CNN, WSJ reported on McCain's Al Qaeda question without noting error
SUMMARY: CNN's The Situation Room and a Wall Street Journal article both noted that, during a Senate hearing, Sen. John McCain asked Gen. David H. Petraeus about whether Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQ-I) is a "major threat," without also noting that McCain went on to ask of Al Qaeda in Iraq: "Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall?" In fact, AQ-I is a Sunni Muslim, not Shiite, group.
The April 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room and an April 9 Wall Street Journal article both noted that in an April 8 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Sen. John McCain asked Multinational Force-Iraq Commanding Gen. David H. Petraeus about how much of a threat Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQ-I) poses, without also noting that McCain went on to ask of AQ-I: "Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall?" In fact, AQ-I is a Sunni Muslim, not Shiite, group. By contrast, an April 9 New York Times article noted that "Mr. McCain did seem to get momentarily tangled over Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. ... Senator McCain was embarrassed last month when, on a trip to Jordan, he stated several times that the Iranians were training Iraqi Qaeda operatives in Iran and then sending them back into Iraq. After one of his traveling companions, Mr. [Sen. Joseph I.] Lieberman [I-CT], corrected him, Mr. McCain explained that he had meant to say that the Iranians, who are Shiites, were training other extremists."
During the hearing, McCain asked Petraeus: "Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?" Petraeus replied: "It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was, say, 15 months ago." McCain then asked "Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall --" prompting Petraeus to reply "No," as McCain went on to finish his question: "or Sunnis or anybody else?"
On the April 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, congressional correspondent Dana Bash said that McCain "led the witness, too, especially to make the crux of his argument for staying in Iraq." Bash then aired a video clip of the hearing in which McCain's comments were cropped, stopping after the "not" in McCain's follow-up question, "Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall --." Rather than noting McCain's error, Bash said, "Now, McCain also got some help from his two Senate wingmen on this issue, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham [R-SC]."
This is not the first time CNN has cropped video in a manner that obscures a McCain error about Al Qaeda. As Media Matters for America noted, on the March 18 Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer reported on McCain's false claim that Iranian operatives are "taking Al Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back," and falsely asserted that McCain "quickly corrected [it] after some prodding from his Senate colleague, Joe Lieberman." During the report Blitzer aired a spliced video of McCain's misstatement immediately followed by McCain correcting himself. The misleading video gave no indication that during the press conference, McCain twice falsely claimed that Iranian operatives are training members of Al Qaeda or that time elapsed between both misstatements and McCain's correction, prompted by Lieberman.
The April 9 Wall Street Journal article headlined "Candidates Stay on Message At Iraq-War Hearings" referenced the McCain-Petraeus exchange about AQ-I without noting McCain's error: "Tuesday, Sen. McCain sought to bolster his view of the threat posed by the group, and he asked Gen. Petreaus [sic] about it. Gen. Petraeus said the group is 'still a major threat' but one less significant than it was a year ago."
From the 9 a.m. ET hour of the April 8 edition of CNN Newsroom:
McCAIN: There are numerous threats to security in Iraq and the future of Iraq. Do you still view Al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was, say, 15 months ago.
McCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall --
PETRAEUS: No. No, sir.
McCAIN: -- or Sunnis or anybody else then? Al Qaeda continues to try to assert themselves in Mosul, is that correct?
PETRAEUS: It is, senator. As you saw on the chart, the area of operation of Al Qaeda has been greatly reduced in terms of controlling areas that it controlled as little as a year and a half ago. But clearly, Mosul and Ninawa province are areas that Al Qaeda is very much trying to hold on to. All roads lead through the traditional capital of the north.
McCAIN: They continue to be a significant threat?
PETRAEUS: They do. Yes, sir.
From the April 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
[video clip]
BASH: On the trail, McCain regularly applauds General Petraeus.
McCAIN: Thank God for General Petraeus, one of the great generals in American history.
BASH: But as rosy an Iraq picture McCain hopes to paint, he's trying to gain credibility with war-weary voters by acknowledging problems.
McCAIN: The thousand Iraqi army and police deserted or underperformed.
BASH: He gently questioned Petraeus about Iraqi military defections during battle in Basra.
McCAIN: Suffice to say it was a disappointment.
PETRAEUS: It was, although it's -- it is not over yet, senator.
BASH: He led the witness, too, especially to make the crux of his argument for staying in Iraq.
McCAIN: Do you still view Al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was, say, 15 months ago.
McCAIN: Certainly not.
[end video clip]
BASH: Now, McCain also got some help from his two Senate wingmen on this issue, Joe Lieberman [I-CT] and Lindsey Graham [R-SC]. They both used their question time, Wolf, with General Petraeus to really scold Democrats for not acknowledging progress in Iraq. But, you know, Wolf, that's also an argument that Senator McCain admits is harder to make as violence is on the upswing in Iraq.
WOLF BLITZER (anchor): What a day. And it's going to continue tomorrow as well.
From the April 9 Wall Street Journal article:
Both Democrats jumped on Sen. McCain's remarks praising the current strategy and condemning an early exit. The Arizona senator used some of his harshest criticism to date about proponents of early withdrawal, saying withdrawal now would "constitute a failure of political and moral leadership."
"I fundamentally disagree," Sen. Clinton said several hours later, calling it "irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced results."
Among the common themes were questions about al Qaeda in Iraq. The issue of the terrorist group's role arose on the campaign trial in February. Tuesday, Sen. McCain sought to bolster his view of the threat posed by the group, and he asked Gen. Petreaus about it. Gen. Petraeus said the group is "still a major threat" but one less significant than it was a year ago.
