The part of the world that comprises America's enemies are not sitting comfortably right now. I rather like that. They need to be very afraid and consider what their future will be shortly if things don't change in their little area of our planet. This holds true with America's enemies that live in the U.S. and Canada as well. The message is clear and to the point. Tyranny and terrorism will not be tolerated by the current administration. Freedom is winning the day over both and we are embarking on a journey to insure that it happens sooner rather than later. I believe that this Inaugural Day will mark a turning point for enemies of America. A tsunami of democratic freedom is headed their way. Condi Rice is riding the crest of that wave and is a world class surfer who will not relent until victory is at hand.
What a refreshing change over the previous 'Bubba and the Dummies' administration.
Friday, January 21, 2005
Thursday, January 20, 2005
I May Never Stop Laughing!
Ah! The absolutely delicious fun of it! I was literally rolling on the floor with a pain in my side I laughed so hard. Boxer and Kerry on the same ticket and looking incredibly stupid for all of the world to see. It's like a dream come true. Condi kicked both of their Donkey behinds without even breathing hard. The funniest thing to come to mind was my take on Boxer's hair dud. It looked as if she just pulled her head out of her azz, but then decided to put it back in to check her position. And Kerry's comment about how the Arabs wanted to "help". Oh, it was so precious. What a dummy. He thinks these Arab guys tell him the truth??!! You know, the more I listen to these idiots the more I realize that the Demo’s are really the party of the Jackazz. Their political party symbol says it all! Can you say HeeHaw??
I can't wait for more on CSPAN!
I can't wait for more on CSPAN!
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Boxer Slams Rice Over Nothing As Usual
Boxer needs to learn to tell the difference between the truth and real facts supporting the truth from innuendo and personal feelings. This partisan hack is a shill for the lies and obsfucation of the truth that the left is so famous for.
Boxer Punches at Rice in Confirmation Hearing
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
WASHINGTON — One of Condoleezza Rice's toughest critics, California Sen. Barbara Boxer (search), drilled the secretary of state nominee on Tuesday, saying Rice's loyalty to President Bush on Iraq overwhelmed her respect for the truth.
"I personally believe that your loyalty to the mission you were given to sell this policy overwhelmed your respect for the truth," Boxer told the nominee during Rice's confirmation hearing.
Boxer, who two weeks ago held up congressional certification of Bush's election win after objecting to the Electoral College votes from Ohio, said Rice had directly contradicted herself in trying to sell the war to the American people by changing the story on whether Saddam Hussein (search) had nuclear weapons. Boxer also referred to the visual image and lasting impression Rice left when she warned that the smoking gun in Iraq shouldn't be a mushroom cloud.
Oh, how unfactual, sophoromoric, emotional, trite and stupid. Boxer must think the people who voted for her are idiots that will believe anything just because it came from butthead Barbara's pie hole.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144771,00.html
Boxer Punches at Rice in Confirmation Hearing
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
WASHINGTON — One of Condoleezza Rice's toughest critics, California Sen. Barbara Boxer (search), drilled the secretary of state nominee on Tuesday, saying Rice's loyalty to President Bush on Iraq overwhelmed her respect for the truth.
"I personally believe that your loyalty to the mission you were given to sell this policy overwhelmed your respect for the truth," Boxer told the nominee during Rice's confirmation hearing.
Boxer, who two weeks ago held up congressional certification of Bush's election win after objecting to the Electoral College votes from Ohio, said Rice had directly contradicted herself in trying to sell the war to the American people by changing the story on whether Saddam Hussein (search) had nuclear weapons. Boxer also referred to the visual image and lasting impression Rice left when she warned that the smoking gun in Iraq shouldn't be a mushroom cloud.
Oh, how unfactual, sophoromoric, emotional, trite and stupid. Boxer must think the people who voted for her are idiots that will believe anything just because it came from butthead Barbara's pie hole.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144771,00.html
If It Bleeds, It Leads, but only if it is American Blood
The media spin on Iraq is a gross distortion of the facts. If America wins, suddenly it isn't news anymore. LTC Tim Ryan puts it into perspective for the reader. Read on.
Media's coverage has distorted world's view of Iraqi reality
By LTC Tim Ryan
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COMTuesday, January 18, 2005
Editors' Note: LTC Tim Ryan is Commander, Task Force 2-12 Cavalry, First Cavalry Division in Iraq. He led troops into battle in Fallujah late last year and is now involved in security operations for the upcoming elections. He wrote the following during "down time" after the Fallujah operation. His views are his own.
