CSI Sadr City
By Mitch Berg
Ed notes an Agence France Presse story in which a woman notes that her house was mercilessly shot to hell by American troops, and has the bullets to prove it.
Any potential Crime Scene Investigators wanna take a, er, “shot” at this one (without cheating and looking at Ed’s wrapup of posts by bloggers that figured it out?)
UPDATE: Given AFP’s record (i.e., as bad as the American mainstream media’s) on these sorts of things, I had to check.
Kudo’s to AFP’s crack fact-checkers; at least they’re American 5.56x45mm rounds. I figured it was even money they’d be 7.62x39mm…
August 15th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
So Special Ed and the Wonder Bloggers figure out an inconsistency that my 5-year-old could point out. Delightful. You take your victories where you find them I guess.
August 15th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Inconsistency?
How about a complete fabrication so utterly ridiculous that your 5-year-old could figure out yet AFP let’s slide.
August 15th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Jeeziz. Even Angryclown, whose weapon of choice is seltzer, can figure that one out.
Maybe the soldiers threw the bullets at her house?
August 15th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
No, they fired them…using a slingshot.
August 15th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
I think they were dropped by an unmanned aerial vehicle. Damn that George Bush!!!
August 15th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Yep, even me-a “girl”-can figure that one out. I guess they think we’re as dumb as they are….
I like the slingshot remark!
August 15th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Sure, make fun. You know you could put a eye out or something throwing those around. Or maybe leave a red spot?
August 15th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
Well, she did say “hit”… Or the translator did.
August 16th, 2007 at 8:47 am
“There was this masked man, see, with a white horse. And he shot hell out of the bad guys and then gave me these before he rode off.”
August 16th, 2007 at 9:14 am
So Special Ed and the Wonder Bloggers figure out an inconsistency that my 5-year-old could point out.
Then your five-year-old will never get a job with Agence France Presse!
August 16th, 2007 at 9:15 am
I’ll give AFP this much; they’re at least American rounds, this time.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:39 am
I wish you had displayed this level of media skepticism when Judy Miller was reporting on Saddam’s WMD program.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:52 am
I wish you had displayed this level of media skepticism when Judy Miller was reporting on Saddam’s WMD program.
If you had shown me a picture of an Iraqi woman holding a couple of 5.56mm rounds and calling them “WMDs”, I might have.
Hey, how about the “degree of skepticism” your stalwart Democrat congresscritters showed when viewing the same exact intelligence?
August 16th, 2007 at 10:56 am
“How about the “degree of skepticism” your stalwart Democrat congresscritters showed when viewing the same exact intelligence?”
A majority of my Congress people voted against the war, nearly all of your Congress people voted for it, plus the whole Executive Branch.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:07 am
A majority of my Congress people voted against the war,
I didn’t say “cherrypick the congresspeople you want to identify with, years after the fact”. I said “count the “D” votes on the original enabling legislation.
Nearly all of your Congress people voted for it, plus the whole Executive Branch.
Which is one reason I voted for them in ’04, and will do so again.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Oh, and Rick?
Please address the topic of the AFP’s little gaffe. K?
August 16th, 2007 at 11:14 am
“Please address the topic of the AFP’s little gaffe”
The fact that this is the best Iraq related topic you can post on pretty much proves the war is circling the bowl.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:16 am
The fact that this is the best Iraq related topic you can post on pretty much proves the war is circling the bowl.
Well, it’s not a “fact”, nor is it the “best” story by a long shot.
But that’s coming up Monday.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:20 am
And a better answer, Rick, would have been “no, I guess I should hold my tongue about this piece of media hackery from AFP. It’s a fair cop”.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:22 am
“The fact that this is the best Iraq related topic you can post on pretty much proves the war is circling the bowl.”
Wow, I didn’t realize this ThunderJournal was THAT influential. Congrats, Mitch!
I wonder what my personal ThunderJournal posts about yard work and bowel movements say about the Iraq war. . .
August 16th, 2007 at 11:28 am
It reminds me of the time USAID (or someone) put out a press release celebrating the fact that they delivered a truck load of dates or figs to Iraqi civilians in the Green Zone.
I figured if that was the best the worlds best PR geniuses could come up with, the war was going to go terribly wrong.
Or stroll over the the Victory Caucus where the Army is putting out a press release
“In the first, while draining a canal, engineers from 2-8 Cav’s Sapper Company found three 60 mm mortar rounds, two 82 mm mortar rounds, one 120 mm mortar round and one 122 mm projectile near Kem.
In the second find, during a cordon and search, 2-8 Cav. troops and Iraqi troops found one sniper rifle with two scopes, one AK-47 assault rifle with five magazines, a 9 mm Glock pistol, and a hand grenade. Two suspects were detained in connection with the cache near Al Dhabtiya.”
If this is the good news, the bad news must be pretty damm bad.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Mitch:
“I didn’t say “cherrypick the congresspeople you want to identify with, years after the fact”. I said “count the “D” votes on the original enabling legislation.”
