Once staunch supporters of the U.S. invasion to oust the dictator who ruthlessly suppressed them, many Shiite Arabs in Iraq have grown so frustrated by the lingering military occupation, with its checkpoints, raids and use of force, that they took to the streets to demand a deadline for the withdrawal of troops.The author Edmund Sanders uses the familiar technique of speaking for an entire people. This has become a common tactic for the MSM recently as the conventional narrative unravels in the region. Here we have one of the lead paragraphs stating how pissed off the Shia are at America. Never mind how the new government is dominated by them and that trend most likely will continue due to simple demographics within Iraq. Without reading two sentences, I (and anybody paying attention for the last two years) knew who was behind this confused display where they were simultaneously burning images of both Bush and Saddam: Chubby Al Sadr, he who looks like Cartmen.
Mr. Sanders then tosses us a bone:
At the same time, the fact that so many protesters were able to gather and voice their opinions without bloodshed or insurgent attacks suggests Iraq is making progress toward establishing a democratic system and creating a strong security force.Here the reporter exposes himself as just as confused as the tiny minority of Iraqis who support Iraqi Cartmen. The entire article swings wildly from side to side, mirroring the confused facade of the pacifist view. I'm getting queasy now, so I'll shut up soon. The article closes with this little gem:
"With just one word" from the cleric, said Qasim Mohammed, 36, of Sadr City, "we are ready to sacrifice our souls."This comes from what the author calls "disenfranchised young men" amongst whom Al Sadr is "wildly popular". I wonder if the papers give small bonuses to reporters who can work in PC catch-phrases. "Disenfrachised" has got to be worth a few buck at least, seeing as I've heard the phrase used in everything from election coverage to movie reviews. "Root causes" and "Hegemony" are now so overused as to be worth pennies now.
Funny how words become gray from flaccid recitation. An example is how skewed their collective memory has become of the horrors of the holocaust. Hitler's name is constantly evoked to score points in argument, thus cheapening the suffering of millions. The problem now for the left is this: after crying wolf for three (or is it 30) years, what makes them think that we will ever trust them again? After all, their command of history and language is less than awe-inspiring.