Who Decides to Publish This Crap?

All right, I'm finally back, and I've got some posting to do. I want to take a look at a few letters in the New York Times opinion section for today. I've never fisked letters to the editor of an actual newspaper before.

Anyone who doesn't think the NYT has a liberal bias should really think about how many letters they must receive, then look at the content of the ones they decide to put in the paper. Let's take a look:

First, we have The Images From Iraq, the Revulsion in America. These letters are about the effects the graphic pictures (which I haven't looked at yet) from Falluja have had on Americans. Letter number one:

The Bush administration, before the war, told us that Iraqis would welcome Americans as liberators.

Your point being...what?

But as your graphic reporting and grisly photographs depict, a year into this war nothing could be further from the truth.

Oh no! There's violence during a war! RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!!!!

Administration officials are now quick to blame "foreign terrorists" and "remnants" of Saddam Hussein's regime for this kind of violence. But when a young Iraqi boy voices anti-American sentiments while mutilating the body of an American killed by a mob, is it not time for the Bush administration to admit the truth about the war in Iraq?

Uh, no. Maybe it's time to realize that children don't know what they're friggin' saying, and they're repeating what they've heard. Then, it's time to point out that many Iraqis were horrified by the incident. There's a reason some don't want the U.S. to succeed. It starts with S, ends with M, rhymes with Autumn...

Not only was the war a tragic mistake, but President Bush must also be held accountable for misleading the public about Iraq and for quickly dragging us into this generation's Vietnam.

Again, I can't believe that they picked this out of all the letters they must get. "This generation's Vietnam?" Interesting. Let's see here...according to this site, in one year of the Vietnam War (1968, in this case), we lost almost 15,000 troops. That's a bit more than 600, isn't it? I also don't think that we CONTROLLED MOST VIETNAMESE CITIES in that war, but I didn't exist when that was happening, so I could be wrong...

Letter number two (actually, just the second letter I feel like fisking):

The reports and photos of the brutal attack in Falluja filled me with a mix of emotions, primarily despair but also anger: anger toward the inexplicable inhumanity of the Iraqis who committed these crimes, and anger toward the administration that led us into a senseless war under false pretenses (front page, April 1).

The Blame America Squadâ„¢ strikes again! On another note, look for that "senseless war under false pretenses" thing to pop up several more times. Not very creative, if you ask me.

The depth of hatred against Americans and opposition to the United States occupation displayed in Falluja and elsewhere in Iraq could have and should have been anticipated.

It was anticipated, douchebag. It's called "the enemy."

Instead, hundreds of American lives and untold numbers of Iraqi lives have been lost.

Thanks for the news flash. You do realize that some of those Iraqis were responsible for torture, rape, and murder, right? Oh, yeah, it's just their "culture."

With Americans still being killed on a near-daily basis, the "relentlessly positive" attitude of L. Paul Bremer III and other occupation officials described by your correspondent ("Act of Hatred, Hints of Doubt," news analysis, front page, April 1) seems like a cruel hoax.

Have you heard of "morale?" Idiot.

Carta numero tres:

Whether to publish your April 1 front-page picture of Americans killed in Falluja must have been a difficult editorial decision.

I can imagine that discussion:

"Should we use the entire front page, or just 3/4?"

If your intent was to provoke revulsion, horror, shock, anger and heartache, then you succeeded.

Interestingly enough, all those emotions seem to be directed toward President Bush, not the friggin' murderous morons who actually killed the Americans. I wonder if that was intentional...........no I don't.

April 1 will go down in history as the date Americans say no to war in Iraq and rally to bring our people home.

We have a psychic in our midst! Tell us the future, o wise and learned scribe of brief anti-war rants!

President Bush's debacle — a war that was started to settle old scores...

*GASP* Incredible! You're a mind reader too? I fear the awesome powers of the prognosticating peace protestor!

...has already cost us tens of billions to rebuild a country we were told had billions in oil reserves...

I thought you didn't want Bushchimperialistâ„¢ to take the ooooiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil.

...resulted in countless loss of life and has alienated our allies to boot.

You mean the allies who are fighting with us right now? What universe are you living in?

Lest administration supporters think this is just the liberals' knee-jerk reaction to this latest horror, they would be wrong.

True. It would just be the liberals' knee-jerk reaction to everything: "You're wrong, you evil people!"

This is just one horror too many in a foolhardy war started under false pretenses.

There it is again! Are you also going to mention how Bush was "stonewalling the 9/11 investigation?"

It was wrongheaded to go in the first place, and it is criminal to subject our military and American and foreign workers to daily threats.

Sure. Let's subject 25 million Iraqis to 'em instead. Brilliant. Unless your powers include time travel, we don't have much of a choice at the moment.

Bring them all home. Now.

"Then we can call 'em baby killers, just like the '60s!!! Wait, did I say that out loud? Uh-oh."

I'm not done yet. There's one more exceptional letter in a section entitled Was That Photo Too Shocking to Be Printed? Check this out:

Observing the bounds of good taste and reporting the news honestly, accurately and responsibly have very little to do with each other.

Considering the media doesn't bother to do any of those things, I don't know why it's even relevant, but that's not the issue for today...

The media should not be asking, after the atrocities in Falluja, how to avoid offending viewers and readers ("To Portray the Horror, News Media Agonize," news article, April 1).

We viewers and readers — we, the people of the United States — let ourselves be led into an unnecessary war...

"It's our fault! It's all our fault! Shame on us AmeriKKKans!"

...on false pretenses by an unelected president.

There it is AGAIN! "False pretenses." If he hadn't also thrown in the classic "unelected president" meme, I'd swear the same person was writing all these letters.

The stories that shock us today reflect the tragic and chaotic consequences of our failure to meet our responsibilities as citizens of a democracy.

I can almost see him hurting himself as he writes this, a la "The Scarlet Letter." Reverse projection, anyone?

It is our moral obligation to have our sensibilities offended.

In that case, I've fulfilled my moral obligation by reading through your asinine letter. I feel patriotic.

Once again, think about this for a second: The NYT probably receives hundreds and/or thousands of letters. Out of all those, it chooses to publish ones like these. I find it hard to believe that they couldn't find anything better.

...By the way, did you know that we were led into an unnecessary war under false pretenses? I haven't heard that in a while.

Posted by CD on April 2, 2004 03:00 AM
Category: