When does a massacre matter?

[Yonivore]

I ask this question, because on Thursday, June 28, The Associated Press—and to a lesser extent, Reuters, and a small independent Iraqi news agency—ran stories claiming that 20 decapitated bodies had been found on or near the banks of the Tigris River in Um al-Abeed, a village near Salman Pak, southeast of Baghdad, with sectarian violence strongly implicated.

There were no named sources from this story from any media outlet, and the two anonymous Iraq police officers cited in the widely-carried AP account were nowhere near the scene of the alleged massacre, with Um al-Abeed being roughly 12 miles from the southeast edges of Baghdad, and Kut being 75 miles away, respectively. Further, in the Associated Press story by Sinan Sallaheddin, the massacre claim itself was purposefully distanced for the dubious location of the anonymous police officers by an account of a bombing in Baghdad.

This claimed massacre never happened (http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/07/a_matter_of_trust.php), and was formally repudiated by the U.S. military on Saturday, June 30, who ascribed the claims to insurgent propaganda. To date, the Associated Press has refused to print a retraction or a correction for this false story, just as it has failed to print a retraction for previous false beheading stories (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/008981.html).

Apparently, correcting misinformation disseminated ranks low on the list of Associated Press priorities.

At the same time, the Associated Press has refused to run the story of a verified massacre in Iraq discovered on June 29 and supported by named sources, eyewitness statements, and photographic evidence provided by noted independent journalist Michael Yon in his dispatch, Bless the Beasts and Children (http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm).

I woner why the Associated Press is willing to run thinly and falsely sourced insurgent propaganda as unquestioned fact without any independent verification, but refuses to publish a freely offered account (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/update-on-bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm) by a noted combat corespondent that some consider (http://www.spokesmanreview.com/blogs/conversation/archive.asp?postID=3499) this generation's Ernie Pyle.

Is it because the massacre documented by Yon was conducted by alleged al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists, and could not be ascribed to sectarian violence? It certainly could not be because of cost, as Yon has offered both his text and pictures to any and all media outlets free of charge. It could not be because of a question of validity, as his account was photographed, videotaped, and witnessed by dozens of American and Iraqi soldiers, some of them named, who could easily be contacted by the Associated Press for independent, on the record confirmation.

Why is the Associated Press willing to run the claimed of a false massacre on June 28, but unwilling to report a well-documented and freely-offered account of a massacre that was discovered just one day later?

Just curious.

[Yonivore]

Kudos to the Philadelphia Inquirer for running this story (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/special/iraq/20070706_Al-Qaeda_deputys_call_to_unite.html):


BAGHDAD - The number-two leader of al-Qaeda called on Muslims in Iraq to unite against their enemies, in a lengthy video released yesterday, at a time when rifts have opened among some Sunni insurgent groups in Iraq and as the U.S. military has detained individuals it says are senior members of the organization.

The bearded, white-turbaned Ayman al-Zawahiri, the top deputy to Osama bin Laden, spoke for more than an hour and a half about the need to press on with the fight against the "Zionist Crusader project" and to coalesce around the efforts of the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq.
***
The speech is perhaps most significant for its admission that Sunni militants have grown divided over the usefulness of the alternative regime that the Islamic State of Iraq claims to offer.

In recent weeks, U.S. soldiers have formed partnerships with Sunni insurgents, in places such as western Baghdad and in Baqubah north of the capital, to track down al-Qaeda in Iraq members and find their weapons.

I think this reflects a major success in the war against al Qaeda, and while I was glad to see the report appear in the Inquirer, I don't think the Mainstream Media in general likes reporting success in the war against al Qaeda in Iraq, because it doesn't fit their narrative and there's a strong desire on the part of the anti-war crowd to characterize the enemy in Iraq as "insurgents."

The MSM is not comfortable with al Qaeda, because they cannot easily be characterized as insurgents. I think this goes a long way towards explaining the seemingly inexplicable, stubborn failure to report the story of recent al Qaeda atrocities (including the beheading of children), despite the fact that it was documented by Michael Yon (http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm) while at the same time publishing thinly sourced, untrue, stories of sectarian violence.

I especially agree with Dean Esmay said (http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1183564762.shtml):


This is what Al Qaeda in Iraq is all about.
And it's what the MSM don't want most Americans to know.

Because, the more the ignorant "little people" are allowed to read about al Qaeda's butchery, the more they'll tend to think entering Iraq might not have been a bad idea after all.

They might not be in as much of a hurry to pull out and leave the Iraqi children to the tender mercies of the beheaders.

[Yonivore]

Michael Yon (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGRmYWI2Njk5MWFkYzYzYWY4OWY5NzJjMGRkZTlhY2Q=) has more...

Arab conspiracy theories and narratives of oppression at the hands of the infidel die hard, but they do die:


I’ve seen this kind of progression in Mosul, out in Anbar and other places, and when I ask our military leaders if they have sensed any shift, many have said, yes, they too sense that Iraqis view us differently. In the context of sectarian and tribal strife, we are the tribe that people can — more or less and with giant caveats — rely on.

Most Iraqis I talk with acknowledge that if it was ever about the oil, it’s not now. Not mostly anyway. It clearly would have been cheaper just to buy the oil or invade somewhere easier that has more. Similarly, most Iraqis seem now to realize that we really don’t want to stay here, and that many of us can’t wait to get back home. They realize that we are not resolved to stay, but are impatient but to drive down to Kuwait and sail away. And when they consider the Americans who actually deal with Iraqis every day, the Iraqis can no longer deny that we really do want them to succeed. But we want them to succeed without us. We want to see their streets are clean and safe, their grass is green, and their birds are singing. We want to see that on television. Not in person. We don’t want to be here. We tell them that every day. It finally has settled in that we are telling the truth.
His full account is here (http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/baqubah-update-05-july-2007.htm), including Iragis' description of Al Qaeda psychopathy so repellent I think it's probably just rumor and propaganda against an enemy.

But that's even better -- that they are propagandizing against their acknowledged enemy, Al Qaeda.