liar, liar

First it was the staged toppling of the Saddam statue, now reports are emerging that the rescue of PFC Lynch was a well-orchestrated news stunt as well. I guess the bit of sarcasm here was well-earned.

Share

8 Responses to “liar, liar”

  1. Sean Says:

    Having read over the links from the alternet article I note with amusement the article on Fox decrying the BBC’s anti-american bias(???) also carries a banner claiming Fox provides “unbiased fair and accurate reporting”…..

    Sometimes the most comical ironies are the elaborations of a bad liar.

  2. Sean Says:

    as an afterthought I thought you might like to take a look at , this related article I think the comments posted by readers there says a great deal about the current mindset of the british.

  3. Big John Says:

    Sean, those comments are indeed very revealing. Particularly interesting are the insinuations that Lynch is faking amnesia.

    Quote:
    “I think the ‘fact’ that Miss Lynch has since lost her memory and ‘will probably never be able to recall what happened’ (US government official statement) says it all. How convenient.”

    Oh, how evil! Those minions of Lord Bush have gotten to poor Jessica! I wonder what horrible threats they used to shut her up?

    One would have thought that if she was ‘going along with the plan’, there would at least be some hazy memories of the ‘rescue’, for dramatic effect y’know.

    Just imagine the effect on Bush’s future if Lynch ever recanted, and pointed the finger at Bush? What a political meltdown! No President in his right mind would take a chance like that, especially when he already has a lock on reelection.

    IMO, Bush has not been the prexy long enough to go mad.

  4. erik Says:

    That rescue did look far too well-staged to be real.

  5. Sean Says:

    Big John,

    Lord Bush may not have been pretzel long enough to go mad. He does appear though to have had sufficient time to squander the trust and goodwill of the majority of people in America’s closest (and only military) ally.

    Not bad going really.

  6. Big John Says:

    “He does appear though to have had sufficient time to squander the trust and goodwill of the majority of people in America’s closest (and only military) ally.”

    Who, the British? Last I heard, the majority had swung over to our way of thinking.

    Trying to guage the British mood thru the media filters seems dicey to me. What really counts is what they DID. And I haven’t heard that Blair is facing any no-confidence votes.

    Actions speak louder than words.

  7. eldan Says:

    The trouble with politics in Britain at the moment is that Blair has a majority so huge that he can weather pretty extensive revolts within his own party, and in turn this is not because he’s popular, but because the traditional opposition party are so useless. This means that the safety of Blair’s position isn’t a good guide to the satisfaction of his electorate, so much as a symptom of the poverty of our political scene.

    During the war itself I think a slim majority of Brits supported it (I can’t be quite sure because I was abroad for the duration, so I’m relying on news sources and friends’ interpretations), and for a while afterwards it looked like this majority might grow because, let’s face it, very few people will miss Saddam. However, the questions about legitimacy have been coming back to haunt Blair, and I think this week’s stories about unrest in Baghdad & Fallujah, together with Rumsfeld’s statements about WMDs might just bring things to a head.

    My opinion (and I can’t be certain of this, but at least I’m reporting from London, so my information is first-hand) is that the British public is now pretty evenly split about whether the war was justified or not. Most people don’t believe the WMD story, but I think there is a significant group who think that we did the right thing, whether for the right reasons or not.

    However, I do think that the buildup to war and its aftermath have increased the anti-americanism that was already common over here. In the build-up because Bush was perceived as being extremely arrogant, and in the aftermath because there have been more problems in US-controlled areas than UK-controlled ones (though I can’t help thinking that this might be partly because the US army has taken on the toughest places)

  8. Sean Says:

    Big John

    “Trying to guage the British mood thru the media filters seems dicey to me”

    Absolutely, I’d say the best thing to do was to speak to a Brit – like me for example.

    Sean

  • Twitter

  • Category Archives

  • Monthly Archives