Remember how MSMers such as Tim Russert recently taunted President Bush for claiming that Al Qaeda is behind much of the violence in Iraq? Posted on 12/31/2006 7:06:03 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Remember how MSMers such as Tim Russert recently taunted President Bush for claiming that Al Qaeda is behind much of the violence in Iraq?
Well, this morning comes a report from a certified MSM source lending credence to W's assertion. NBC's Richard Engel, who nobody would confuse with a Bush administration defender and who only yesterday was deploring the execution of Saddam as "primitive and vindictive," appeared on this morning's "Today" to discuss the aftermath of Saddam's death.Asked host Lester Holt: "Lots of concern that there would be a violent response to the execution from Saddam loyalists, supporters. What has the reaction been so far?"
Engel: "So far that violent response has not materialized. There is a concern that some of saddam's supporters could try and launch a spectacular attack but most of the insurgents who are now attacking American troops in this country are not Saddam supporters at all. They are more militant al Qaeda-type supporters and there is concern they will continue their attacks but that Baathist spike so far hasn't happened."
Granted, Engel identified al Qaeda as a major source of violence against US troops, rather than of sectarian violence. But his statement suggests that al Qaeda is playing a more important role in Iraq than Bush-administration critics would have people believe.
Finkelstein was in Iraq last month. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
Support-from-an-odd-source ping to Today show list.
Somebody missed the memo.
The coming Ba'athist uprising has been a myth from day one. The Ba'ath party was mortally wounded in the invasion, and has never offered serious resistance to the United States military. While the military itself (due to Administration guidance) wasted a long time focusing on this threat, it never materialized. AQI, on the other hand, has been a constant thorn in our side. Nice for everyone to finally catch up.
I noticed Perky Katie was wearing Navy Blue Friday. I guess her black was at the cleaners.
"Did I say al Qaeda? I didn't mean al Qaeda. That was just a slip of the tongue. I meant, uh, some other guys."
"most of the insurgents who are now attacking American troops in this country are not Saddam supporters at all"
I don't think has suggested that they are. This is a pretty pointless article, with at best a strawman target.
Slip of the lip more likely.
Never trust a Brit with a French screen-name ;-)
The media was fully expecting this response and seemed to be praying for it (so they could again proclaim Bush's fault).
Even the local news radio station assured listeners Friday that they would break in with any details on violence exploding in Iraq as a result of the execution. Cheering crowds are not newsworthy.
You don't disagree then?
I do disagree. When's the last time you heard a member of the liberal media acknowledge that most of the violence against US troops is Al Qaeda-inspired?
If it will help Bush, it's not true. If it will hurt Bush, it's true. What part don't you understand? It's all very logical.
The good thing about the Iraq war is that it is attracting terrorists from all over, and we can pick them all off there.
"When's the last time you heard a member of the liberal media acknowledge that most of the violence against US troops is Al Qaeda-inspired?"
It depends what you mean by 'Al Qaeda-inspired'. Engel talks of 'Al Qaeda type' groups rather than 'Al Qaeda', though I doubt they carry membership cards in any case. I'm more familiar with the British media than the US media, but I don't recall seeing anyone recently attempting to make an argument that Baathists were responsible for the majority of attacks on troops, if they ever made that argument.
What makes Engel's comment interesting to me was not that he said it wasn't Baathists responsible for the violence, but that he did say it was al-Qaeda types.
Knock me over with a feather. Then, in 2020, when archeologists accidentally turn up a trove of WMDs in Syria, stringer Katie Couric will say, "Nevermind."
It depends what he means by Al Qaeda types though. If it simply means 'a loose grouping with religious motivations' then that would pretty much be a synonym for 'anyone other than former baathists'. If he's talking about people with actual connections to a defined Al Qaeda command structure, then I'd concede your point, but I also wouldn't know on what basis he was making that claim.
Every squirrel finds an acorn once in awhile.
Not only that, but the baathist party was in retreat even before we invaded. They held little control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.