AP/Reuters Watch 6/23

Friday, June 23, 2006
A Flares feature which takes the Associated Press declaration in its

STATEMENT OF NEWS VALUES AND PRINCIPLES:

"we abhor inaccuracies, carelessness, bias or distortions"

to heart and offers a helping hand by pointing out egregious examples of abhorrent practice as they occur.

Day after day after day.

Examples found by readers and posted in comments will be placed in the main post with credit.

All Flares contributors are invited to edit and/or update AP/Reuters Watch posts.

NOTE: Stories at AP and Reuters are updated throughout the day. Some of their updates may obviate criticism made here.
_________________________________________________________________
AP hews the party line very closely in this report concerning the chemical shells found in Iraq, the location of which Saddam was required to disclose pursuant to various UN resolutions. No allegations were ever made that Saddam had resumed mass production of WMD after 1991. His failure to disclose the location of existing stocks was the reason that Hans Blix spent so much time in Iraq.

As to the lethality of the shells found, I would suggest that those certain that they have degraded to the point of non-lethality be given the chance to demonstrate their faith in their assertions by disarming a few of those shells without wearing protective breathing gear. A demonstration in front of a live (to begin with, anyway) audience of journalists and pols who spout this propaganda would be very convincing.
__________________________________________________________________
Gateway Pundit highlights AP's ability to push anti-American propaganda on the flimsiest of pretexts. The photo isn't worth a thousand words - except to note that AP's photographers know how to frame a shot as well as anyone who ever worked for Pravda [h/t Clarice]
___________________________________________________________________
AP contiues in the standard anti-American vein with this headline: story by Alexander G. Higgins which contains the curious phrase
Louise Arbour, in a speech to the new U.N. Human Rights Council, was clearly referring to repeated allegations of U.S. abuses.
Now if Ms. Arbour was "clearly referring to" why aren't the words she used in quotes? One might infer that Higgins considers Ms. Arbour to be too gutless (not unusual in a UN breaucrat, to be sure) to say what she means. Let's be charitable though and suppose that Ms. Arbour is referring to Chinese, Vietnamese or Cuban "abuses" - Higgin's explanation would then become petty propaganda, which it assuredly is. The same petty propaganda which leads Higgins to leave out any explanation that Ms. Arbour's phrasing of "the reported existence of secret detention centers where suspects are held incommunicado is ... of grave concern." refers to news reports concocted without reference to any official reports - because there are no official reports except those that state that no "secret prisons" have been found.

AP - All Propaganda - all the time.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Devlin Barrett carries a little more water for Miz Clinton.

"I think we come out more united," said (Hillary) Clinton. "We're not blindly united like the other side is, where they are like the three monkeys, See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak no Evil. They're not going to say anything negative about the president, the vice president, the secretary of defense or anybody else.”
A Republican could never get away with saying something this idiotic. The AP reporter would have made sure to provide evidence contradicting such an erroneous assertion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE: In comments, Knuck points to this story which establishes the "serious" nature of the UN rights group. Perhaps it's a variation of the "set a thief to catch a thief" strategy? Of course, catching thieves at the UN can be done by waiting in front of any elevator and arresting the first person to get off.
___________________________________________________________________

6 comments:

terrye said...

Now we know why the Bushies did not make a big deal out of it. Nothing to see here, move on.

My father in law Al was a chemcial engineer and worked on chemical weapons for the navy. If these folks really think that all we have to do to render this stuff harmless is let it sit in some shells some where for 15 years then maybe we should give up all these programs we have to incinerate and destroy these weapons here in the US.

Al said that this stuff stays bad for a very long time and even if it changes or degrades that does not render it harmless. That is not the point anyway, Saddam was not supposed to just leave this laying around he was supposed to account for and destroy it all.

brylun said...

Rick, My thoughts exactly when I saw the degradation comment. Let the journalists and pols see how harmless it really is!

CF said...

Only the 7 Amnesty organizers(but no supporters) showed up for the anti-Gitmo protest but AP gave the protest full coverage anyway.http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/06/what-if-you-held-gitmo-protest-nobody.html

Barry Dauphin said...

If the stuff would be harmless than why didn't the UN inspectors basically say, "Let's wait a few years, then the stuff will be harmelss."

Knucklehead said...

There was no point making any press splash about this. These are almost certainly some of - and more of the same - the sorts of things the Deuffler (sp?) report mentioned were either discovered or could reasonably be expected to be discovered.

The WMD deniers and Saddam warn't so bad morons have long since moved the goalposts many kilometers beyond what the existence and discovery of these munitions tells us.

This information is yet another truckload of bricks on the load of evidence that demonstrates what a vile, murdering, lunatic and dangerous scumbag Saddam was.

To the BDS idiots he was "under the sink", out of sight and mind. The fact that he, like these munitions, was explosive and capable of detonating is beyond their ability to recognize let alone acknowledge.

Knucklehead said...

That AP photo re: the starving for support Hungarian Amnesty International protest was priceless. No doubt it is just because I'm crazy but I find that story, with the photo, very amusing. Can't stop chuckling.

I can get more people than that around my patio table for burgers and dogs on 10 minutes notice even when I forewarn that I failed to stop and pick up some beer.

Why didn't they just get all seven protesters and the cop assigned to keep them orderly into a nice group hug photo?

Personally I find it of "grave concern" that Ms. Louise Arbour, the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights - in a world full of mass murdering thugs, dictators, Islamic lunatics - doesn't have more pressing issues on her list of "grave concerns" than "reports" (a euphamism, apparently, for unsubstantiated allegations by assorted moonbats) of "secret detention centers".

Louise, lovie, update your grave concerns list, willya - you're a High Freakin' Commissioner and not just some run of the mill ordinary commissioner.

Oh, I almost forgot. Since I'm not the least bit shy about the biases and bigotries of the Presse Ancienne I suppose it is only fair to note when one of the Big Names among the seditionist lot puts out a rare report that at least hints of some vague understanding of who the scum really are. Please see the WaPo's Iran's envoy to UN rights group is met with outrage by Karl Vick.