More Fallout

Mark wrote this Letter to the Editor of E&P:

The “9,000 dead” US troops in Iraq was a smear from a neo-nazi publication (Barnes Review) to discredit the peace movement. Barnes Review works with KKK leader David Duke, praises Hitler and sells Holocaust Denial books. calling it “tbrnews” doesn’t change the fact that this is a racist disinformation operation.
Barnes Review’s sibling publication “American Free Press” pretends to be an opposition publication investigating scandals but they insert lots of fake claims to discredit real evidence. Perhaps the most notorious is their creation and promotion of fake claims of official complicity in 9/11 to discredit abundant real evidence of complicity. It is reminiscent (if not part of) the Karl Rove strategy used to discredit CBS (see BS?) last fall – the “memos” given to that network that were then used to alienate the media from investigating Bush going AWOL from the Air National Guard.

I don’t know whether this is true.

Then there’s this:

your views are not understood here. my family has been saved by your troops. who do you prefer Saddam the rapest and murderer. or Bush the Mad invader…I prefer Bush, he can only save my town, family, country…….I wish more in the USA could see this. your a lier!!!

I just wonder where this person lives, that he/she was “saved” by our troops. American troops haven’t died defending US soil since World War II, and then just barely (Alaska and Hawaii, which weren’t states then).

Editor & Publisher Notes My Retraction

There was never in any doubt in my mind, once I discovered the dubious nature of TBRNews, that I would issue a retraction. It sucks to admit you’re wrong, but considering the alternative–becoming as credible as a Republican–well, there’s really no choice at all. Anyway, there’s a piece about my retraction in Editor & Publisher.

You get guys like Desmond who kick sand in your face:

Your excuses are pathetic. You liberals are unbelievable. You believe anything no matter how obviously wrong it is, if it fits your liberal agenda. Why don’t you just fold up your act and disappear. It is so apparent what you are trying to do. You should be embarrassed to show your face. Say goodbye already.

Yeah, I know. Doesn’t the guy care about Bush’s lies? Or that he never, ever admits he’s wrong? But still–I do feel stupid for falling for the 9,000 story. After the lies about WMDs, the “search” for Osama in a country we knew he wasn’t in, etc., it’s easy to believe that the Bushies are capable of just about anything. That cynicism opens one up to this sort of thing.

On the other hand, kind souls like Matt have also been offering support:

Hey, just wanted to let you know that I think it was a good thing to issue the retraction, and I respect you more for it. I know you
probably have a lot of rightwingnuts emailing you and telling you to do uncomfortable things to yourself, but I’d give you a pat on the back. After all, I don’t remember hearing any neocons/fascists saying they were wrong about WMD in Iraq, or much of any thing else that they’ve fucked up.

True. In my own, admittedly biased way, I am trying to find the truth. Setting the record straight when you mess up is a big part of that.

Tom is harsh but brings up an excellent point:

I appreciate you cartoon with some exception, but regularly read it. My question for you is what do you do for the reader that glances
casually at your cartoon when you cite an inflammatory and incorrect fact? Unfortunately, I read you guidelines for e-mail and think you will probably stop reading my e-mail when I get too critical, but while I was angry and disappointed, I attempted to temper my e-mail to your guidelines.
I visited you blog for the first time yesterday and found the “retraction” you posted. Everybody gets it wrong sometimes, but your reaction seemed cowardly and infantile. To cite other cartoonists who misrepresented things hardly make it right for anyone else. You have been very critical of neo- cons and I would expect them to react the way you had. Honestly, I thought you were better than that. I would expect Karl Rove to cite others that have gotten away with his plots to exonerate himself, but you?
It would have been useful to post the retraction for the average reader to see, unless you didn’t care that the average Joe see that you got it wrong. You talked about hiding bodies in the cartoon in question, but what about hiding retractions? I am not of the political mind that frequents your blog. I’m not even sure you care much, considering the amount of e-mail you recieve (according to the guidelines). It would just be nice to see someone somewhere refuse to be shrill and caustic without the integrity to make it worthwhile.
I was disappointed in your handling of the situation and hope you have considered rectifiying it. If the US military dropped a bomb on a
wedding party, I’m sure you would expect something to be done about it. While your “bomb” is on a much smaller scale, the regular reader
might like to know that just because the other kids did it, doesn’t mean it’s right to misrepresent the truth for the sake of argument.

Of course, with few exceptions, nothing does come from the thousands of innocent civilians killed by triggerhappy US servicemen in Afghanistan and Iraq. But we’re not talking about that here.

Tom brings up an interesting point about “burying” a retraction, a practice I deplore in newspapers and television media. Unfortunately, I don’t have the kind of control editors and producers have. Here’s why: I draw three cartoons for syndication each week. Were I to include a text retraction with one or all three of the next week’s cartoons, my subscribing clients would absolutely not run those cartoons–or would run them minus the retraction. That’s because very few of my papers run all three of my cartoons each week, and they tend to view cartoons as extra content rather than staff content–stuff generated by the papers themselves. I could do an entire retraction cartoon, but no one would run it. So while I can screw up in public, it’s virtually impossible for me to issue a correction anywhere other than here, in my blog. It is no doubt a highly imperfect solution to a vexing problem, but until I own my own paper or work on staff somewhere rather than through syndication I don’t see a solution.

