http://www.nypost.com/seven/01182008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_new_l
epers_864120.htm?page=1
January 18, 2008 -- I'VE had a huge response to Tuesday's column about
The New York Times' obscene bid to smear veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan
as mad killers. Countless readers seem to be wondering: Why did the paper
do it?
Well, in the Middle Ages, lepers had to carry bells on pain of death to
warn the uninfected they were coming. One suspects that the Times would
like our military veterans to do the same.
The purpose of Sunday's instantly notorious feature "alerting" the
American people that our Iraq and Afghanistan vets are all potential
murderers when they move in next door was to mark those defenders of
freedom as "unclean" - as the new lepers who can't be trusted amid
uninfected Americans.
In the more than six years since 9/11, the Times has never run a feature
story half as long on any of the hundreds of heroes who've served our
country - those who've won medals of honor, distinguished service
crosses, Navy crosses, silver stars or bronze stars with a V device (for
valor).
But the Times put a major investigative effort into the "sensational"
story that 121 returning vets had committed capital offenses (of course,
20 percent of the cases cited involved manslaughter charges stemming from
drunken driving, not first- or second-degree murder . . . ).
Well, a quick statistics check let the air out of the Times' bid to make
us dread the veteran down the block - who the Times implies has a machine
gun under his bathrobe when he steps out front to fetch the morning
paper. In fact, the capital-crimes rate ballyhooed by the Gray Lady
demonstrates that our returning troops are far less likely to commit such
an offense.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is
largely a waste of time.
H. L. Mencken
.
|
