62…2….0…….64……2.06.. 31
The deadliest month ever for the US was November, 2004:
Period….US…UK..Other..Total..Avg…Days
11-2004..137…4….0…….141…..4.7…30
Oh, and Gay Patriot is a blog for patriotic American gays and lesbians, so I wouldn’t assume, by any tortured logic, that those who post here are members of an Iraqi militia, regardless of how they use the first-person plural.
Why, I wouldn’t even assume militia membership of posters at ShiaChat.com, who should be delirious with happiness upon Zark’s demise, given his 3 1/2 years of hideous, bloody attacks against thousands of innocent Iraqi Shiites.
Comment by Butch — June 9, 2006 @ 5:42 pm - June 9, 2006
butch- your right. why did I think last month was the deadliest month? and the shias (i’m not one) are literally having zarqawi is dead parties. they are as elated as you fell the MSM should be.
Comment by lester — June 9, 2006 @ 6:34 pm - June 9, 2006
butch – “CNN just reported that the records for May 2006 tally “the largest number of Iraqi civilian deaths” since the invasion in 2003.”
so it was the dealiest month, but not for the US as I incorrectly stated.
Comment by lester — June 9, 2006 @ 6:38 pm - June 9, 2006
Yep, Zarqawi caused a lot of civilian deaths, especially after his thugs destroyed the Golden Mosque in February. He was a crafty, evil man, and if I were a Shiite, I’d be having a Zarqawi Is Dead party, too.
Comment by Butch — June 9, 2006 @ 6:47 pm - June 9, 2006