Sen. Obama, speaking later in a different hearing, revisited the topic with a question about the U.S. definition of success in Iraq. He asked what the likelihood would be that al Qaeda in Iraq could "reconstitute itself" at a future date, perhaps after the U.S. had withdrawn. Gen. Petraeus responded that it was possible.
Sen Obama said, "It's fair to say that we're not going to completely eliminate al traces of al Qaeda in Iraq. That can't be our definition of success."















I'm not assuming senility (but I'm not disregarding the idea, either) but I think when he keeps making the same fundamental errors on issues on which he should be knowledgeable, I get concerned that he either doesn't know the facts or is indifferent to them. One or two slips of the tongue are very excusable. I'm getting the impression that McCain's erroneous statements are beyond that.
Thomp,
I was pulling Gov's chain. He spends half his time asking Why? Why? Why?...you know like a six year old.
I thought your post was spot on.
Hey, Tommy:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/36890
Gov, The other day you told me to f&*k off. Now you link to a cartoon bashing genitals.
And we are to take you serious here? I just can't, sorry.
Working for one of the greatest presidents in American history.
And hopefully no one will take me for one of those hateful ageists, but that's saying a lot since John rode with William Tecumseh Sherman when he was a young man.
You've got to love these people.
First they said that since the surge was working so well and things have settled down, we can't withdrawal troops.
Now that things might flare up again, we can't withdrawal troops.
Makes sense to me.
Sunni, Shiite--both begin with an S, Iraq, Iran--Both begin with an I, Obama, Osama, hell there's only one letter difference.
Geez, no wonder these people are so confused.
Good point.
Hey my name is Mike. One of our son's names is Matt. My wife [as well as others] quite often calls me Matt I mean Mike or Mike-Matt or Matt-Mike.
She does the same to our son.
Obviously both McCain & Obama know what they meant. Both are gaffes, nothing more.
I do get my daughters name right most of the time on the first try.
I hear ya King, I mix up the names of our 3 sons & their names don't even begin with the same letter. Hell these days I forget more names than I remember ;-)
The important thing is not to call your wife by the wrong name...at the wrong time :-O
As an Obama supporter, I am worried that these hearing will remind the country that McCain wore the uniform, served his country with honor and distinction, and is proud to be an American.
These are not great issues for my affirmative action candidate, Obama.
Again, the only problem is that people know that McCain is NOT in the "bottom 1% of his clas" when it comes to being a proud and loyal American.
We Obama supporters need to change the subject before we have to confront the fact that Obama has almost zero accomplishments post-graduation. (After all, this guy had so much time on his hands that he was able to two books - clearly, he needed something to do just to keep himself busy.)
Go Obama!
I can't believe Obama has yet to give you an advisory role for his campaign. For McCain's sake, I hope you keep your advice to this board alone
NAC, by your logic, McCain hasn't done anything, ever (he's written or co-written 5 books, not to mention contributing to several more.)
You really need a new shtick, this one is wearing thin.
Cliff Schecter?
Never heard of him. Must not be very important.
Attack the messenger when you can't attack the message?
ok, now you're officially making stupid arguments.
Like I said, OFFICIALLY.
The only "abhorrent behavior" I can see is when hacks write crazy screeds and partisan hacks cite the crazy screeds AND ACTUALLY THINK NORMAL PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO THEM!!!
Oh, and of course, GO OBAMA!!!
I'm worried if these things are looked at more closely, Senator Obama's marital commitment to his first and only wife might make my candidate, John McCain look bad because of his treatment of women in the past.
Oh, and go MCain!
Republican hacks at that:
http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/news/the_beat/?p=16
Go Crazy!!!
oops.. screwed up the link
http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/news/the_beat/?p=161Are you o.k? Can you answer a question in a cogent manner without taking this interaction to a infantile level? Calm down, and at least try to engage in an adult discussion.
Now then, by your answer I assume you feel that if McCain did those things it isn't bad behavior. Do you not see the inherent flaw in that? do you calll our wife those kinds of names? If not would you codone people who do? I don't want some kind of useless name calling argument with you. I'd rather discuss this like adults. Shall we?
Are you o.k? Can you answer a question in a cogent manner without taking this interaction to a infantile level? Calm down, and at least try to engage in an adult discussion.
I hope you realize that you've just replied this to yourself.
Are you o.k? Can you answer a question in a cogent manner without taking this interaction to a infantile level? Calm down, and at least try to engage in an adult discussion.
Now then, by your answer I assume you feel that if McCain did those things it isn't bad behavior. Do you not see the inherent flaw in that? do you calll our wife those kinds of names? If not would you codone people who do? I don't want some kind of useless name calling argument with you. I'd rather discuss this like adults. Shall we or you can continue down this road of just plain wierdness.
...people know that McCain is NOT in the "bottom 1% of his clas" when it comes to being a proud and loyal American. - NAC
And yet he still falls short of Obama and Clinton in that category.
I appreciate that my candidate might have some trouble concerning his infatuation with an alien earth girl, his pencil thin mustash, wardrobe and manner are defintly not mainstream USA. And don't ask him about about green cards.But just look at the way he kicked Mongo into the 31st century. Please give him your support.
Go Ming!!
Ankth you.
Wonderful.
McCain doesn't know who he's fighting... but he wants to fight & kill somebody... for 100 years?
I'd rather have health care
Bambo, before one of the McCainiacs corrects you, let me; McCain doesn't want our troops to be in Iraq for 100 years, he's just "fine" with it.