Malicious Malkin

Is the right congenitally unable to admit mistakes?

Of course not - but their frequent failure to do so proves their intent is not to inform, but to deceive.

Glenn Greenwald is guest blogging today at Crooks and Liars. He points out a post from Michelle Malkin regarding leaks and cell phones of January 13 that is in fact not true. (we are all Homeland Security Agents of 1/13 11:06 am) Her article concerned two large purchases of disposable cell phones that occurred soon after Risen's piece in theTimes. Treason and the incalculable damage to our national security was thus proven, according to Michelle. But it was based on error. After reading Glenn's piece, I was curious to see how Michelle, and the bloggers who shared her outrage and anger, corrected their error.

Not Michelle. Michelle had quoted extensively from a report about an incident in Crawford, * TX. where several Arab looking men bought a lot of disposable cell phones and "it was discovered that members of the group were linked to suspected terrorist cells stationed within the Metroplex." Now there had been a report to this effect, but when Michelle wrote about it, she knew that the report was not true. Later on in her post she mentions that the Midland Reporter Telegram "has more details on the ...incident." 

The details are that the head of the Midland, FBI office said "There is no known link or demonstrated link or any other kind of link" ... with this incident "and any terror cell. He issued this statement on the 12th.

She knowingly is misleading her readers. And so do many of the right wing pundits to whom she linked.

One of the bloggers she linked to, Chris Christner, spewed outrage "Now that terrorists appear to be buying traceless telephones as a result of that article...how is Bush "supposed to fight" the war on terror.  No corrections from Chris today.  And he too is trying to mislead - what does an appearance have to do with the ability to really win or lose a war? (Unless it only appears to be a real war?)

Needless to say The Anchoress fails to correct the error.  Instead she wants to remind us of the horrors of 9/11. It was horrible. But she mentions the "stench of death" lingering for weeks afterwords. (I seem to remeber that Christie Todd Whitman thought the air quality was just peachy.)

The ever logical Junkyardblog headlines his piece: "Did the NSA Leak lead to a Surge in Disposable Phone Sales?" and continues "That's what the Feds would like to know.  Law enforcement officials say the phones were used to detonate the bombs terrorists used in the Madrid train attacks in March 2004."  Be careful here. This is a trick used by many of the right wing bloggers on this issue. They are trying to conflate the use of cell phones as detonators with the wire-tapping of U.S. citizens. . The Madrid attacks occurrred long before the leak; the terrorists clearly knew how they could use the phones before the leak;, and what in the world does the wiretap have to do with detonating weapons? In other words "what the Feds want to know" (assuming even this is true) has nothing to do with  the "NSA leak."  And no, he has issued no correction for the error in the original report.

Macsmind does not correct the mistake either. He is furious - talks about treason, and the desire of liberals "to get us all killed."

Quite a few bloggers relied not only on the (debunked) report linking Crawford Texas cell purchasers to terror cells, but also referred to a report from Hemet, California. This time it was supposedly a Target store, where 150 phones were purchased on New Year's Eve, and the FBI summoned. But aside from the one report, I cannot find any evidence that it ever happened.  The Ugly American lives right near Hemet, and was particularly upset. Yet he mentions no corroborating source. It may be my limited search skills but I can find nothing anywhere. Not in the LA Times, nor in the paper of record in Hemet - the Valley Chronicle.

But even if the Hemet report is accurate - no one has reported a tie it to any terrorist cell.

Many right wing bloggers are fond of this kind of deception. Bush did the same to lead us into war in Iraq.  All you have to do is to manufacture some outrage; base it on reports which you know are untrue, and conflate causes - blaming one enemy for the crime of another. It is how they keep their angry, fearful followers in line.

(My mistake was noted by thatgayconservative)

Comments

[ThatGayConservative]

The only thing Bush did was repeat what the liberals had been saying for years.

[ThatGayConservative]

It's interesting to note that ABC News, the source for the story, hasn't made any corrections. Guess that makes them part of the vast right wing conspiracy, eh?

[bbbustard]

You kill me friend - How often have you heard ABC ever correct a story? I guess you think that the head of the FBI in Crawford Texas was lying. Come on - do you really think that the terrorists would go, in a group, to a Wal-Mart in Crawford Texas, and buy a lot of cell phones? Crawford - probably the city with more surveillance and security of any city in the country outside of D.C.?

[ThatGayConservative]

1. That was the FBI office in Midland (the other side of the state) not Crawford. The security in Crawford would be done mostly by the U.S.S.S. and I seriously doubt that they spend much time in Crawford unless the President is in town.

2. So your logic is that because folks haven't updated their blog entries with corrections, they must be liars and part of the deceiving "vast right wing conspiracy".

3. I don't see any corrections to your liberal lying points about Alito below, so it's obvious that your intent is to deceive your readers.

[bbbustard]

I certainly screwed up on the Crawford bit - luckily not so emphasized in my original post.
But once again you don't address the basic point. Michelle knew that the report had been called false by the FBI but did not say so. She was lying.
What points about Alito are lies, in your humble opinion? When you commented on my Alito post, why didn't you point out any lies?
(I thought you were proud to be a member of the "deceiving vast right wing conspiracy?)

[Queer Conservative]

Now really, if Michelle wanted to mislead you or other liberals, would that link from the Midland Reporter Telegram have been anywhere to be found in her post? You say she was hiding information that she linked to. Your accusation makes no sense.

[bbbustard]

Thanks for the comment, but I think you're wrong. Anyone who reads your post, or Michelle's, would conclude that there was some sort of link to a terrorist cell. That's what both of you are leading the reader to conclude. If you, or she, quoted the FBI agent in an open and direct way, do you think a reader would reach such a wrong conclusion? Classic deception.
I guess you're arguing that you're more deceptive than Michelle, because you did not mention the link?

[Queer Conservative]

The most important part of the story is that middle eastern men bought over a hundred disposable untraceable cell phones. THAT'S the story.

[bbbustard]

Are you serious?
I don't mean to be rude, but I have a tough time understanding the logic of the positions some on the right espouse.
On the one hand, I hear that it was quite correct for Bush to have done absolutely nothing when the intelligence community gave him a report "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Conservatives tell me that this report was a non-event.
Now it seems that you are suggesting outrage and action when a group of Arab-looking men buy a lot of cell phones- even after the FBI says that they have no terrorist connections?
Can you see why I find it inconsistent?
Our intelligence agencies see a problem, it should be ignored. Our intelligence agencies determine there is not a problem, we should be outraged.

[bbbustard]

Are Israeli men also middle eastern men?