Malkin on media's Haditha coverage: "[T]here are puddles of drool in the offices of the L.A. Times and The New York Times"
On Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson, right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin blasted the media coverage of the alleged massacre in Haditha, claiming that there are "puddles of drool in the offices of the L.A. Times and The New York Times." Malkin suggested that there be "a ratcheting down of all the hyperventilation and treat this incident with the seriousness and sobriety that it deserves."
On the June 1 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson, right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin blasted the media coverage of alleged killings of Iraqi civilians by U.S. troops in Haditha, claiming that there are "puddles of drool in the offices of the L.A. Times and The New York Times." Malkin suggested that there be "a ratcheting down of all the hyperventilation and treat this incident with the seriousness and sobriety that it deserves." Malkin went on to complain that "there is a large antiwar contingent that is willing to believe every last lie about our troops. And I think that our troops deserve at least as much deference and attention paid to their rights and the presumption of innocence as, oh, say, [suspected 9-11 mastermind] Khalid Shaikh Mohammed or O.J. Simpson or [Crips gang co-founder] Tookie Williams."
In a May 28 editorial, The New York Times described the Haditha incident as "the latest indication of what terrible things can happen when soldiers are required to occupy hostile civilian territory in the midst of an armed insurrection and looming civil war," and that questions surrounding the incident "have awful resonance for those who remember Vietnam, and what that prolonged and ultimately pointless war did to both the Vietnamese and the American social fabric." In a May 31 editorial titled "What happened at the Iraqi My Lai?," the Los Angeles Times wrote: "If Marines 'avenged' the killing of a comrade by terrorizing and killing innocent Iraqis, they disgraced their uniform and must be punished. The same is true of anyone higher in the chain of command who helped conceal what happened on November 19, 2005, in Haditha in western Iraq." The editorial added: "If the allegations of a massacre are corroborated -- and a full disclosure is overdue -- the debate about the wisdom of the U.S. mission in Iraq inevitably will become even more inflamed. But in Iraq, as in Vietnam, larger 'explanations' for atrocities cannot be regarded as excuses."
Other right-wing pundits have also complained about media coverage of the Haditha incident on Fox News. For example, on the May 31 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly claimed that the "left-wing press" and others are "rejoic[ing]" over Haditha, as Media Matters for America noted.
From the June 1 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson:
GIBSON: The U.S. military is conducting at least two investigations into claims that U.S. Marines killed two dozen unarmed civilians in Haditha last year. President Bush is promising a full investigation and so is the Iraqi government. And now, those crying "cover-up" are seeing some sharp criticism. Joining us now is one of the critics, Fox News contributor and syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin. So, Michelle, it seems that there was clearly some kind of -- I don't know if you would call it a cover-up, but the correct story wasn't told in the first case because a couple of commanders had been relieved of duty, so why go after the people crying "cover-up"?
MALKIN: Well, what I really want to get across, John, is that we don't know exactly what happened, and I am very dismayed by a lot of our colleagues in the media who pretend that they do know what happened. And there are puddles of drool in the offices of the L.A. Times and The New York Times, whose columnists and editorial writers are screaming, "Iraqi My Lai, My Lai, My Lai," and when they get tired of living old history, invoking Abu Ghraib or Guantánamo Bay with ultimate confidence about what happened here. Yes, there are some very disturbing allegations about what happened on that day and also a possible cover-up, and the Bargewell report will tell us exactly what happened, and I'm glad to hear the Bush administration say they will make all of these findings public. But in the meantime, I think there should be a ratcheting down of all the hyperventilation, and we should treat this incident with the seriousness and sobriety that it deserves. We're not getting that.
GIBSON: Do you sense that people are trying to make Haditha into the entire war?
MALKIN: Yes, of course. And I think that that context is so important that this incident did not happen in a vacuum, and the media treatment of it didn't either. Now, I have to say that I think actually that Time magazine did a good service in bringing this forward and showing us that the original story that the Marines gave apparently was not true, that the 24 civilians -- upwards of 24 civilians did not die in a roadside bomb attack. And we have to commend, and the Iraqi people themselves in this neighborhood commend, the NCIS for how they are conducting this, and I think it's interesting to note that the Iraqi government itself, not a single one of their politicians had bothered to go visit these survivors until this media thing played out here.
