|Home » Industry Watch » The Technological » Hall of Monkeys
They shilled before and now they shill again.
NEW YORK (Rixstep) — They played a vital role in enabling the invasion of Iraq and they're turning their backs on ethics and their fellow citizens again, writes Glenn Greenwald of the New York Times.
One has to seriously wonder why WikiLeaks even let them in the loop.
At issue is the shocking revelation that the US knowingly violated the UN convention on torture, used the fear of the Iraqi torturers to coerce prisoners, and even gleefully participated in torture sessions.
This of course made headlines around the world. Big headlines.
'Huge WikiLeaks release shows US ignored Iraq torture', wrote BBC News. 'Secret files show US ignored torture', wrote the Guardian. 'US turned blind eye to torture', wrote Al Jazeera. 'US ignored torture, civilian killings', wrote Hindustan Times. 'They paint a devastating portrait of apparent US indifference to a pattern of murder and torture', wrote Politico. But what did the New York Times write?
'Detainees fared worse in Iraqi hands, logs say.'
'Three cheers for the US', comments Greenwald sarcastically.
The revelations of the WikiLeaks Iraq War Logs have prompted the UN chief investigator on torture to formally demand Obama begin an inquiry, something the world media again were not tardy in relating to their readers. Yet there is nary a mention of it in the New York Times or in any US-based publication.
Britain's deputy prime minister Nick Clegg was so outraged that he today demanded an inquiry into his country's complicity.
All the New York Times can manage is a mention buried deep in a blog. (There's no mention whatsoever in WaPo.)
'The notion the Obama administration not only should - but must - investigate the role the military played in enabling this widespread, stomach-turning torture and abuse in Iraq is simply suppressed in American political discourse, most of all by the newspaper which played the leading role in enabling the attack on that country in the first place', writes a furious Greenwald.
Baghdad on fire in 2003. Do you remember?
There are those who remember. Remember how Hans Blix came back to the UN security council time and again empty-handed - WMDs in Iraq?! Remember how the very thought a country like Iraq under such severe economic sanctions could finance even research into slingshot development.
Remember how after every session the White House immediately countered with 'OH HE'S GOT 'EM ALRIGHT!'
When it comes to 'democracies', wars must always start with lies, Julian Assange said. The lies have to continue right through the wars and even after. And the New York Times played a pivotal role in spreading the lies of the US government to the public.
Perhaps people at large didn't really believe Iraq had WMDs. But they were close enough to believing the war hawks in the US capital were dumb enough to believe it. And that's about all that's needed.
Today even Karl Rove is posturing himself, saying if there truly are no WMDs in Iraq, the US should never have invaded.
But the New York Times? Bill Keller's jackals go even further, specifically and systematically avoid using the word 'torture' in connection with US actions.
'By stark contrast', writes Greenwald, 'virtually every other media account uses that term to describe the heinous abuse of detainees chronicled by this leak, the only term that accurately applies: see The Guardian ('American military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes'); BBC ('US ignored Iraq torture'); Politico ('apparent US indifference to a pattern of murder and torture').'
Boing Boing's even come out with a New York Times Torture Euphemism Generator.
The NY Times seriously need to set the disgraceful and cerebrally challenged Bill Keller out to pasture.
Bill Keller has blood on his hands. Lots of it.
Rixstep: Assange/WikiLeaks RSS Feed
Radsoft: Assange/WikiLeaks RSS Feed
Glenn Greenwald: NYT v the World: WikiLeaks Coverage
Glenn Greenwald: The Nixonian Henchmen of Today at the NYT