Retraction: 9,000 Dead? Maybe, Maybe Not.

I draw more than 200 cartoons a year, but this has never happened to me before: commenting on a story that turns out to be, if not bogus, at least inadequately sourced. Of course, an editorial cartoonist is always commenting on other people’s reporting, so he or she is always vulnerable to the possibility of being taken in by some jackass. Consider, for example, all the cartoonists who did cartoons about Saddam postulating what he’d do with hiis nuclear weapons!

To be make this short, I’m not apologizing because I have nothing to apologize for. I read a story that came off as possible, sourced it using previously reliable informants, and ended up doing a cartoon that I wouldn’t have done had I known then what I know now.

So this is a retraction of this past Monday’s “C” cartoon. Did 9,000-plus soldiers get killed in Iraq? Maybe, maybe not. But as a cartoonist friend of mine points out: The relatives of those hidden 7,000 dead troops sure would be raising hell if the Pentagon were trying to hide them. To which I respond: Duh.

The battery in my BS detector must have been running low last week.

TBR News a Fraud?

F.C. writes:

I want to preface this e-mail by saying that my political leanings are far left and I love reading your articles, comics and blog.
That said, I must point out the site you provided as a source has been discredited beyond cavil:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/jim-lampley/the-ultimate-deception_2838.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/jim-lampley/a-poor-choice-of-sources_2891.html
Again, do not get me wrong, it is not that I cannot posit the criminal-in-thief lying about US troop casulaties but TBRnews.org is not the best way to prove it.
Frankly, as a collateral point, I do not think there is any need to lie about troop deaths – the American public is by and large in a consumeristic [sic?] frenzy (or is it stupor?) who do not care anyway. Time to move onwards!

The Huffington site comments section contains several allegations that TBR News is related to The Barnes Report and is affiliated with wacko Holocaust revisionist types like David Irving. If so, please ignore anything they say.

I’m looking into it, including trying to reconfirm my independent source(s). As F.C. writes, we don’t need to copy the right by lying about them–the truth is damning enough.

Editor & Publisher Mention

E&P mentions my cartoon in a small piece. Maybe this will spark a discussion and some plain talk from the Pentagon.

Real Number of Iraq War Dead: More Than 9,000

Some emailers are asking for source material on today’s cartoon about American war dead in Iraq. You can find one reference here, and there are others elsewhere. In addition, I have independently confirmed this news with appropriately-placed sources.

God bless America–with George W. Bush running the joint into the ground, we need all the help we can get.

Rodney Crowell

Jim advises me:

In the new issue of Paste, a music and pop culture mag, there’s a review of Rodney Crowell’s new CD (two stars) that has a prominent blurb that references your work:
“Crowell overstates his point by a Texas mile, constructing a gigantic Ted Rall cartoon version of bourgeois capitalist piggery.”
Thought I’d pass it on, in case you haven’t seen it.

Yeah, well, maybe I do overstate my case sometimes. Sometimes you need to do that to begin to counter the tsunami of lies and perverted logic flooding us from the right.

Book Review: “War Powers”

My review of Peter Irons’ important new book “War Powers”–about how presidents have stolen Congress’ power to declare war under the Constitution–appears in today’s San Diego Union-Tribune.

Today I Read the New York Times with You

I haven’t looked at the paper yet. (That’s right, I still read the physical paper. If I still had a day job I’d no doubt be slacking off reading the whole thing online and saving money in the process, but I don’t which means I have to actually work for a living. So today, for the first and possibly past time, you get to follow along while I react to today’s news, as brought to you by the New York Times.

Today’s lead story quotes the (cough) Pentagon as claiming that some roadside bombs used by Iraqi insurgents are manufactured in Iran. It’s just another floater for possibe war against Iran because, hey, we’ve got so many more troops to send to death and so many more billions a week to spend. The money quote:

But just as troubling is that the spread of the new weapons seems to suggest a new and unusual area of cooperation between Iranian Shiites and Iraqi Sunnis to drive American forces out – a possibility that the commanders said they could make little sense of given the increasing violence between the sects in Iraq.

Once again, the crux of cluelessness. The reason “enemy” Sunnis and Shiites are cooperating against us is because they both want us to get the fuck out of their country. What’s surprising about that? Oh, but they’ll have to fight each other after we leave. That’s true. But they have to cooperate in the common fight against the United States if either wants the chance to rule post-Bushite Iraq.

On the editorial page, op-ed “writer” John Tierney has surpassed his reliable inanity:

Polar bears are mammals with a mission, whether it’s Gus obsessively swimming in the Central Park Zoo, or the mother and her cub that I once followed during a dogsled expedition here in the Canadian high Arctic. We watched her with awe and kept our distance, especially after coming across the bloody remnants of her seal dinner on the ice. The message I took home was: “You mess with my habitat, and I’ll mess with you.”

