I think Dan at Gay Patriot has this exactly right. The media are willingly participating in the media manipulation the terrorists are using strategically.
As horrible as these murders are, it is important to note that it is one of the few times Al Qaeda has succeeded in directly attacking coalition soldiers in Iraq. Normally, they do not directly attack our troops, but instead use Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) to target them. It is a sign of their weakness that they have largely been targeting civilians, murdering innocent Muslims.
They’re killing their own people to make it appear that we are losing. And the Western media is helping them make their case. In the very AP article on the murder of the U.S. soldiers, the reporter writes that “Violence was unabated Tuesday, with at least 18 people killed in attacks nationwide, including a suicide bombing of a home for the elderly in the southern city of Basra.“
As one military officer wrote in to Best of the Web:
The media manipulation by the insurgents is brilliant and extremely effective. The press has become a puppet for the insurgents; the insurgents know exactly what they are doing with these “massacres” (quoted here because the investigation has not been completed, nor have any charges been filed) and the political nightmare they will cause the current administration. Bodies are produced for film, and there is zero fact-checking by the media–the media eat up this “news” like there is no tomorrow.
To the terrorists’ fighting our troops and the Iraq people, indiscriminate murder is merely a means of manipulating the media.
I wonder if perhaps, the latest uptick in violence is Al Qaeda’s means of showing that it is still exists after the American success in taking out is leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It needs to do something as it suffers repeated defeats. In the immediate aftermath of his death, “American and Iraqi forces . . . carried out 452 raids,” killing 104 insurgents and capturing “759 ‘anti-Iraqi elements.” Earlier today, an American airstrike killed another leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, the group’s “religious emir.“
Al Qaeda’s remaining leaders in Iraq know that by murdering innocent civilians and relying on a compliant Western press, they will make it appear that despite numerous successes, U.S. and Iraqi forces are unable to control the situation in Iraq. Thus, Al Qaeda attacks the targets they can most easily attack, not the ones with any strategic value in a traditional military sense. That’s because their strategy is getting headlines and winning this one not on the battlefield, but in the U.S. media. And to that end, it doesn’t matter how many Iraqis they murder.
The media needs to step back and look hard at which side of this war they are on. Right now, it's not a very good picture. They need to change this.
Pingback: Webloggin
> The media are willingly participating in
> the media manipulation the terrorists are using strategically.
Giaus, c’mon, seriously…isn’t a mosque blown up by whack-job extremists worth reporting? If so, is that the extremists manipulating the media? The slipperly slope response to your concerns is state controlled media. As a big first amdendment guy, I can’t believe you’d want this.
Is the US Embassy in Baghdad participating in this manipulation conspiracy you and gay patriot aver? Did you read the report that came out last week from the embassy discussing the grave conditions the Embassy workers are living under?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/graphics/iraqdocs_061606.pdf
It’s easy to take a shot at the MSM and claim biased reporting, but it’s hard to explain away a report from the Embassy. Maybe it isn’t a pro-insurgent media conspiracy. Maybe it’s reality in Baghdad.
Jim
Pingback: The Anti-Jihad Pundit
Jim, Two young men, US Marines, were recently captured in Iraq. Subsequently they were mistreated in the most barbaric ways imaginable, brutally tortured, and finally murdered.
Is their treatment at the hands of terrorists worth reporting? Say, somewhere on the scale false reports of Koran abuse were reported, or similar to the way Abu Ghraib dominated the headlines for weeks on end? If not, why not?
MSM’s not really all that squeamish or overly concerned about the impact of blood and gore on the public. They don’t have any qualms about showing Iraqi victims of Al Qaeda brutality. Think we’ll ever see MSM pictures and descriptions of terrorists along with denunciations of their despicable barbarity held up for widespread condemnation any time soon? Editorials in the NY Times calling for the whole world to unite in revulsion against Al Qaeda’s bloodthirsty monsters?
Perhaps a call in the Security Council, or some Human Rights Organization for all civilized nations to join together in a Global War on Terrorism to eliminate the vile scourge from the face of planet Earth. Front page stories in the WaPo and LA Times calling for the UN to declare Al Qaeda a threat to the very concept of “human rights?”
Or, should we expect MSM will continue to oppose American efforts to bring democracy to Iraq, condemn our troops at every opportunity while turning a blind eye to actual atrocities committed by Al Qaeda? If so, isn’t that more than enough evidence to conclude there just might be a whiff of bias out there blowin’ in the wind?