All right, I've had enough. I am tired of reading distorted and grossly exaggerated stories from major news organizations about the "failures" in the war in Iraq. "The most trusted name in news" and a long list of others continue to misrepresent the scale of events in Iraq. Print and video journalists are covering only a fraction of the events in Iraq and, more often than not, the events they cover are only negative.
The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.
The fact is the Coalition is making steady progress in Iraq, but not without ups and downs. So why is it that no matter what events unfold, good or bad, the media highlights mostly the negative aspects of the event? The journalistic adage, "If it bleeds, it leads," still applies in Iraq, but why only when it's American blood?
As a recent example, the operation in Fallujah delivered an absolutely devastating blow to the insurgency. Though much smaller in scope, clearing Fallujah of insurgents arguably could equate to the Allies' breakout from the hedgerows in France during World War II. In both cases, our troops overcame a well-prepared and solidly entrenched enemy and began what could be the latter's last stand. In Fallujah, the enemy death toll has exceeded 1,500 and still is climbing. Put one in the win column for the good guys, right? Wrong. As soon as there was nothing negative to report about Fallujah, the media shifted its focus to other parts of the country.
More recently, a major news agency's website lead read: "Suicide Bomber Kills Six in Baghdad" and "Seven Marines Die in Iraq Clashes." True, yes. Comprehensive, no. Did the author of this article bother to mention that Coalition troops killed 50 or so terrorists while incurring those seven losses? Of course not. Nor was there any mention about the substantial progress these offensive operations continue to achieve in defeating the insurgents. Unfortunately, this sort of incomplete reporting has become the norm for the media, whose poor job of presenting a complete picture of what is going on in Iraq borders on being criminal.
Much of the problem is about perspective, putting things in scale and balance. What if domestic news outlets continually fed American readers headlines like: "Bloody Week on U.S. Highways: Some 700 Killed," or "More Than 900 Americans Die Weekly from Obesity-Related Diseases"? Both of these headlines might be true statistically, but do they really represent accurate pictures of the situations? What if you combined all of the negatives to be found in the state of Texas and used them as an indicator of the quality of life for all Texans? Imagine the headlines: "Anti-law Enforcement Elements Spread Robbery, Rape and Murder through Texas Cities." For all intents and purposes, this statement is true for any day of any year in any state. True — yes, accurate — yes, but in context with the greater good taking place — no! After a year or two of headlines like these, more than a few folks back in Texas and the rest of the U.S. probably would be ready to jump off of a building and end it all. So, imagine being an American in Iraq right now.
From where I sit in Iraq, things are not all bad right now. In fact, they are going quite well. We are not under attack by the enemy; on the contrary, we are taking the fight to him daily and have him on the ropes. In the distance, I can hear the repeated impacts of heavy artillery and five-hundred-pound bombs hitting their targets. The occasional tank main gun report and the staccato rhythm of a Marine Corps LAV or Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle's 25-millimeter cannon provide the bass line for a symphony of destruction. As elements from all four services complete the absolute annihilation of the insurgent forces remaining in Fallujah, the area around the former insurgent stronghold is more peaceful than it has been for more than a year.
The number of attacks in the greater Al Anbar Province is down by at least 70-80 percent from late October — before Operation Al Fajar began. The enemy in this area is completely defeated, but not completely gone. Final eradication of the pockets of insurgents will take some time, as it always does, but the fact remains that the central geographic stronghold of the insurgents is now under friendly control. That sounds a lot like success to me. Given all of this, why don't the papers lead with "Coalition Crushes Remaining Pockets of Insurgents" or "Enemy Forces Resort to Suicide Bombings of Civilians"? This would paint a far more accurate picture of the enemy's predicament over here. Instead, headlines focus almost exclusively on our hardships.
