Pentagon says New York Times Involved in Mythmaking
From Cliff May at The Corner -- I'm assuming this is a faily new publication For the Record from the Pentagon.. but I don't know that for sure!
DOD asks editorial page to correct error
Oct. 24, 2006 The Pentagon today asked the New York Times to correct an editorial, which claimed that There have never been enough troops, the result of Mr. Rumsfelds negligent decision to use Iraq as a proving ground for his pet military theories, rather than listen to his generals. Whether the Times believes there were (or are) enough troops in Iraq, it is demonstrably untrue that troop levels in Iraq are the result of Secretary Rumsfelds not listening to his generals.
Generals involved in troop-level decisions have been very clear on this matter, making numerous statements that are not newor difficultto find, such as extensive commentary in General Frankss book, American Soldier. The implication is that the New York Times either believes these generals are not being truthful, or that they are too intimidated to tell the truth. The Pentagon would vigorously dispute both characterizations.
Read what generals themselves have to say about the subject, in a Pentagon letter to the editor.
UPDATE: The New York Times has declined the Pentagons request to correct its editorial.
and...
Newsweek Declines Pentagon Request to Examine Reporting
DOD asks magazine to reconsider refusal
Oct. 20, 2006 In response to a Newsweek article on Afghanistan (The Rise of Jihadistan, October 2, 2006), the Department of Defense sent Newsweek a lengthy rebuttal of points of fact and opinion, as well as a request for an opportunity to submit a stand-alone column that not only rebuts some of the more sensational charges, but offers your readers a clearer view of the very real challenges we face in Afghanistanas well as the many achievements of the past five years.
Newsweek dismissed the rebuttal as the government position, as well as the request for a stand-alone column. The Pentagons response to that letter read in part: First, a concise letter to the editor, of say, 200 words, cannot adequately address an [sic] 2200-word article containing a series of false assertions. Second, the issue is not Newsweeks position versus the government position. The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoodswhich is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.
Read the whole exchange here
and...
Oct. 18, 2006
The Weekly Standard.
To the Editor:
Bill Kristols recent article No More Huffing and Puffing manipulates Secretary of Defense Donalds Rumsfelds comments at a recent press conference and misleads your readers.
Lots more at the site
Posted by: Sherry 2006-10-26 |