Jim, My husband is in the Army and from his perspective and that of other soldiers he works with – some in the MSM are allied with the terrorists. It’s not a matter of reporting the bad news – the problem with some in the MSM is that they are giving aid and encouragement to the enemy. Where was the MSM outrage over the alleged torture of the two soldiers who were abducted? It’s awfully silent – however on the other hand just three weeks ago the huge story was the Haditha “atrocities” story (which at that time was still under investigation – but as far as the MSM was concerned the Marines were guilty). The MSM jumped on that story and demonized the military in the process – where again is that demonization and outrage with regards to the terrorists who tortured and killed those two Army soldiers?
As I wrote earlier – I want the MSM to report the stories that are coming out of Iraq – however I want them to be balanced in what they report and to keep their biases out of what should be factual reporting. Right now I can see the overwhelming bias in the reporting of many in the MSM. Even the former leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq (Zarqawhi) mentioned that the MSM was on his side – there’s something to think about – if the terrorists think the MSM can help them defeat a military with superior weaponry, strategy and war planning then it brightly illustrates the fact that the MSM are (perhaps unwittingly so) favorably biased toward the enemy (terrorists) – and that those enemies are smart enough to take the media advantage and use it in their propaganda.
A bit off topic but still Media related : The coverage of Zarqawi’s death and the positive signifigance linked to his demise was just an itty bitty blip on the MSM story radar. Interesting wouldn’t you say? Specially compared to the coverage of the alledged Haditha atrocities. Perhaps that’s simply some in the MSM preferring to report stories that demonize the Bush administration, the military and anyone who supports the Iraq war. Whereas, Zarqawi’s death was a much less hot topic story( and the majority of those stories reported where chastising the Bush Administration for not killing him sooner or for purposely making him the connection between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda as seen here and here). One would think that a great deal more reporting would be generated covering the death of one of the most evil terrorists thugs who delighted in personally torturing , beheading and killing innocent civilians. Could it be that his death was an indicator that there are successes in Iraq and in the war on terror? Is it because the MSM prefers to repeat Congressman Murtha’s insanities on the alledged atrocities in Haditha because that story portrays the Bush Administration and the Military in an awful light – som in the MSM even went so far as to gleefully report on the similarities between the alledged atrocities at Haditha and My Lai. Again that story shows the bias – not the reporting of the facts.
I would normally agree with Jim…normally. The problem is that every day (sometimes every hour or two) we are fed stories on the latest bombing in Iraq, the latest casualties among our forces and so on. Yet there is an uprising going on in Iran and the MSM doesn’t deem it worthy of reporting. Further, our forces have done wonderful things for the people of Iraq and had tremendous military success, yet all we hear about are the latest death count and Haditha. The news that we get is tipped immensely in one direction.
The media was full of those who wanted Rumsfeld fired after Abu Ghrahib (as if he’d ordered what those morons did), yet not a word of praise for him after Zarqawi was taken out. If we are going to apply the standard that anything bad in the military ought to mean Rummy’s head then he should, by the same standard, reap praise for success. Yet nothing in the media, who reports using that standard, is positive toward Rumsfeld. In fact, spend a day watching CNN from 9am-5pm and take notes. Tell me how many positive military stories they run, how many negative military stories they run and compare. Do likewise with pro or contra Bush (and the administration) stories. Then keep track of air time given to anti-war/anti-Bush people vs. those supportive of him or the war.
All told, a the bombing of a mosque would normally be newsworthy…normally. Too bad things in the MSM are not normal.
> Is their treatment at the hands of terrorists worth reporting?
If one of the two was my son, I don’t know how I’d feel about it being plastered all over the news (especially pictures)…but I agree with your sentiment that people need to know how inhumane these scumbags are. And as much as I’m a fiscal conservative, I have no problem spending whatever it takes to track down and bring to justice those involved in this vile act against our boys.
But the fact is, sadly, dozens of dead bodies turn up every day in Baghdad…many showing signs of torture. I think it’s horrible. But I don’t see how democracy will make it stop. The Iraqis voted! What magic are you expecting to happen? You can’t vote to make everyone love each other.
Why keep exposing our men to this horrible situation, and exposing them to this type of treatment? I just have to shake my head and say this is (horribly) more proof that Bush Sr. knew best when he said he didn’t want to take over Iraq. America’s presence is not going to change the culture. Iraqis are going to have to evict Al Qaeda (and there are signs this is happening) on their own, and are going to have to resolve their ethnic hatred on their own. Our presence is just a excuse for them to lump their problems on us, and take out their frustration on us.
Black Jack, as I’ve ask Giaus (and I’m stilll waiting), please give me your definition of what “success” is in Iraq. Saddam is deposed. Iraqis have voted. They’ve elected their own government. What do you expect us to be able to do?
Jim
I don’t know how to define it in total, but at minimum, a stable government that is able to police it’s own streets is a start. It looks like they are, in fact, getting started doing just that. Will there continue to be death and violence for a while longer. Sure.
