Is it just me . . .
Jun. 19th, 2003 03:20 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stevenehrbar. . . or is some of the reporting on Iraq just laughable?
I am perfectly willing to believe that there is chaos in Iraq, that there is a breakdown in order, and that there is a rise in fundamentalism. But when you look at who is quoted to support the assertions, you just have to scream "Come on!"
Example -- CBS News ran a story on former Iraqi soldiers protesting losing their jobs and not getting back pay. So far, so good.
But who is the only person they show an interview for the story, though? A former Iraqi brigadier general, talking about how hard his life is now. Excuse me? A general of the losing side is always going to have a rough time when his country is conquered by a foreign power; his struggles tell you absolutely nada about conditions of people in general in Iraq.
Example -- Reuters runs a story on a belly dancer who has been having difficulties getting work, and has had to cover her face and carry a gun to walk the streets safely. Economic crisis! Rising fundamentalist Islam! Chaos!
Great story if this were a typical Iraqi belly dancer. But this one regularly worked parties for Uday Hussein, which might explain why she's having trouble making money -- Uday is currently hiding instead of throwing parties. And, you know, if I were a former intimate of Uday, I'd cover my face and carry a gun, too -- I'd be worried that somebody who had a friend or relative killed by Uday would recognize me. This again says nothing of general conditions in Iraq, but merely that people closely identified with the upper levels of the Hussein regime are having trouble now that it no longer exists.
Look, Iraq may be in as bad of shape as the reporters are saying. But if so, why can't they find somebody who isn't closely linked to the former regime to say so? Are there no former lieutenants or privates to ask about finances? No belly dancers who didn't personally work for Uday to ask? Somebody with a shred of credibility?
I am perfectly willing to believe that there is chaos in Iraq, that there is a breakdown in order, and that there is a rise in fundamentalism. But when you look at who is quoted to support the assertions, you just have to scream "Come on!"
Example -- CBS News ran a story on former Iraqi soldiers protesting losing their jobs and not getting back pay. So far, so good.
But who is the only person they show an interview for the story, though? A former Iraqi brigadier general, talking about how hard his life is now. Excuse me? A general of the losing side is always going to have a rough time when his country is conquered by a foreign power; his struggles tell you absolutely nada about conditions of people in general in Iraq.
Example -- Reuters runs a story on a belly dancer who has been having difficulties getting work, and has had to cover her face and carry a gun to walk the streets safely. Economic crisis! Rising fundamentalist Islam! Chaos!
Great story if this were a typical Iraqi belly dancer. But this one regularly worked parties for Uday Hussein, which might explain why she's having trouble making money -- Uday is currently hiding instead of throwing parties. And, you know, if I were a former intimate of Uday, I'd cover my face and carry a gun, too -- I'd be worried that somebody who had a friend or relative killed by Uday would recognize me. This again says nothing of general conditions in Iraq, but merely that people closely identified with the upper levels of the Hussein regime are having trouble now that it no longer exists.
Look, Iraq may be in as bad of shape as the reporters are saying. But if so, why can't they find somebody who isn't closely linked to the former regime to say so? Are there no former lieutenants or privates to ask about finances? No belly dancers who didn't personally work for Uday to ask? Somebody with a shred of credibility?
