Iraqi Child (Not) Happy To Be Cradled by Navy Corpsman

I guess this story has been floating around for a while, but I hadn’t seen it, and Janus/onan (who pointed it out to me) was right that I’d find it interesting: Times like this I’m glad I don’t have a rifle handy, 24/7.

12 Responses to “Iraqi Child (Not) Happy To Be Cradled by Navy Corpsman”

  1. Patriot Says:

    i cant see the link for some reason…. can somebody tell me what this story is about?

  2. JJ Says:

    Your employers restricted your internet access at the Quikie-Mart again did they Patriot?

    I’ll help ya out.

    The story is about a brave American red-state soldier saving a poor brown child from an Al Quaeda terror cell.

    See, this Iraqi terrorist “family” was using their highly trained suicide bomber 3-year-old as a human shield against the mighty truth and Christian rightousness of American bullets.

    Quicker than you could say “Jenna and Barbara are passed out again on the White House lawn” the good and virtuous Americans perservered by slaying the barbarians with deft resolve and flaming justice, thus saving the day for truth, democracy, humanity and virgin motherhood.

    Another happy ending, eh?

  3. Patriot Says:

    ok – i think i might be able to translate that from whatever language that was in …. you’re saying an american soldier tried to “save” a kid that was trained to be a suicide bomber and exploded?

  4. JJ Says:

    What do you mean what language is it in? It’s in Murican…what are you, some kind of furriner?

  5. TeacherVet Says:

    Patriot, the link shows some of the photos taken that were not released to the press. In one of them the baby is crying, which in turn leads to an ignorant interpretation that the baby is unhappy about being held and checked over by a U.S. soldier.

    The “red-state soldier” is Navy corpsman Richard Barnett, from Camirilo, California.

  6. TeacherVet Says:

    Terry Karney, author of the article, states, “I’ll grant the right, even the duty of those who hold the opposite view to score what points they can with the good.” (debating the amount of weight given in reporting good news vs. bad news on events in Iraq) He quotes the soldier as saying that :if any good comes from any of this, he cannot see it”.

    He then adds, “But that does not give anyone the right to twist facts, for any purpose.” Did “JJ” twist the facts in relating the story to you, making up a false, ignorant scenario, with no attempt at accuracy? Absolutely, yes.

    The soldier, if correctly quoted, has doubts about the “rightness” of our involvement in Iraq that mirror those of JJ, but the author obviously condemns the twisting of facts that is consistently practiced by JJ and others.

  7. Jim Says:

    Hmmm…the baby COULD be unhappy about being checked over by the Corpsman. Or he could be unhappy that his sister and father were wounded and his mother was killed by crossfire in a battle between the Marines and some Iraqi fighters. Or he even could be unhappy about the realization that his life is nothing more than a political football to be kicked around by you.

    Any of the above is more than enought to cry about if you ask me.

    But I didn’t “twist” the facts – a made up a sarcastic story lampooning the spin I was certain any wingnut would surely put on this story to avoid any examination of the circumstances at hand that might cast their viewpoint in an unfavorable light. And you didn’t disappoint.

    Well done.

    For an extra bonus helping of sloppy irrational wingnuttyness you even added that I had doubts about the “rightness” of our involvement in Iraq or that I (and “others” like me who are…uh…Masons?..Jews?…African-Americans with pierced nipples?) “consistently” practice “the twisting of facts” – which is a rather broad and generalization based on a single post, I tend to think.

    So who’s guilty of making up what here?

    Anyway, let me ease your mind. I can assure you that I am not now nor I have I ever been a Republican, so please apply your mindless stereotypes elsewhere.

  8. TeacherVet Says:

    Contrarily, I used to be a Democrat, a descendant of the John Nance Garner family.

    The baby is not old enough to understand the issues you chronical, so your analysis of the child’s thought process in stupid. The despair expressed by the Navy corpsman should have been enough to justify your argument.

    Yes, you did “spin,” or actually you fabricated, a scenario in the story in responding to a question by Patriot, a poster who could not access it with the link provided. Your statement that you did not twist the facts was followed by a run-on sentence that makes no sense, but I’m glad I did not disappoint you. I had read the article when John first posted it, and Terry Karney’s intent was insulted by your ignorant interpretation.

    You use sarcasm and childish personal insults in lieu of an absence of defense or argument. You seem to infer that you have no doubts about the “rightness” of our involvement in Iraq, then follow with some inane statement about blacks with pierced nipples. To clarify, I was lumping you in with other treasonous activists who would sacrifice both American and Iraqi lives, encouraging criminals in Iraq in order to satisfy a political agenda.

    Let me clarify, since I was writing to Patriot, not to you, that I was making reference to the intent of the article: Terry Karney’s contention that the bad news coming out of Iraq should be reported with equal or greater weight than the good news items—and his acknowledgement of the right, even the duty of those who hold the opposite view to score what points they can with the “good” (news coming out of Iraq).

    If my synopsis of the article for Patriot offends you, it is only evidence of your defensiveness. If my analysis makes me a wingnut, then I’m a proud wingnut.

  9. Jim Says:

    “Contrarily, I used to be a Democrat, a…….childish personal insults…”


    Goood Lord make a point please, you’re killing me with your inanity and mindless jibberish. Breathing must tax all of you “intellect”.

  10. TeacherVet Says:

    Wow. You can’t read the points that are made, even about a baby’s inability to comprehend and process complex situations. Would your little panties be less knotted if I used your “debate” techniques?

    Have someone analyze your own last post for you, then please explain what part of it was not inane jibberish. Your point doesn’t need explanation; see “You use……….” in my last post.

  11. Patriot Says:

    “Or he even could be unhappy about the realization that his life is nothing more than a political football to be kicked around by you.”
    By TeacherVet!?!?! By me!?
    We didn’t bring the story up! I just asked a question!

  12. pecunium Says:

    Patriot: It is about a news story being twisted, through clumsy photoshop work, to be used as a piece of propaganda.

    The details are that a Navy corpsman, who bemoaned the effects of the war on the innocent (in April 2003) was being twisted into a reason for us to be there.

    JJ: If you plan to twist my words to make points, at least try to 1: be clever, and 2: paint me as I am, not as some fictive bad-guy would be.

    TeacherVet, thanks for covering my back.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.