Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, March 31, 2008

New York Times Using Former Saddam Officer To Cover Iraq War

Because nothing says “fair” and “objective” like having someone who used to pledge his loyalty to a vicious tyrant cover the war which ousted said vicious tyrant:

When reporters write in the first person, the result is rarely good. . . .

Today’s coverage of the Iraqi government’s fight for Basra is a clear example of the rule.

First of all, who is Qais Mizher, who owns the byline on the piece? Well, he tells us this in passing: “Calling on my experience as a captain in the Iraqi Army before the 2003 invasion and essentially a war correspondent since then…” Got that? The New York Times reporter was an officer in Saddam’s army. Nice. By the way, officers were not drafted (that’s how the enlisted ranks were filled). Officers had to be selected and regularly vetted for loyalty and effectiveness. So Saddam decided that he could trust our intrepid correspondent and so did the New York Times.

Makes you wonder: Would the Times have hired former Nazi officers to cover the three-year insurgency against the American presence in Germany in the late 1940s? Even if they spoke the language, knew the countryside well and said they “never really believed” in that evil ideology?

And is it smart to send an Iraqi Army captain from the Saddam era to cover the actions of the new Iraqi army? Are they likely to welcome him? Is likely to view them fairly?

Hey, at least they were forthcoming about who this guy’s former employer was.  Really, though, how does the New York Times see “former officer in Saddam’s army” on a person’s resume and say to themselves “Hey, let’s have this guy cover the war.

Comments

Why did they stop at a former Saddam official and not just find an insurgent who can speak broken english?  Good grief.



A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

dougee on March 31, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Avatar for FlyOnTheWall

Why did they stop at a former Saddam official and not just find an insurgent

They wanted someone who could speak well.  You’re thinking of stringers and photographers the AP and Reuters use.

FlyOnTheWall on April 1, 2008 at 06:12 am

The funny thing is that a former captian in Saddam’s army would probably be the least anti-American person on the NY Times payroll.

Wing Chun Geologist on April 1, 2008 at 04:52 pm

oh snap!



A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

dougee on April 1, 2008 at 05:44 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.