Mohammed weighs in....

....on Sarah Boxer.

He starts like this

Sarah Boxer (boxer@nytimes.com) in her latest piece on the NYT tried hard to put together some rotten limbs to produce a creature that satisfies her fantasy but she ended up introducing a new mutant to the readers and to the methods of journalism.
It wasn't a surprise for me as it was just another reproduction of the old ways of the corrupt side of the MSM in dealing with facts and events.

One short look at the "article" shows how naive the writer was and how old the methods used in writing this post are. This post has fixed another nail in the casket of the gasping media.

I won't be exaggerating if I said that I find a close resemblance between the ways of the media and those of terror in dealing with events; both are using ugly and cheap maneuvers to get attention. These methods could be even horrible and dangerous but never convincing.
It doesn't seem that the media is working hard to catch up with time and progress; at least the performance says so.

and then proceeds to fisk the article point by point.

Here's just a small part.

Maybe she thought it's too much for us to be Iraqis and love our country at the same time, so she added "who have mixed feelings...".
From Boxer's point of view, an Iraqi who supports America's efforts in liberating his country from the worst tyrant in modern history and rebuilding his country after that is either a paid agent or a mentally confused person. As if clear thinking is an exclusive gift that only a journalist from the NYT could possess while anyone outside her office is simply confused.

If Boxer had spent few more minutes in reading any of our posts she would've learnt that we're first of all, pro-Iraq. We never ceased to look forward for a new Iraq that is democratic and prosperous and the reason why we are pro-US is because we saw that America-the people and the administration-has made the right decision by liberating Iraq and this certainly serves the interests of both nations.

Sounds right to me.