Looking down the page at my RSS feed of blogdex, to see what other people are talking about, I see that some Weekly Standard article is having a bit of a go at the BBC about its coverage of the war. I’m kind of loathed to link to it since it just chucks it further up the blogdex chart, but I guess I have to.
This is not an easy time, and the Beeb hasn’t always acquitted itself as well as it might, but I have absolutely no problem with their coverage of the war.
Don’t forget that we’re talking about a news organisation who’s reporters came under fire by “friendly” forces, and it’s transpiring daily that the government have at best misled the country, and at worst simply lied to us about the danger Iraq posed.
A paragraph about the pronunciation of Paul Wolfowitz’s surname gives a pretty good idea of the political leanings of the article’s writer. Incidentally, I’ve always heard his name spoken correctly, but it’s the man’s actions that worry me.
I don’t think we can honestly say that we’ve “liberated” the country, when it’s still an unsafe place. What we’ve actually done is invade another country without UN backing that hasn’t actually invaded or attacked anyone else.
Still if we’re taking on monstrous dictators, can we go into Zimbabwe next please?
I’ll wait for the conclusion of the Hutton Inquiry before commenting on that, but the Jessica Lynch story is still one of the biggest pieces of nonsense to come out of the war so far. Read John Kampfner’s piece on the matter. Of course some papers have had to correct their initial versions of this story.