The AP is still whitewashing terror incidents.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) – A car bomb ripped through a market in a poor Shiite Muslim neighborhood on the eastern outskirts of Baghdad at sunset Saturday, killing at least 30 people and wounding 38, police said.
Near Abu Ghraib prison, a suicide car bomb wrecked three vehicles in a U.S. convoy Saturday, and insurgents fired seven mortar shells at the jail just west of Baghdad and used grenades to damage three armored vehicles in another U.S. convoy in the area, police said. The U.S. military issued no immediate casualty reports.
Interior Ministry police Maj. Falah al-Mhamadawi said an explosives-packed car was parked in front of fruit and vegetable stands in the market at Nahrawan, about 20 miles east of Baghdad, a poor suburb heavily populated by Shiites.
He said at least 30 people were killed and 38 wounded.
This is an example of a terrorist attack, not an “insurgent” attack. But it is found in an article with many other attacks by the “insurgency,” as the AP calls the terrorists. Here is how they explain the bombing.
Shiites have suffered the brunt of massive campaign of bomb and shooting attacks launched on Wednesday and claimed by al-Qaida in Iraq.
The Iraqi insurgency is predominantly Sunni Muslim and has vowed to continue stirring sectarian conflict as the date approaches for the Oct. 15 referendum on a new constitution, which most militant Sunnis have already rejected.
Actually, the “insurgency” is littered with foreign fighters, which even AP’s own articles report, and yet, they keep pretending that the bombings are solely the response of the “insurgency”—even when terrorists claim full responsibility and declare war on Iraqi Shiite Muslims.
To review, the AP covers the following events in this article:
- A suicide bombing of a marketplace in a poor Shiite neighborhood
- A suicide bombing of American military vehicles near Abu Ghraib prison
- Mortars fired at Abu Ghraib
- Grenades fired at a U.S. convoy
- A suicide bombing of an Iraqi army patrol
- An attack on a convoy of trucks carrying food for the U.S. military
One of these things is not like the other.
AP can’t tell the difference. But I can.
Is this an instance of the “exception clause” applying even when there are no Jews in the picture?
Or, is this is an example of the extended exception clause? Perhaps the “insurgents” are seen as fighting against a puppet government installed by the “occupying forces” that were sent into Iraq thanks to the machinations of the “neo-cons,” that is, by the Jews. Even if it’s Arabs blowing up Arabs, perhaps a Jewish connection, no matter how attenuated or even fanciful, is enough to merit keeping the “terrorist” label on the shelf.
No, The Exception Clause applies only to Jews. No one else.
This is an example of media bias and stupidity and unwillingness to call a terrorist a terrorist.