Scooping the Poop.

A few years ago I shared a Beagle called Twiggy who was great in every way except that she never quite got the hang of correct toilet procedures, which was especially difficult as she became old. I'd come downstairs in the morning and find this pile or that puddle, and occasionally the room was a mess.

Yep. That's how I feel when I look at the BBC website, as they just can't hold in their anti-Iraq war, anti-US feelings. Well, apart from the 'great in every way bit'.

So now, as then, I scoop the poop, wash the widdle, and spray the deodorising spray- metaphorically speaking.


>I'll start with the latest pile of s*** the Beeb have produced about the Abu Graib scandal. I am sure if I was able to pin a BBC journalist down and ask 'why are you reporting this rather stale stuff?' they'd have to say essentially, 'because I can' (I used to feel that if Twiggy had had a voice she would give that answer too).

So now we have Specialist Graner and Sabrina Harman pictured smiling and showing thumbs up beside a corpse. Wooooo- better put that in as top headline. These are unpleasant photographs. Only sickos would mock the dead in this way. But are the 'new' pictures showing something we don't already know (one photograph similar in nature has already been released a long while)? Or are they just keeping the pot boiling for anti-war BBC journalists momentarily stumped for a really negative line (sounds implausible, I know, given the BBC's inventiveness)?

One conclusion I draw is that the circle of abusers is not expanding with more released photographs, and nor is the range of abuse depicted. If the BBC would also draw that conclusion everything would be different- but they take the opposite line by considering it 'news'.


>Moving on to another anomaly: the presence of Michael Howard MP, Leader of the Opposition, amongst the top headlines. What hath Howard done? Why, offer some criticism of the US in Iraq and Tony Blair's relationship with GWB (never mind the fact that he described the Anglo-American relationship as a 'cornerstone' of his party's foreign policy, still supports the war etc- actually the Beeb mention this last point in passing, but the 'news' is clearly Howard's 'criticism').


>And finally, to Silvio, a most beleaguered Iraq ally of Mr Bush if this article is to be believed. Here we get around to the 'quagmire' word (unquotemarked), and an extraordinary passage dripping with political innuendo which I'll quote, italicising, emboldening and bracketing to try and disperse the stink:

'With the Spanish poised for withdrawal from Iraq after the defeat of the Aznar government in the recent general election, keeping the Italians on board the coalition is vital for Mr Bush. (the Spanish 'poised for withdrawal'? I thought they'd already gone.)

Mr Berlusconi seems to be a loyal supporter of Mr Bush, like British Prime Minster Tony Blair.

But at the same time, he wants to move rapidly forward with the next phase of extricating Italy from the Iraq quagmire.

He wants to prove to his European colleagues that he is also a loyal supporter of the United Nations.

Mr Berlusconi is pushing for a quick handover of the crisis to the UN in order to avoid the threat of civil war in Iraq when the US formally hands over sovereignty to the Iraqis on 30 June. (note: by the same logic, to 'avoid the threat' of being run down by a car you must simply avoid roads altogether).


>All the above should be read in the context of primary sources such as this letter from an experienced US soldier in Ramadi (via Glenn):

'As I write this, the supply lines are open, there's plenty of ammunition and food, the Sunni Triangle is back to status quo, and Sadr is marginalized in Najaf. Once again, dire predictions of failure and disaster have been dismissed by American willpower and military professionalism.'