So, you know, I just think that you have to keep in mind that there is a large antiwar contingent that is willing to believe every last lie about our troops. And I think that our troops deserve at least as much deference and attention paid to their rights and the presumption of innocence as, oh, say, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed or O.J. Simpson or Tookie Williams.
GIBSON: All right. Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin. Michelle, thank you.
Dammit! Who let Malkin in?
This is now the new GOP coordinated talking point.
Maybe they can intimidate the media into not writing about it so much.
The moral of the story is: If the truth hurts, try to shutup the truthteller.
You took your truth serum this morning, I think. Exactly. Malkin is an opportunist/farce of a 'journalist'. She'll say anything. Why doesn't she get her butt over to Iraq and cover the news?
...is that 'roll'? Hmmm...
Because she's not a journalist.
that she is an opinion maker, is she not?
Despite that, the only one right now using the blood of Iraqi civilians and the misfortune of the troops involved are used by O'Reilly and Malkin to blast the messenger of the news and 'liberals' (whatever that may be).
They're blasting them because they are running with the story as if it was the truth! We don't know that yet! The left is convicting these soldiers without knowing all the facts. You don't know if this was a setup. We are taking the word of the Sunnis, our enemy!
..the Sunnis are our enemy? You mean, roughly 80% of the Muslim population?
Both editorials stated a conditional phrase: if the massacre did happen, then ...
I don't know what you man by the "left." As always, we would like to see some specifics.
Obviously, you're the left. You want to know the facts about something that might reflect negatively on your Country, your (sorry) government, and by extension, you.
You're such a rabid leftist that you might even want to prevent these things from happening in the future, even giving up the elation that you would feel if these things are done by a Repub. gang.
Open Mind already stated it above: Question the patriotism of anyone who wants answers, equate reporting with "convicting", and shut them up.
as much as I hear it from Rightys (they're convicting(fill in the blank), I need to ask: Just as O'Reilly considers this site, which reports facts and quotes him,a "smear site", doesn't referring to reporting as "convicting" imply guilt?
I mean, how do you reconcile a belief that tapping your phone is O.K., because you have nothing to hide, with the opinion that investigating a suspected crime is unfair?
Answer, anyone?
What are you trying to say? I simply asked Finnallyinsf to give specific proof of his claim that "The left is convicting these soldiers without knowing all the facts."
You answer this way:
>>as much as I hear it from Rightys (they're convicting(fill in the blank), I need to ask: Just as O'Reilly considers this site, which reports facts and quotes him,a "smear site", doesn't referring to reporting as "convicting" imply guilt?
You have a parenthesis within a parenthesis, the second of which you don't close. Other than that, the gramar is so poor that it makes no sense. What do you mean by your last clause "doesn't referring to reporting as 'convicting' imply guilt?"
You then end your post with a completely irrelevant topic of phone tapping.
Are you trolling or are you serious here?
it was late, and sarcasm doesn't always translate into print.
I was jokingly accusing you of being that nebulous "left" by pointing out that you are thinking and questioning.
My lack of puntuation and proofreading made it worse.
I was attempting to support you, did it very clumsily. Sometimes a straightforward response to the dittoheads seems impossible, but I should know by now that being facetious in print, as I've been confused by others on this site,doesn't always work.
I'll watch that.
I should be tired of explaining this to my conservative friends,but I'm a helpful guy:
"the left", "the media","journalists" don't get to convict anyone.That happens in court, military or civilian.
Calling the police with a complaint about your neighbor throwing trash into your back yard doesn't "convict" him. It may start an investigation, which may prove your neighbor guilty, you crazy, or a third party responsible.
"the left" (which I guess these days is anyone who doesn't think that Saddam had a robust nuclear arsenal or that GW is anything more than an embarrassing boil on the face of our nation's history) is asking questions of an administration that has spent several years demonstrating its arrogant disrespect for American values and the law, and using the least powerful representatives of their organization( the man and women in uniform) as scapegoats.
