When Dana published this yesterday:
How Many Times Can the US "Capture" Someone?
The internets are chok-a-blok with triumphant stories of the "capture" of yet another Al Qaeda senior operative this morning. Apparently he was trying to sneak into Iraq. All crouched over with his jalabaya covering his head no doubt.
His name we're told is Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi.
Problem is that he's been listed as "captured" since March of 2003. Fox News and Free Republic say so, so it must be true. (You can use your pooters find function on those pages.)
my absolutely first reaction was ... which Blogging Tory would be the first to embarrass himself or herself by crowing over this new "victory" in the Global War On Islamojihadifarianism? Who, I ask you, who, would be so delightfully gullible as to swallow that story straight off the teleprompter?
I give you ... who else?
Sometimes, I think I need more of a challenge in my life.
NOW HERE'S AN INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT: In the comments section, "Junker" defends the honour of his blog thusly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Hadi_al_Iraqi
"It was reported in January 2002 that someone with the same pseudonyms Abdul-Hadi al-Iraqi and Abu Abdullah had been captured in Afghanistan.[10] That person was also described as a training camp commander. But despite these coincidences, the two suspects are now known to be distinct people."
Now, unlike Junker's Blogging Tory colleagues, I'm actually going to follow up on this and, if it turns out to be true, I'll publicly issue a retraction. (I'm aware that neither Junker nor any of his BT buddies would recognize a retraction if it walked up to them and kneed them in the happy sack, so I'll be sure to put a big label on it.)
But before that happens, Junker. I'm curious -- did your co-blogger Paul already know that, or did he make that post, get called on it, then dig around and conveniently come up with that possible rationalization after the fact? After all, his post didn't mention a potential mistaken identity, and it's not clear how he confirmed that it really is al-Iraqi this time.
So, let's be honest, Junker -- what kind of corroboration did your buddy Paul perform before making that post?
8 comments:
Don't worry, I think you're plenty challenged as it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Hadi_al_Iraqi
"It was reported in January 2002 that someone with the same pseudonyms Abdul-Hadi al-Iraqi and Abu Abdullah had been captured in Afghanistan.[10] That person was also described as a training camp commander. But despite these coincidences, the two suspects are now known to be distinct people."
As Celestial Junk is mostly Paul's blog now, and we are separated by at least a few thousand kilometers, I cannot speak on his behalf. I don't know what sort of background information he dug up on the article. I can only assume that he took note of the numerous media outlets and blogs reporting the incident, and posted it.
Kudos to Dana for digging up the obscure fact that there is/was another member of Al-Queda named Abdul-Hadi al-Iraqi, but it hardly seems relevant, does it? An interesting curiosity to be sure, but most likely nothing more than that.
If you believe that evil fascist Bush-Hitlerite neo-cons are bent on world domination then you just might see this as some sort of conspiratorial propaganda ploy.
To me, its just an irrelevant coincidence.
I appreciate the promise of a retraction, and I hope you enjoy the “challenge”.
As Celestial Junk is mostly Paul's blog now, and we are separated by at least a few thousand kilometers...
I'm scoring that to Céline Dion's "My Heart Will Go On."
This factual pettifogging is getting boring; let's revisit what CJ had to say about the VTech massacre.
Wow, I haven't run into ti-guy for quite some time now. I was wondering why my headaches had subsided.
I'm rather curious CC, why do you have such a fascination with our humble little blog? I mean, besides Paul's one article "Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant", which has been published extensively, we're no more noteworthy then a million other right wing blogs out there.
Certainly there must be something behind your strange fascination with us. Perhaps it is simple veiled jealously. Jealous of our rapier wit, stunningly original blog title and banner, and our jaw dropping handsome chiseled looks. Or maybe it’s a sort of Superman conflict. You need your Lex Luther, your arch-nemesis, otherwise what’s the point of being.
Either why, I most certainly take your enthrallment as a compliment and I keenly await your next deconstruction of one of our posts.
Wow, I haven't run into ti-guy for quite some time now. I was wondering why my headaches had subsided.
Cut the crap, arsehole. You've been desperate to establish some coherence between your own politics, that idiotic blog (where's 'Debris Trail', by the way?) and the CPC and you're discovering that that's not possible.
So give it up. Renounce your association with that tard-fest of a blog and establish yourself as an independent thinker.
...and maybe, when you come back from overseas, you wont be spat on.
LOL, good times in the comments section, how I've missed thee.
Just to clarify, I'm still in Canada, Debris Trail and Paul are one and the same, and I cannot foresee disconnecting myself from Cjunk any time soon as its just too much fun and I wouldn't get into these discussions with you without it.
Debris Trail is Paul? Well, now I'm sad.
Ah, well, Junker. You were always able to make me laugh.
Likewise, Ti-Guy.
Post a Comment