Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Freeman and the Free Press (cont)   [Mark Steyn]

Following my remarks last night about American newspapers' suicidal antipathy to news, I see the Washington Post has now run its first news piece on the Chas Freeman story:

Charles W. Freeman Jr. withdrew yesterday from his appointment as chairman of the National Intelligence Council after questions about his impartiality were raised among members of Congress and with White House officials.

Actually, I don't think his best friends would claim there was ever any question about his "impartiality." And, from that textbook example of reportorial torpor, Walter Pincus files a column notably shy on details on exactly what "questions" were raised and that devotes much of its emphasis to Freeman's response, while leaving out the most interesting and self-revelatory part of the text:

In an e-mail sent to friends yesterday evening, Freeman said he had concluded the attacks on him would not end once he was in office and that he did not believe the NIC "could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack." He wrote that those who questioned his background employed "selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record . . . and an utter disregard for the truth."

What's missing here? How about this bit from Freeman's e-mail:

The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth.  The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.

Poor old Freeman. He has the guts to spill the beans on the Israel Lobby, and either their stooge Pincus or the sinister cosmopolitan Jews who control America's Union of Newspaper Delivery Boys hoover any reference to the dark truth out of the paper before it reaches your doorstop.

At least I hope that's the case. The alternative explanation is that the Washington Post would rather protect anyone even peripherally associated with President Obama than risk giving its readers any "news."

03/11 08:05 AMShare