What about the media's portrayal of the enemy? Why do these ruthless murderers, kidnappers and thieves get a pass when it comes to their actions? What did the the media show or tell us about Margaret Hassoon, the director of C.A.R.E. in Iraq and an Iraqi citizen, who was kidnapped, brutally tortured and left disemboweled on a street in Fallujah? Did anyone in the press show these images over and over to emphasize the moral failings of the enemy as they did with the soldiers at Abu Ghuraib? Did anyone show the world how this enemy had huge stockpiles of weapons in schools and mosques, or how he used these protected places as sanctuaries for planning and fighting in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq? Are people of the world getting the complete story? The answer again is no! What the world got instead were repeated images of a battle-weary Marine who made a quick decision to use lethal force and who immediately was tried in the world press. Was this one act really illustrative of the overall action in Fallujah? No, but the Marine video clip was shown an average of four times each hour on just about every major TV news channel for a week. This is how the world views our efforts over here and stories like this without a counter continually serve as propaganda victories for the enemy. Al Jazeera isn't showing the film of the CARE worker, but is showing the clip of the Marine. Earlier this year, the Iraqi government banned Al Jazeera from the country for its inaccurate reporting. Wonder where they get their information now? Well, if you go to the Internet, you'll find a web link from the Al Jazeera home page to CNN's home page. Very interesting.
The operation in Fallujah is only one of the recent examples of incomplete coverage of the events in Iraq. The battle in Najaf last August provides another. Television and newspapers spilled a continuous stream of images and stories about the destruction done to the sacred city, and of all the human suffering allegedly brought about by the hands of the big, bad Americans. These stories and the lack of anything to counter them gave more fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism that burns in this part of the world. Those on the outside saw the Coalition portrayed as invaders or oppressors, killing hapless Iraqis who, one was given to believe, simply were trying to defend their homes and their Muslim way of life.
Reality couldn't have been farther from the truth. What noticeably was missing were accounts of the atrocities committed by the Mehdi Militia — Muqtada Al Sadr's band of henchmen. While the media was busy bashing the Coalition, Muqtada's boys were kidnapping policemen, city council members and anyone else accused of supporting the Coalition or the new government, trying them in a kangaroo court based on Islamic Shari'a law, then brutally torturing and executing them for their "crimes." What the media didn't show or write about were the two hundred-plus headless bodies found in the main mosque there, or the body that was put into a bread oven and baked. Nor did they show the world the hundreds of thousands of mortar, artillery and small arms rounds found within the "sacred" walls of the mosque. Also missing from the coverage was the huge cache of weapons found in Muqtada's "political" headquarters nearby. No, none of this made it to the screen or to print. All anyone showed were the few chipped tiles on the dome of the mosque and discussion centered on how we, the Coalition, had somehow done wrong. Score another one for the enemy's propaganda machine.
Now, compare the Najaf example to the coverage and debate ad nauseam of the Abu Ghuraib Prison affair. There certainly is no justification for what a dozen or so soldiers did there, but unbalanced reporting led the world to believe that the actions of the dozen were representative of the entire military. This has had an incredibly negative effect on Middle Easterners' already sagging opinion of the U.S. and its military. Did anyone show the world images of the 200 who were beheaded and mutilated in Muqtada's Shari'a Law court, or spend the next six months talking about how horrible all of that was? No, of course not. Most people don't know that these atrocities even happened. It's little wonder that many people here want us out and would vote someone like Muqtada Al Sadr into office given the chance — they never see the whole truth. Strange, when the enemy is the instigator the media does not flash images across the screens of televisions in the Middle East as they did with Abu Ghuraib. Is it because the beheaded bodies might offend someone? If so, then why do we continue see photos of the naked human pyramid over and over?
So, why doesn't the military get more involved in showing the media the other side of the story? The answer is they do. Although some outfits are better than others, the Army and other military organizations today understand the importance of getting out the story — the whole story — and trains leaders to talk to the press. There is a saying about media and the military that goes: "The only way the media is going to tell a good story is if you give them one to tell." This doesn't always work as planned. Recently, when a Coalition spokesman tried to let TV networks in on opening moves in the Fallujah operation, they misconstrued the events for something they were not and then blamed the military for their gullibility. CNN recently aired a "special report" in which the cable network accused the military of lying to it and others about the beginning of the Fallujah operation. The incident referred to took place in October when a Marine public affairs officer called media representatives and told them that an operation was about to begin. Reporters rushed to the outskirts of Fallujah to see what they assumed was going to be the beginning of the main attack on the city. As it turned out, what they saw were tactical "feints" designed to confuse the enemy about the timing of the main attack, then planned to take place weeks later.
