Bias in Boston

The other day, one of the senior editors here at “The Hatemonger’s Quarterly”—let’s just call him “Chip”—was busy perusing The Boston Globe, Beantown’s answer to the lefty bias of the Gray Lady. Whilst flipping through the broadsheet, “Chip” happened upon a curious exemplum of liberal media tomfoolery.

A front-page (below-the-fold) story in the May 27 number of the Globe is called “GOP Rivals Embrace Unproven Iraq-9/11 Tie.” Penned by a slipshod journalist called Peter S. Canellos, this piece is little more than a dubious hit-job on the Republican candidates for president.

Essentially, the article quotes the Republican frontrunners discussing the War on Terrorism, and then offers responses by liberal foreign policy analysts that ridicule the Republicans’ positions. The title given to the piece on its continuing page—“GOP Rivals Reinforce Misleading View of Iraq Role in 9/11”—aptly demonstrates that it is an attack masquerading as news.

Take, for example, the opening paragraphs of the sordid article. They read as follows:

In defending the Iraq war, leading Republican presidential contenders are increasingly echoing words and phrases used by President Bush in the run-up to the war that reinforce the misleading impression that Iraq was responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, [sic] attacks.

In the May 15 Republican debate in South Carolina, Senator John McCain of Arizona suggested that Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden would “follow us home”—a comment some viewers may have taken to mean that bin Laden was in Iraq, which he is not.

Oh, for crying out loud. What complete hogwash.

How dumb does Peter S. Canellos believe that the American people are? Does he earnestly think that readers of The Boston Globe didn’t recognize that Osama bin Laden is not, in fact, in Iraq?

Obviously, Senator McCain did not mean that Osama bin Laden would personally take the next Air Saudi Arabia flight to New York City (first class, we presume). He was speaking more generally: If we retreat from Iraq, terrorist organizations ideologically linked to al Qaeda are likely to target the US itself. Peter S. Canellos would know this is true if he ever troubled himself to read the words of the terrorists themselves—who routinely discuss their desire to wreck havoc in America, Israel, and, more generally, the West.

Instead, Canellos merely quotes—wait for it—Michael Scheuer, the anti-Semitic former CIA analyst with an odious crush on Osama bin Laden. Curiously, Canellos never gets around to mentioning that Mr. Scheuer has argued that the Holocaust museum in Washington, DC plays a role in the nefarious Jewish Lobby’s attempt to hijack American foreign policy. That might cast some doubt on his ability to offer reasonable commentary on the Iraq War.

Rather, Canellos pretends as if he understands nothing about Islamist terrorist groups. He treats bin Laden like the official CEO of al Qaeda—anything not explicitly approved by him is not the handiwork of his organization. Obviously, these terrorist organizations are far more amorphous associations. But Canellos can’t admit this, because it would sully his pathetic attempts at smearing the Republicans.

We, the crack young staff of “The Hatemonger’s Quarterly,” can’t wait until the Globe publishes a piece called “Democrat Rivals Embrace Defeat in Iraq,” which highlights the views of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton—and then offers conservative foreign policy experts’ ripostes to their assertions.
Well, maybe we ought not to hold our collective breath.