There was no cherrypicking. On the original war vote a majority of Democrats in Congress voted against the war.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
I may just change your display name to “Rick, the Parsemonger”.
August 16th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
“I may just change your display name to “Rick, the Parsemonger”.”
Really do you ever read what you write? Do you care at all? The only one trying to parse a statement is you. You parsed my statement “A majority of my Congress people voted against the war”. I just pointed out that anyway you want to parse the statement, it is still true. If I get to “cherrypick the congresspeople [I] want to identify with, years after the fact”, then a majority opposed the war. Or if I “count the “D” votes on the original enabling legislation”, a majority still opposed the war.
I will settle for Rick, the factually accurate.
August 16th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
I will settle for Rick, the factually accurate.
And I settle for “Master of Unicorns”, while we’re at it.
No such settlement is forthcoming.
August 16th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Hey DFL(hack)Rick…before you bust your arm, patting yourself on the back for knowing that “A majority of my Congress people voted against the war”…I’d like to remind you that only 57% of YOUR party voted AGAINST the resolution authorizing the use of force in 10/02.
Wow…a landslide of Dems! I wouldn’t crow about having a margin of 7%, pallie…
August 16th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
How about…Rick, the half truth Teller?
August 16th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Oh…and Rickie…make sure you ALSO note that 29 or 50 Dems in the Senate (58%, for the math-challenged Rick-boy) voted IN FAVOR OF THE RESOLUTION! That’s right, Rick…the Senate Dems voted (as a group) IN FAVOR OF THE RESOLUTION!
Sleep well, Ricky
August 16th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
If I may ignore Rick (happily), I have one more observation about the post. It’s not surprising that AFP missed the obvious in the photo. They’re French. How much real world experience with bullets do they have?
August 16th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
If this is the good news, the bad news must be pretty damm bad.
Too lame to deserve a retort. Even a snark.
You’re flailing, Rick.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
I will settle for Rick, the factually accurate.
This from the guy who thinks calling a Rutgers basketball player a ‘nappy-headed ho’ is the epitome of a hate crime.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
And plus, that’s one ugly old woman….or is it even a woman for sure? Kinda looks like Al Delvecchio from Arnold’s Diner on Happy Days.
August 17th, 2007 at 6:38 am
That’s really unkind, Scary Colleen. I think she looks more like Murray the Cop from The Odd Couple.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:16 am
“Wow…a landslide of Dems! I wouldn’t crow about having a margin of 7%, pallie…”
Well of course I wish it had been closer to 100%, but I certainly will take 57% of Democrats opposing the war over the 95% (or so) of Republicans who supported the war.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:43 am
Mitch:
“No such settlement is forthcoming.”
Your failure to contest my factual assertion is more than enough.
August 17th, 2007 at 10:13 am
So RickDFL, since “Your failure to contest my factual assertion is more than enough” *snicker* is enough, will it be “RickMasterOfUnicorns” from now on then? 😉
August 17th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Rick,
Your “factual assertion” wasn’t. Most Dems supported the resolution to invade Iraq. Claiming some as “MY Democrats” is cherrypicking at its lamest.
And it wasn’t a “failure to contest”, it was a “I am under no obligation to continue every thread to its bitter end”.
History is going to prove you very wrong, Rick. It always does.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Mitch:
Sigh. . . .
clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml
The AUMF passed 296-133. Republicans voted in favor 215-6. Democrats voted 81-126 against. Add the 126 Democratic No House votes to the 21 Democratic No Senate votes. That gives you 147 of 258 (208 House and 50 Senate) Democratic members of Congress who voted against the Iraq war. That is more than half. “Most Dems supported the resolution to invade Iraq” is about as false as a sentence can get.
Even Dave managed to save the numbers from the last time I posted them here.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
For some reason Republicans can’t add numbers that don’t have dollar signs in front of them.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Doh. My bad. Wrong vote.
Even Dave managed to save the numbers from the last time I posted them here.
Yes, but most of what you post is crap, so I tend to ignore it.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
“Yes, but most of what you post is crap, so I tend to ignore it”
Well that would explain why you continue to make basic factual mistakes.
August 17th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
RickDFL, you have an “interesting” definition of what is a “basic factual mistake”. I take the “basic” here to mean “elementary”, as if everyone should read, believe, save, and remember whatever you decide to post. Or be doomed to “make basic factual mistakes”.
I am sorry if I am the first one to say this to you, RickDFL, but your posts are honestly not compelling enough to inspire that kind of reverence. *shrug*
August 17th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Rick was simply trying to get through your thick skull the fact that most Congressional Democrats didn’t vote for the Iraq resolution – information that’s readily available to anybody who knows how to use Google. Don’t pretend he’s forcing you to recall trivia from months-old posts, Troy. You were wrong. He proved you wrong. You were too slow to understand until just now that you were wrong. None of that is Rick’s fault.