Once the network realized that major combat operations wouldn't start for several more weeks, CNN alleged that the Marines had used them as a tool for their deception operation. Now, they say they want answers from the military and the administration on the matter. The reality appears to be that in their zeal to scoop their competition, CNN and others took the information they were given and turned it into what they wanted it to be. Did the military lie to the media: no. It is specifically against regulations to provide misinformation to the press. However, did the military planners anticipate that reporters would take the ball and run with it, adding to the overall deception plan? Possibly. Is that unprecedented or illegal? Of course not.
CNN and others say they were duped by the military in this and other cases. Yet, they never seem to be upset by the undeniable fact that the enemy manipulates them with a cunning that is almost worthy of envy. You can bet that terrorist leader Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has his own version of a public affairs officer and it is evident that he uses him to great effect. Each time Zarqawi's group executes a terrorist act such as a beheading or a car bomb, they have a prepared statement ready to post on their website and feed to the press. Over-eager reporters take the bait, hook, line and sinker, and report it just as they got it.
Did it ever occur to the media that this type of notoriety is just what the terrorists want and need? Every headline they grab is a victory for them. Those who have read the ancient Chinese military theorist and army general Sun Tzu will recall the philosophy of "Kill one, scare ten thousand" as the basic theory behind the strategy of terrorism. Through fear, the terrorist can then manipulate the behavior of the masses. The media allows the terrorist to use relatively small but spectacular events that directly affect very few, and spread them around the world to scare millions. What about the thousands of things that go right every day and are never reported? Complete a multi-million-dollar sewer project and no one wants to cover it, but let one car bomb go off and it makes headlines. With each headline, the enemy scores another point and the good-guys lose one. This method of scoring slowly is eroding domestic and international support while fueling the enemy's cause.
I believe one of the reasons for this shallow and subjective reporting is that many reporters never actually cover the events they report on. This is a point of growing concern within the Coalition. It appears many members of the media are hesitant to venture beyond the relative safety of the so-called "International Zone" in downtown Baghdad, or similar "safe havens" in other large cities. Because terrorists and other thugs wisely target western media members and others for kidnappings or attacks, the westerners stay close to their quarters. This has the effect of holding the media captive in cities and keeps them away from the broader truth that lies outside their view. With the press thus cornered, the terrorists easily feed their unwitting captives a thin gruel of anarchy, one spoonful each day. A car bomb at the entry point to the International Zone one day, a few mortars the next, maybe a kidnapping or two thrown in. All delivered to the doorsteps of those who will gladly accept it without having to leave their hotel rooms — how convenient.
The scene is repeated all too often: an attack takes place in Baghdad and the morning sounds are punctuated by a large explosion and a rising cloud of smoke. Sirens wail in the distance and photographers dash to the scene a few miles away. Within the hour, stern-faced reporters confidently stare into the camera while standing on the balcony of their tenth-floor Baghdad hotel room, their back to the city and a distant smoke plume rising behind them. More mayhem in Gotham City they intone, and just in time for the morning news. There is a transparent reason why the majority of car bombings and other major events take place before noon Baghdad-time; any later and the event would miss the start of the morning news cycle on the U.S. east coast. These terrorists aren't stupid; they know just what to do to scare the masses and when to do it. An important key to their plan is manipulation of the news media. But, at least the reporters in Iraq are gathering information and filing their stories, regardless of whether or the stories are in perspective. Much worse are the "talking heads" who sit in studios or offices back home and pontificate about how badly things are going when they never have been to Iraq and only occasionally leave Manhattan.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below:
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/05/breaking2453389.0680555557.html
Media's coverage has distorted world's view of Iraqi reality
By LTC Tim Ryan
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COMTuesday, January 18, 2005
Editors' Note: LTC Tim Ryan is Commander, Task Force 2-12 Cavalry, First Cavalry Division in Iraq. He led troops into battle in Fallujah late last year and is now involved in security operations for the upcoming elections. He wrote the following during "down time" after the Fallujah operation. His views are his own.
All right, I've had enough. I am tired of reading distorted and grossly exaggerated stories from major news organizations about the "failures" in the war in Iraq. "The most trusted name in news" and a long list of others continue to misrepresent the scale of events in Iraq. Print and video journalists are covering only a fraction of the events in Iraq and, more often than not, the events they cover are only negative.
The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.
The fact is the Coalition is making steady progress in Iraq, but not without ups and downs. So why is it that no matter what events unfold, good or bad, the media highlights mostly the negative aspects of the event? The journalistic adage, "If it bleeds, it leads," still applies in Iraq, but why only when it's American blood?