The name of the column: “The Good News Bears.”

Every day I read the New York Times’ entropic op-ed page, I’m reminded of how the nation’s greatest newspaper has a section unworthy of most high school newspapers. Yeah, yeah, I like Krugman too. But still.

Every now and then the Times publishes a piece that makes you wonder why they’re just getting to a story now, months after you’ve already read and digested it. “C.I.A. Leak Case Recalls Texas Incident in ’92 Race” is a classic case. It’s a rehash of something that we Treasongate watchers have long known: Rove has a history of exactly the sort of sorry shit he pulled on Valerie Plame. On the other hand, the Times’ sluggishness has the salutory effect of keeping the story in the news.

There’s a piece about Gitmo getting leaner and (!) meaner:

E-Mail This

Printer-Friendly
Reprints

By NEIL A. LEWIS
Published: August 6, 2005

WASHINGTON, Aug. 5 – In a few years, Pentagon officials say, the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, will have undergone a radical transformation.
The sprawling detention site known as Camp Delta, with its watchtowers, double-wide trailers housing rows of steel cells and interrogation rooms will be mostly demolished.
Instead, a sharply reduced inmate population of those the military considers the most hard-core will inhabit two nearby hard-walled modern prisons. The newest of those, which is still under construction, is modeled on a modern county jail in Michigan and is designed to counter international criticism of Guantánamo as inhumane and, to some, a symbol of American arrogance.
The first step in changing the character of Guantánamo, officials say, is to relocate many of the 520 detainees. As part of that effort, Defense and State Department officials said this week that they had reached agreement with Afghanistan to transfer 110 Afghan detainees to their home country. Eventually, the population will be reduced to 320, the capacity of the permanent prison buildings.

Sure, this is Judith Miller-style transcription journalism–some “journalist” typing what some government official tells him–but it’s interesting as a trial balloon/statement of intent. The Gitmo concentration camp is becoming, as its Soviet predessors did, more permanent. It also belies, in the case of the 110 guys being shipped back to Afghanistan, repeated Administration claims that all of the Gitmo detainees were “the worst of the worst,” guys so evil we could never, ever release them.

And now I need coffee. Along with regime change.

The Average Soldier

I get a lot of military email, some positive and some negative. I was impressed by this one from Johnny:

Hi Mr. Rall,
I saw you on Foxnews a few times, and while I disagreed with some of the things you said, I went to your site and check back on it about once a week. I know that you can’t just always believe everything you are told and sometimes the opposition is right. I do have a problem with how you treat the military though. I have been in ROTC for the past four years and as soon as I am done my masters I am going to commission fulfilling my contract. I contracted four years ago because I wanted to serve my country and “fight the good fight” against anyone who tried to do our country harm. Many of my fellow cadets are in the same boat as me, came from an average family, good students, ( I have a 3.9 cum GPA now ), just wanting to do our service, finish it, and move on with your lives. We could have never predicted what we would eventually have to end up doing and where we would be going but it is the government, and you can’t back out once you’ve signed the dotted line. We were not recruited and lied to, we went into it knowing full well what we were getting into. There are many many many great people in the Army ( and other branches ). Many joined for training opportunities or just to do their duty. Yet all I ever see in your comics/other writings, is disdain for the military, continually calling all of us torturers and gun wielding fanatics. While some have done such things, it embarrasses many of us to be in the same military as them. They are not soldiers out of line, they are criminals. But you must see that many of us are just normal guys that signed up for a job because we wanted to, and therefore we must do what we are required to. Foreign policy is not our fault, it is the governments. We are supposed to clean up the mess when the government can’t seal the deal. Please reconsider your stance on the average soldier, blame the government for where we are all you want, but I know that when you portray soldiers in the light you do, it really hurts me and many of my colleagues that someone would look down on us, when we are just trying to do something positive for our country. I am sorry for the length of this e-mail but after following your web site for a little over a year now, I felt it was time to voice myself and hopefully get your opinion on this subject at hand. Thank you

Point taken. The vast majority of soldiers have not (presumably) engaged in the sort of atrocities committed daily at US concentration camps like Abu Ghraib and Bagram. But let’s get real: people join the military in order to kill people. Or, at bare minimum, they’re willing to kill people. That’s what the military does, and everybody understands that. I doubt that even the lyingest son-of-a-bitch recruiter claims otherwise.

Unfortunately, dutiful soldiers get lumped in with the sadists when they refuse to stand tall, in public, to denounce those whose behavior disgraces the armed services. Especially disconcerting to those of us who wish to believe the best about the men and women serving in uniform is the way they applaud criminal mass murderers like George W. Bush at public appearances–e.g., the notorious “mission accomplished” appearance. It is also sad to see so few soldiers prosecuted for refusing to serve in the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Mass resistance, even from 1 percent of the armed forces, would prompt the kind of national reconsideration that might bring an end to Bush’s madness, and yet it’s not forthcoming.

One last point: career soldiers who enlisted before Bush can be excused for being stuck fighting wars which they may or may not believe to be justified. But anyone who enlisted since–or in the future–is fully aware of what he or she is getting into.