The Los Angeles Times is once again caught in another outright deception:
This would be unbelievable if we weren’t so accustomed to false reporting by both the Times and the Post. If you were going to write an article criticizing Ambassador Bremer for failing to give a farewell speech, wouldn’t you at least check to find out whether he had, in fact, given one? Apparently the L.A. Times considers fact-checking to be beyond the call of duty.
As for the Post, it has still not corrected its article, a full week after it appeared on June 29. The Post’s article was by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, its head reporter in Iraq, who has repeatedly embarrassed the Post by his false and distorted reporting. Well, let me rephrase that: the Post is probably beyond embarrassment, but if it seriously aspired to be a news organization rather than a propaganda organ for the Democratic Party, it would be embarrassed.
Quite frankly, I don’t think they give a damn. The facts aren’t important, what matters is getting the narrative right. The narrative being Iraq is a quagmire, Bush is both evil and incompetent, and we should all listen to Kofi Annan and Jacques Chirac next time. Such things as checking very basic facts or actually watching the local media only get in the way of creating the narrative.
Something like this should never have gotten through the first editor, no less actually made print. When such a blatantly false assertion makes it into the papers – no less two national papers, it’s clear that someone is either spinning or asleep at the switch. Unfortunately, it’s most likely the former.
(As always Glenn Reynolds has a compendium of excellent links on the subject – how does he manage to find all of them?)