As the Iraqis take over more and more of those efforts, fewer and fewer American troops need to be there. The Iraqis have a goal oriented plan to do just that. Will it take time? Sure. They’re trying to make it work by the end of 2008.
Pingback: AGITPROP: Version 3.0, Featuring Blogenfreude
Jim, the textbook definition is that success in Iraq is the ability of the elected government to exercise an effective monopoly on the use of force to keep the peace and enforce law and order.
It will become possible when Sunni’s join the coalition government in good faith, reject the Ba’ath socialists among them, and help hunt down and kill every Al Qaeda terrorist, and their enablers, still in the country. (Assuming there are any remaining after our boys get through with their miserable butchering, bloodthirsty, godless, cowardly, hides.)
Additionally, the Shi’a must maintain and strengthen their independence from Iran, and the Kurds must resist the temptation to push for a comprehensive Kurdish State at least till Iraq is stable and can function as an independent member of the community of nations.
So let me get this straight Black Jack. We need to “stay the course” (spend two billion a week and have US citizens killed and maimed) until:
- Sunni’s join the coalition in good faith
- Sunni’s reject Ba’ath socialists
- Al Qaeda is eliminated from Iraq
- Shi’a break ties with Iran
- Kurds stop moving towards an independent Kurdistan
Wow…I seriously hope you didn’t tell your friends that Iraq would be a cakewalk, like my pro-war friends tried to tell me it would be pre-invasion.
Just curious– How many billions of dollars and US lives is it worth to achieve this goal? Is a Pyrrhic victory not a concern?
Jim
> Diva says “some in the MSM are allied with the terrorists”
Diva, the MSM isn’t allied with the terrorists, or any cause. All they want is for you to pay attention to them, so you’ll buy from their sponsors. The MSM has found out the best way to get your attention is to scare you, shock you, and generally sell negativity.
Look at Monicagate, or “tailgate” as I like to call it. A President caught doing what so many others in power do all the time. Details on the fetid dress, a certain ‘curvature’ our President has– lurid details in wide circulation. The media catered to our most base emotions, and we all tuned in!
But now, the Republicans control government. Thus, when things go bad, it usually goes bad for Republicans. But not always– Tell me the headlines weren’t splashed with a congressman keeping a ‘cool’ $100K in his freezer! It gets your attention- negative, Negative, NEGATIVE reporting.
Stuff goes bad in Iraq. It’s gonna get reported over a power station finally going back online. A guy gets shot in a movie theater by a Muslim nut, it’s going to get reported over Bill Gates opening a hospital for the sick. You blame this on a MSM conspiracy (with terrorists)? If those stories were all links, which ones would you click on?
Frankly, the whole “MSM conspiracy” is a straw man created by right wing spin doctors to keep you from focusing on how Republicans are corrupt statists…same as the Democrats. It’s just like Iraqi politician who blames America for not doing XYZ as the cause for no electricity, and meanwhile the guy is taking kickbacks.
Think. Independently.
Jim
Jim, you asked me for a “…definition of what “success†is in Iraq.”
You said, “please,” so I gave you a textbook response which would apply in general, and listed a series of conditions which I thought would be indicative of that success specifically in Iraq. In short, I did you the curtesy of responding to your request, and I said nothing at all about “stay(ing) the course,” that’s one of your strawman.
Nor did I indicate the Kurds should “stop moving” anywhere. I said they, “…must resist the temptation to push for a comprehensive Kurdish State…” There’s a difference, albeit subtle, but a distinctive difference nevertheless.
Additionally, although I shouldn’t have to say it, my opinions are mine, and are not subject to your approval. You are free to disagree, but not to make a request, put your words in my mouth, and then twist the context to suit your preconceptions.
Your ridicule hints you didn’t think much of my comments, and your snide remark about what I may have said to my friends confirms your ingratitude. Now, you have the gall to make additional requests. I think not. How rude can you be? You owe me an apology.
Black Jack, sincerely, I apologize if I upset you. My frustration is not with you personally. Our Iraq occupation really upsets me. I have friends and relatives, from grunts to generals, who are serving over there now. I want them back here, safely. Maybe it’s wrong for me to let my concern for them develop into angry words towards those who think they should be over there. It’s just that I don’t see events over there leading towards us leaving any time soon.
I extend my concern for everyone who has family or loved ones over in Iraq. God bless them and bring them home safely, as soon as possible.
Don’t take my comments personally, or think I’m passing judgement on anyone (except perhaps our leadership). I just want the best for my family and, well, all of America.
Jim
Jim, thanks, I’m impressed. All is forgiven, and I hope your friends and relatives return safely and in robust good health. Best Regards, BJ.