As a recent example, the operation in Fallujah delivered an absolutely devastating blow to the insurgency. Though much smaller in scope, clearing Fallujah of insurgents arguably could equate to the Allies' breakout from the hedgerows in France during World War II. In both cases, our troops overcame a well-prepared and solidly entrenched enemy and began what could be the latter's last stand. In Fallujah, the enemy death toll has exceeded 1,500 and still is climbing. Put one in the win column for the good guys, right? Wrong. As soon as there was nothing negative to report about Fallujah, the media shifted its focus to other parts of the country.
More recently, a major news agency's website lead read: "Suicide Bomber Kills Six in Baghdad" and "Seven Marines Die in Iraq Clashes." True, yes. Comprehensive, no. Did the author of this article bother to mention that Coalition troops killed 50 or so terrorists while incurring those seven losses? Of course not. Nor was there any mention about the substantial progress these offensive operations continue to achieve in defeating the insurgents. Unfortunately, this sort of incomplete reporting has become the norm for the media, whose poor job of presenting a complete picture of what is going on in Iraq borders on being criminal.
Much of the problem is about perspective, putting things in scale and balance. What if domestic news outlets continually fed American readers headlines like: "Bloody Week on U.S. Highways: Some 700 Killed," or "More Than 900 Americans Die Weekly from Obesity-Related Diseases"? Both of these headlines might be true statistically, but do they really represent accurate pictures of the situations? What if you combined all of the negatives to be found in the state of Texas and used them as an indicator of the quality of life for all Texans? Imagine the headlines: "Anti-law Enforcement Elements Spread Robbery, Rape and Murder through Texas Cities." For all intents and purposes, this statement is true for any day of any year in any state. True — yes, accurate — yes, but in context with the greater good taking place — no! After a year or two of headlines like these, more than a few folks back in Texas and the rest of the U.S. probably would be ready to jump off of a building and end it all. So, imagine being an American in Iraq right now.
From where I sit in Iraq, things are not all bad right now. In fact, they are going quite well. We are not under attack by the enemy; on the contrary, we are taking the fight to him daily and have him on the ropes. In the distance, I can hear the repeated impacts of heavy artillery and five-hundred-pound bombs hitting their targets. The occasional tank main gun report and the staccato rhythm of a Marine Corps LAV or Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle's 25-millimeter cannon provide the bass line for a symphony of destruction. As elements from all four services complete the absolute annihilation of the insurgent forces remaining in Fallujah, the area around the former insurgent stronghold is more peaceful than it has been for more than a year.
The number of attacks in the greater Al Anbar Province is down by at least 70-80 percent from late October — before Operation Al Fajar began. The enemy in this area is completely defeated, but not completely gone. Final eradication of the pockets of insurgents will take some time, as it always does, but the fact remains that the central geographic stronghold of the insurgents is now under friendly control. That sounds a lot like success to me. Given all of this, why don't the papers lead with "Coalition Crushes Remaining Pockets of Insurgents" or "Enemy Forces Resort to Suicide Bombings of Civilians"? This would paint a far more accurate picture of the enemy's predicament over here. Instead, headlines focus almost exclusively on our hardships.
What about the media's portrayal of the enemy? Why do these ruthless murderers, kidnappers and thieves get a pass when it comes to their actions? What did the the media show or tell us about Margaret Hassoon, the director of C.A.R.E. in Iraq and an Iraqi citizen, who was kidnapped, brutally tortured and left disemboweled on a street in Fallujah? Did anyone in the press show these images over and over to emphasize the moral failings of the enemy as they did with the soldiers at Abu Ghuraib? Did anyone show the world how this enemy had huge stockpiles of weapons in schools and mosques, or how he used these protected places as sanctuaries for planning and fighting in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq? Are people of the world getting the complete story? The answer again is no! What the world got instead were repeated images of a battle-weary Marine who made a quick decision to use lethal force and who immediately was tried in the world press. Was this one act really illustrative of the overall action in Fallujah? No, but the Marine video clip was shown an average of four times each hour on just about every major TV news channel for a week. This is how the world views our efforts over here and stories like this without a counter continually serve as propaganda victories for the enemy. Al Jazeera isn't showing the film of the CARE worker, but is showing the clip of the Marine. Earlier this year, the Iraqi government banned Al Jazeera from the country for its inaccurate reporting. Wonder where they get their information now? Well, if you go to the Internet, you'll find a web link from the Al Jazeera home page to CNN's home page. Very interesting.
