Giving wickedness a pass at the NY Times

Sabrina Tavernise has a story about the difficulty many ordinary Iraqis have because the enemy murders people who do any work for Americans. There is not a hint of condemnation of this enemy wickedness only the continuing meme of the NY Times that our policy in Iraq is a failure or is doomed.

As Jules Crittenden and Gateway Pundit have pointed out the NY Times recently lamented the loss of a "defining atrocity" when the last of the Haditha Marines murder cases folded. Note what the Times is saying. The on going murders of Iraqis who work for Americans is not an atrocity that defines the enemy or the war. Nor is the mass murder of non combatants on a daily basis by the enemy a defining atrocity such as the murders in the Yazidi bombings.

Nor does the Times attempt to comprehend the enemy responsibility for the killings of innocents in Haditha. I am not talking about the IED attack, which may have been its only legitimate act of war in that event. I am talking about its war crimes of camouflaging itself as a civilian and using civilians as human shields. Those two war crimes occurred before any Marine pulled a trigger and were the proximate cause of the civilian deaths that occurred at Haditha, but there in not one word of condemnation of these defining war crimes of the enemy in its lament of a lost "defining atrocity."

Why can't the NY Times see the blatant atrocities of the enemies on a daily basis and exposed them for the wickedness they represent? Why is it making our forces and our war effort responsible for the enemy's wickedness?


Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Where did Uvalde shooter get the money to buy the weapons and ammo?