Compare Difference in Media Scrutiny Between Sgrena and Swift Vets

There are a lot of really good questions being asked about the Sgrena “abduction” and release. Check out Malkin, Jeff Goldstein and the Jawa Report. Hat tip PoliPundit.

Regardless as to what the facts ultimately show, what is remarkable (though not surprising in the least) is the complete lack of scrutiny Old Media is giving Sgrena. Given that she appears to be a radical anti-American communist whose track record indicates she’s more of a propagandist than a reporter, one would expect some mention of this by the media in recounting her position. But her position comes from the left, the same direction as her mainstream colleagues, and she’s telling the story that her colleagues desperately want to re-tell.

On the other hand there’s the scrutiny given the Swift Vets. Many had no track record whatsoever which would cast doubt on the veracity of their statements. Some even swore affidavits under oath, in effect putting their collective careers and reputations where their mouths were.

Yet completely opposite to the media’s treatment of Sgrena, not only were the motives of the Swift Vets discussed, they were the centerpiece of the story. The facts of the story were delved into only so much as to provide a background on which to base an attack against them. In the case of the Swift Vets, it was the story they were telling that made them unbelievable to Old Media and nothing more. No doubt if those very same individuals had come out with some revelations against the Bush administration instead of against Kerry they would be treated exactly as Sgrena is being treated today. Except unlike Sgrena, the Swift Vets would be deserving of such treatment.

UPDATE: Check out OpiniPundit, lots of goods stuff on this subject.

UPDATE II: LGF has pictures of the “bullet riddled car” except that there’s no bullet riddles – not any visible ones anyway and the windshield is completely intact. Sgrena claims that U.S. troops fired between 300 and 400 rounds. Lets see, a history of anti-US bias and now what seems to be an obvious misstatement. Oh, yes, she’s also claiming the troops intentionally targeted her.

UPDATE III: Apparantly the picture that the Associated Press used in its report was not the car that was shot at, but the car from which Sgrena was first taken. I’d still like to see that “riddled car” though.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email