An AP dispatch this morning bears the headline "Iraqi Insurgents Go on Rampage, Kill 60." The article describes a string of suicide bombings that were unleashed Wednesday as US forces were in the midst of a major offensive against insurgents in western Iraq, near the Syrian border.
My issue here isn't whether or not the insurgents went on a rampage. It appears that they did. Rather, the bigger question is whether the AP, or any other US mainstream media outlet, applies the same standards when describing violent, offensive actions on the part of warring factions?
I don't recall the AP using a similar headline while US forces were attacking Fallujah last November. During that battle, US forces attacked hospitals, killed thousands of people (how many civilians, we'll probably never know), and drove maybe 100,000 - 200,000 people from their homes.
Was that not a rampage? Certainly the scale of the attack was far bigger than that of Wednesday's suicide bombings.
The AP article also includes this astonishing passage, which has actually become customary for US mainstream media:
...evidence obtained from captured insurgents confirmed the presence of foreign fighters in the area.
Foreign fighters? Aren't the 1,000 or so US troops conducting the offensive "foreign fighters?" I don't think any of them are Iraqi-born, nor are they from neighboring countries. So why does AP simply repeat US military statements or comments about "foreign fighters" in Iraq? Aren't the soldiers who make such statements also foreign fighters? And what exactly is the "evidence" they've obtained? The AP doesn't say.
Perhaps AP could at least rewrite the article to read: "The US military, which itself is fighting on foreign soil, says evidence obtained from captured insurgents confirmed the presence of other foreign fighters in the area who have taken up arms with the insurgency."
Hey, here's a thought: What if all the foreign fighters left Iraq?