I'd have to research the Al-Qaaqa deal, but you have to look at motive. What other motive is there in coming out with a front page story that is essentially a nonstory? To make Bush look bad a week before the election.
When ABC gets a tape about a threat to America, we want to know about it. Since Bush is seen as the candidate who Americans feel safer under, this threat could benefit him.
When ABC gets a tape about a threat to America, we want to know about it. Since Bush is seen as the candidate who Americans feel safer under, this threat could benefit him.
Al Qaqaa being a nonstory is your opinion however. It is your opinion there's tons upon tons of explosives in enemy hands in Iraq anyways, a bit more won't matter, and therefore there's no need to report it. Maybe you're right, maybe not (ignoring the arguements thus far).
It is my opinion that the ABC Tape story is a nonstory. Threats occur on a way common basis from many terrorist organizations. I no longer know how many terrorist beheading tapes have been posted, and it seems every month or two another supposed Osama tape gets filtered around. Threats are common and easily bluffed - it's actions I want to know about. Until I know the facts though, I won't know if or why this tape is important at all. I won't know any facts - until there's a story on it. The CIA has authenticated it, I've heard, though I haven't heard to whom, so I expect something. Possibly on the weekend, more likely on Monday.
If there's a bunch of BS surrounding it and the issue is actually not that important, then I can rant about it. The whole CBS mullarkey with Bush's service is a good example - damn what a turkey that was. I don't expect this tape to actually air, but I do expect some reporting on it (other than the shill Drudge making his noise), and I will look for it. And make a more final judgement after (no judgement is ever final).
And I may be reasoning with you or handing you ammo depending, but I will say this about the Al-Qaqaa story. The fact that the base was looted did not suprise me at all - the only suprise was that Iraq had lots of quality stuff to loot. There have been stories ever since the fall of Baghdad about rampant looting. The more obvious stories focused on that one museum as an example, and highlighted the city looting of offices and palaces. Yet, all along there's been under-the-radar stories about old bases being looted, even ones including possible nuclear materials. Nothing concrete though, and nothing in detail, and reports eventually filtered through that all the nuke stuff was recovered.
The Qaqaa story is important not just because of the well documented explosives that were lost (which is damning in it's own right), but because it also ties into other major problems of the war. Once you have the face of it down pat, it implies that lots of bases were not covered like this, giving weight to all the insubstantial looting reports that were happening all along. Then you get into the why not - was this bad planning, was intel misplaced or ignored, we keep hearing opposing sides about whether we sent enough troops...
It's not just the explosives. It's a logical lynchpin for the Iraq war. A proven and investigated end symptom that points backwards at problems long debated or ignored, not a root cause of anything concrete (yet) but a grounding point for discussing every other thing going wrong over there. A lot like Abu Gharib prison was, actually.
That is why it's a story. How could it not be, tying into as much as it does?
You may call it a bias move, but I don't think the facts can help which way they point. I think you can only see the way they point, and ignore that they are facts behind that.
We'll see over the next few days if the tape has any similar effect.
Comment