It's the Right, if anyone, who will convict the soldiers. It's their bosses who will most likely walk away from the mess.
But, your ire is a tad misdirected. FUNNYMANPANTS is not a Righty -- by anything I've seen. Nor does he deserve the lecture. Perhaps, you're merely speaking in generalities. I, too, share your rage at the ineptitude of our gov't/military leadership.
Bad sarcasm, bad proofreading, I was trying to goof on finallyinsf.
My comment about "reporting =convicting" implying guilt was a comparison to O'Reilly's calling a site that quotes him a smear site. If your own words "smear" you, how do you blame somebody else?
And the seemingly unrelated phone-tapping reference (again,clumsy writing) did have a connection; If simply investigating an alleged incident of our military commiting atrocities, based on reputable reports, is "convicting", isn't keeping a database of civilians phone calls, absent any cause, worse?
If not, explain.(a question I was asking Rightys) Sorry that my rambling style caused so much confusion.
I figured as much... It was a bit confusing though ;) I've been there myself... I do like the rage though. And, on that score, I think you are right on the money.
it was the Shias, damn it that was in the seventies and eighties. Never mind we've always been at war with Eurasia.
Is it really you?
Malkin is not a journalist. Is she a 'pundit'? A newscaster? A reporter? Merely an 'opinion maker'? But, I suppose -- technically -- her job is not to report the facts. Does that happen anymore?
To be honest, the lines are so blurred for me these days... I throw all these creeps in the same basket = propagandist.
Shovel...Shovel...Shovel Stack it high and smelly If the height of the pile don't block out the truth The odor must drive it from the telly
There's an O'Rielley sighting in the house.
Finallyinsf IS... BILL... O'RIELLEY!!!
Considering the intellectual level of people her columns and website appeal to, i would imagine that, save for the absence of Cheeto dust residue, puddles of drool would be something that Ms. Malkin knows all too well.
And isn't it just another great moment of irony that the same person who likes to prattle on and on in spittle-flecked, foaming-at-the-mouth rants about when charging at one strawman argument or another has the nerve to ever call any of her detractors or ideological opponents "unhinged"
And I think that our troops deserve at least as much deference and attention paid to their rights and the presumption of innocence as, oh, say, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed or O.J. Simpson or Tookie Williams.
Does Malkin's choice of these people strike anyone else as weird? All of them are generally considered to be guilty of their crimes. Maybe I don't get the "humorous" point she's trying to make.
It seeths through her everytime she talks.
There is a virtual epidemic of drooling.
That's the human body's way of lubrication in preparation for regurgitation.
I'm sure lots of Americans are sick to their stomach.
do not judge all conservatives by the words of this inflammatory woman. she is a down the line, strict bush apologist and her unending moralistic rants give thoughtful and fair conservatives a bad name. let the investigation of haditha continue to it's complete and truthful conclusion. but to continue to hear people like her and o'reilly and gibson accuse anyone of gloating and smiling over mass murder for some political gain is beyond contempt.
It's unfair to assume that these people speak for the average conservative. They speak for themselves. I'm convinced that they're all just trying to outdo each other.The more outrageous and venomous they seem the bigger their following. But their following comprises only a small percentage of actual viewers. I know most Americans can see through this.
"her unending moralistic rants give thoughtful and fair conservatives a bad name."
-----
Well, then...
Why hasn't one of those so-called "thoughtful and fair" conservatives contradicted her on anything she has ever said? It's because conservatives, whether thoughtful or otherwise, put party and ideology above truth.
Why hasn't one of those so-called "thoughtful and fair" conservatives contradicted her on anything she has ever said?
i just did.
And you are what well-known public conservative figure whose opinion matters in locations other than obscure progressive web sites?
I thought so.
while malkin gives thoughtful and fair conservatives a bad name, it's people like you that give thoughtful and fair liberals a bad name. you are no better than her, that's the irony of it.
also wonder whether she is really conservative or just likes to yell and have BFs. I think in other times these people could have represented other sides, no matter what the cause as long as it pays well.
