So, in the article from Voice of America, Iraqi Protester Killed as US Troops Face Angry Mob, there's a strange set of paragraphs:
This was the first violent encounter between U.S. troops and Shiite Muslims in Baghdad. Although Shiites make up around 60 percent of Iraq's population, they had little political power under the regime of Saddam Hussein and were often subjected to persecution.
The military says three U.S. soldiers have died since Tuesday in separate bomb attacks north of Baghdad.
U.S. military officials have said that recently there have been an average of 12 attacks a day throughout Iraq and they blame the violence on people loyal to the regime of Saddam Hussein.
Wait, give me a second.... sooooo, 3,000 Shiites, who hated Saddam and vice versa, are protesting (apparently with ineffective grenade launchers according to the second paragraph of the article); but it's the fault of Saddam sympathizers. Yah, ok, next.
I would also like to point out the ineffable Paul Bremer's words at the closing of the MSNBC article:
Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator of Iraq, urged Iraqis and the world Tuesday to look beyond the daily shootouts and power cuts to newly found freedoms in Iraq.
"I don't accept the definition of a country in chaos. Most of this country is at peace," Bremer told reporters.
"We have a problem with attacks against coalition forces in a small area of the country by a small group of bitter-end people who are resisting the new Iraq. We will deal with them and we will dominate them. They will either be killed or they will be captured."
Bremer said that while Iraqis complained of unsafe streets and shortages of power, they must also realize that Saddam's fall had improved their lives.
"I think it's important to ... look beyond the shootouts and blackouts and remind ourselves of a range of rights that Iraqis enjoy today because of the coalition's military victory," he said.
Anyone else find that as funny as I do? Or as sad?