But that's just what Bill Sammon did in
today's edition.
His headline reads: 'U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' over aid.' But if you think somewhere in the piece there'd be a comment criticizing the U.S. for being, I dunno, 'stingy over aid,' you'd be wrong. Sammon couldn't pull a quote because the 'slam' simply never occured.
Here's the jist of the Times story:
U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
"It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really," the Norwegian-born U.N. official told reporters. "Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become."
Note how 'stingy' is in quotes in the first graph and 'the United States and other Western nations' is not. That's because Egeland referred to 'wealthy states' and 'donor states,' but at no time did he single out the United States. In fact, when a reporter asked Egeland to name the countries he believed to be "stingy," he pointedly declined to do so (you can
stream the 48-minute press conference with RealPlayer and see for yourself).
As for Egeland's talk of taxes, that too was generic. He referred broadly to 'politicians,' specifying only a few sentences later that he had in mind leaders "in the United States, in Western Europe and even in Norway." That was the only time he mentioned the U.S.
Sammon finishes his fabrication by quoting White House spokesman Trent Duffy saying that the U.S. leads the world in humanitarian assistance, a statement which Sammon characterizes as a "response to Mr. Egeland's comments."
So how do you get from a Norwegian asking "why are we so stingy?" to a UN official 'slamming' the U.S.? You work for the Washington Times, the leading UN-basher and a publication that's not unduly burdened by those pesky facts.