Malkin is an opportunist. Plain and simple. Does she care one way or the other? No. These days, it's easy to make a good buck being a loud-mouth, harsh, moralist, 'conservative' pundit. Those folks have the floor at the moment. If the tables were turned... she'd prob be a screaming, bleeding heart liberal. Well, maybe not...
I think you both have a point. Right On did, indeed express a reasonable point of view, with which I agree. Easy, on the other hand, points out that no well known conservative has called this woman to task. In fact, she and Ann Coulter and all the others frequently mentioned on this site seem to have free reign in the Conservative universe. I know they don't speak for all conservatives, but it sure seems that way sometimes.
but i don't get too worked up over whether others condemn inflammatory remarks made by someone else or not. one could do that all day long, every day. the same way many prominent liberals have not condemned inflammatory comments by other liberals, i.e harry belafonte, etc. the point is just because you don't publicly slam another's comments doesn't mean you condone it either. what a person says are their own opinions and nobody else's. i thought what malkin said here was wrong and i pointed it out. if asked again i would say the same thing. if not asked, i am not about to bring it up in conversation whether i am a public figure or not.
Harry Belafonte is *not* a Liberal.
I agree with your overall sentiment... But, sitting back and not speaking out against this sort of back-and-forth is a silent approval, in my mind. And, I expect the lefties to do the same. In fact, what fresh breath of air it would be if one of these jokers (Pubs, Dems) actually told it straight...were even humble? Honesty? What a concept.
The truth, however, for right-wingers is... the party has total control and they blew it. Nothing's been done well ... and I don't believe that's a stretch to say that. Where are the true conservatives out there to admit any of it? I think it'd be mighty surprising how the public would react = favorably.
From your posts, I treat your contempt as a badge of honor. You are the type who rejoices at disaster, because it gives you a chance to project your hatred onto those who disagree with you and who have never expressed such an emotion.
---"while malkin gives thoughtful and fair conservatives a bad name, it's people like you that give thoughtful and fair liberals a bad name. you are no better than her, that's the irony of it."---
The pattern: High-profile Malkin makes absurd, offensive remark on national tv about progressives. Obscure, unknown progressive forum member responds-rightly-on a message board with outrage. Conservative forum member-instead of contacting Malkin- chastizes progressive forum member for their angry response.
I agree enthusiastically with something you've said, in re the horrific posturing of some of these pundits and their assumption that anyone could be happy about what appears to have happened in Haditha.
Thank you Right On for admitting the apologist, bomb throwing nature of these rightist pundits. Where I disagree with 90 percent of your post -- sanity has prevailed with at least one admitted conservative, namely you. How long before the tide turns with your compatriots on the right?
by saying U.S. troops deserve as MUCH presumption of inoocence as those three?? Wow- uumm... methinks someone was messing with her teleprompter a little bit...
If any of you caught Hannity's radio show yesterday, you were treated to a most disgusting example of the favored tactic.
Some weak debater from Human Rights Watch was embarrassed by Hannity and Oliver North because he was intimidated out of speaking the truth. I can only imagine all of the thoughts that passed through that young man's head while he was being taken advantage of.
"Khalid Shaikh Mohammed or O.J. Simpson or Tookie Williams"
Who have ever said they were inoccent (besides OJ perhaps). The only one is she! And I do not think the anti-war movement is that big right now. Most Americans and other westeners support the troops although their point of view and the power has been diverted from the war against terror to a personal war of this administration.
I don't mind that Saddam is gone: good riddence. But that could also have happened at a later point. We have an important war: against terrorists who are all over the world, and here we are trying to stabalize a region that was stable before toppling Saddam. That could have been an objective after the terrorists were destroyed.
...to further bash the libr'l media for criticizing the war effort. It's no wonder you have Malkin getting on board. I wouldn't be a bit suprised if we see Ann Coulter rear her ugly head next just in time to bash media "drooling" over Haditha and promote her new book, of course.