The operation in Fallujah is only one of the recent examples of incomplete coverage of the events in Iraq. The battle in Najaf last August provides another. Television and newspapers spilled a continuous stream of images and stories about the destruction done to the sacred city, and of all the human suffering allegedly brought about by the hands of the big, bad Americans. These stories and the lack of anything to counter them gave more fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism that burns in this part of the world. Those on the outside saw the Coalition portrayed as invaders or oppressors, killing hapless Iraqis who, one was given to believe, simply were trying to defend their homes and their Muslim way of life.
Reality couldn't have been farther from the truth. What noticeably was missing were accounts of the atrocities committed by the Mehdi Militia — Muqtada Al Sadr's band of henchmen. While the media was busy bashing the Coalition, Muqtada's boys were kidnapping policemen, city council members and anyone else accused of supporting the Coalition or the new government, trying them in a kangaroo court based on Islamic Shari'a law, then brutally torturing and executing them for their "crimes." What the media didn't show or write about were the two hundred-plus headless bodies found in the main mosque there, or the body that was put into a bread oven and baked. Nor did they show the world the hundreds of thousands of mortar, artillery and small arms rounds found within the "sacred" walls of the mosque. Also missing from the coverage was the huge cache of weapons found in Muqtada's "political" headquarters nearby. No, none of this made it to the screen or to print. All anyone showed were the few chipped tiles on the dome of the mosque and discussion centered on how we, the Coalition, had somehow done wrong. Score another one for the enemy's propaganda machine.
Now, compare the Najaf example to the coverage and debate ad nauseam of the Abu Ghuraib Prison affair. There certainly is no justification for what a dozen or so soldiers did there, but unbalanced reporting led the world to believe that the actions of the dozen were representative of the entire military. This has had an incredibly negative effect on Middle Easterners' already sagging opinion of the U.S. and its military. Did anyone show the world images of the 200 who were beheaded and mutilated in Muqtada's Shari'a Law court, or spend the next six months talking about how horrible all of that was? No, of course not. Most people don't know that these atrocities even happened. It's little wonder that many people here want us out and would vote someone like Muqtada Al Sadr into office given the chance — they never see the whole truth. Strange, when the enemy is the instigator the media does not flash images across the screens of televisions in the Middle East as they did with Abu Ghuraib. Is it because the beheaded bodies might offend someone? If so, then why do we continue see photos of the naked human pyramid over and over?
So, why doesn't the military get more involved in showing the media the other side of the story? The answer is they do. Although some outfits are better than others, the Army and other military organizations today understand the importance of getting out the story — the whole story — and trains leaders to talk to the press. There is a saying about media and the military that goes: "The only way the media is going to tell a good story is if you give them one to tell." This doesn't always work as planned. Recently, when a Coalition spokesman tried to let TV networks in on opening moves in the Fallujah operation, they misconstrued the events for something they were not and then blamed the military for their gullibility. CNN recently aired a "special report" in which the cable network accused the military of lying to it and others about the beginning of the Fallujah operation. The incident referred to took place in October when a Marine public affairs officer called media representatives and told them that an operation was about to begin. Reporters rushed to the outskirts of Fallujah to see what they assumed was going to be the beginning of the main attack on the city. As it turned out, what they saw were tactical "feints" designed to confuse the enemy about the timing of the main attack, then planned to take place weeks later.
Once the network realized that major combat operations wouldn't start for several more weeks, CNN alleged that the Marines had used them as a tool for their deception operation. Now, they say they want answers from the military and the administration on the matter. The reality appears to be that in their zeal to scoop their competition, CNN and others took the information they were given and turned it into what they wanted it to be. Did the military lie to the media: no. It is specifically against regulations to provide misinformation to the press. However, did the military planners anticipate that reporters would take the ball and run with it, adding to the overall deception plan? Possibly. Is that unprecedented or illegal? Of course not.
CNN and others say they were duped by the military in this and other cases. Yet, they never seem to be upset by the undeniable fact that the enemy manipulates them with a cunning that is almost worthy of envy. You can bet that terrorist leader Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has his own version of a public affairs officer and it is evident that he uses him to great effect. Each time Zarqawi's group executes a terrorist act such as a beheading or a car bomb, they have a prepared statement ready to post on their website and feed to the press. Over-eager reporters take the bait, hook, line and sinker, and report it just as they got it.