I think Andrew has a new book coming out Tuesday. 6-06-06, remember the "present for liberals."
I think Malkin stole Andrew's horn for her photo. It looks like someone had to airbrush them out.
Oh Michelle....why oh why must our people feel that they need to resort to an extremist-psycho-bomb-thrower mentality in order to be heard???!!!
Come, my sister. Let us disengage ourselves from this half-baked neo-con hatriotism and, instead, cleanse our needlessly incendiary rhetoric with a bowl of Sinigang na Baboy.
Sorry, Right On, your little exercise is for naught. Harry Belafonte was merely telling the truth, plain and simple, although most righties either don't recognize truth or respond to it. Malkin and her ilk have lied repeatedly, and done their level best to destroy people through character assassination and outright falsehoods, and it's an epidemic. while you may consider yourself fair and open, you are among the 29% of the 29%. The conservatgives have hidden the few "thoughtful and fair" among them, and not a one has stood up to the abject lying and BS that passes for conservative "thought". Conservatives have sold out America, in the most literal way, and deserve scorn at best. Your mincing apology isn't even a beginning.
Malkin's a joke. This was was at 20 percent popularity BEFORE Haditha. There's no need to drool over it. Especially, since there seem to be more and more of these incidents coming to light. What's more, there seems to be more and more evidence of attempts to cover up these incidents coming to light.
Shrub's like a bus, just wait 10 minutes. Another one will come along. He'll do something slimy and stupid. If it's not Iraq, it's Katrina. If it's not Katrina, it's Harriet Miers, if it's not Harriet Miers, it's warrantless wiretaps, if it's not warrantless wiretaps, it's Dubai Ports, if it's not Dubai Ports, it's Cheney shooting somebody in the face and trying to cover it up, and on and on.
It's always something with these clowns. He's the worst President in History. It's not even close.
So much for the insurgency being in its last throes. Haditha and the incident du jour are going to serve as recruiting posters for this insurgency. That's just a fact.
This can't be another Abu Ghraib. They can't just toss a few pawns to the wolves and call it justice. If individual soldiers are found guilty, they should be held accountable, but I don't really blame the grunts. Those guys were on their third tour because they can't meet their recruiting goals.
I blame the chicken hawk idiots who dreamed up this caper in the first place. The ones who said it would pay for itself. The ones who said they knew where the wmd were. The ones who said we'd be greeted as liberators. The ones who said the insurgency was in its last throes and that the mission was accomplished. They're the ones who should be asked one question. Do you want a cigarette with that blindfold?
1. She's pro-Bush (generally, except in immigration, she simply hates all hispanics living in the US, and Bush likes them).
2. She's pretty. This makes her a good "talking head".
3. She's female, and thus come off "softer" than a male, which lessens the impact of her words.
4. She's asian, which makes it easier for her to avoid accusations of xenophobia. Notice how the 3 examples she brought up in her idiotic analogy are all non-white and non-asian? I'm sure it wasn't an accident that she chose to bring up the black convicted ex-gang leader Tookie rather than a white convicted lunatic like, oh say, Charles Manson.
And one more thing: one "journalist" interviewing another "journalist" is pathetic.
Where was your seriousness and sobreity in the lead up to the war? Mushroom clouds anyone? Where was your respect for the investigation when Hans Blix was runnin around doin his job in 2003?
You all know damn well that if this incident happened under a Dems. administration this blowhard would be screaming for resignations and impeachement.
Some serious stuff went down in Haditha and this chick wants everyone to be cool about it? I guess it's ok to get all foamy at the mouth when Monica got the ex-Prez in her mouth but a platoon of battle hardened, war weary Marines losing their cool should be in the back of paper next to community calender.
And that's one thing I haven't heard from the Right either. What are they gonna do with all these vets coming home? What are we doing to help these men and women get back into normal life agian?
And I'm getting sick and tired of this labeling that the "antiwar contigent" is anti American. Why is someone like me getting blamed for having an opinion on THEIR mistake? Its so friggin childish I dunno where to start.
And how could a hottie like her have such an ugly mind? That's the real tragedy for me.