Did it ever occur to the media that this type of notoriety is just what the terrorists want and need? Every headline they grab is a victory for them. Those who have read the ancient Chinese military theorist and army general Sun Tzu will recall the philosophy of "Kill one, scare ten thousand" as the basic theory behind the strategy of terrorism. Through fear, the terrorist can then manipulate the behavior of the masses. The media allows the terrorist to use relatively small but spectacular events that directly affect very few, and spread them around the world to scare millions. What about the thousands of things that go right every day and are never reported? Complete a multi-million-dollar sewer project and no one wants to cover it, but let one car bomb go off and it makes headlines. With each headline, the enemy scores another point and the good-guys lose one. This method of scoring slowly is eroding domestic and international support while fueling the enemy's cause.
I believe one of the reasons for this shallow and subjective reporting is that many reporters never actually cover the events they report on. This is a point of growing concern within the Coalition. It appears many members of the media are hesitant to venture beyond the relative safety of the so-called "International Zone" in downtown Baghdad, or similar "safe havens" in other large cities. Because terrorists and other thugs wisely target western media members and others for kidnappings or attacks, the westerners stay close to their quarters. This has the effect of holding the media captive in cities and keeps them away from the broader truth that lies outside their view. With the press thus cornered, the terrorists easily feed their unwitting captives a thin gruel of anarchy, one spoonful each day. A car bomb at the entry point to the International Zone one day, a few mortars the next, maybe a kidnapping or two thrown in. All delivered to the doorsteps of those who will gladly accept it without having to leave their hotel rooms — how convenient.
The scene is repeated all too often: an attack takes place in Baghdad and the morning sounds are punctuated by a large explosion and a rising cloud of smoke. Sirens wail in the distance and photographers dash to the scene a few miles away. Within the hour, stern-faced reporters confidently stare into the camera while standing on the balcony of their tenth-floor Baghdad hotel room, their back to the city and a distant smoke plume rising behind them. More mayhem in Gotham City they intone, and just in time for the morning news. There is a transparent reason why the majority of car bombings and other major events take place before noon Baghdad-time; any later and the event would miss the start of the morning news cycle on the U.S. east coast. These terrorists aren't stupid; they know just what to do to scare the masses and when to do it. An important key to their plan is manipulation of the news media. But, at least the reporters in Iraq are gathering information and filing their stories, regardless of whether or the stories are in perspective. Much worse are the "talking heads" who sit in studios or offices back home and pontificate about how badly things are going when they never have been to Iraq and only occasionally leave Manhattan.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below:
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/05/breaking2453389.0680555557.html
The ACLU Would Hate This Success Story.
The ACLU hates the Boy Scouts and is trying to ban the organization from all Federal and State sponsorship. This flies in the face of the enormous good done by the BSA for over 100 years in preparing America's young boys to be honest citizens that have ethics and a moral code. Somehow, to the ACLU, being a secular homosexual is more important than being an ethical and moral Boy Scout. If you espouse heterosexually, the ACLU condemns you because you aren't sensitive to homosexuals and invite them to be leaders of young boys in the Boy Scouts. The ACLU would prefer moral decay of our boys and girls to ethics and honor. This to me is a very good example of the Left's pretzel logic. Despite the opinions of the ACLU, there are some very good and caring folks out there that know the ethical and moral values that Scouting brings to a young boy's life. Read on.
Pair sees foster son soar as an Eagle
By Dennis McCarthy
"What really matters is they wanted me when no one else did." -- Jonathan Compton He was 6 weeks old, a preemie weighing all of 4 pounds, the first time Rita and Bob Prectl held the foster-care baby named Jonathan Compton in their arms and hugged him 18 years ago.
Today the kid's more than 6 feet tall and built like a linebacker -- but still not too big for the Prectls proud foster parents to hold and hug.
Along with two other Scouts from Venture Crew 415 in the Balboa Oaks district, the baby no one had wanted 18 years ago stood with his proud foster parents Sunday on the stage in the auditorium at St. John Baptist de la Salle Church in Granada Hills to receive his Eagle Scout badge of honor.
Then he turned and pinned a special Eagle Scout pin on his parents standing behind him -- giving them a hug for providing him the best home and upbringing any child could ever have had.
"I could see they were proud of me, but I was more proud of them," Jonathan said. "They raised me. They're my parents, and I love them."
It's rare that a foster child stays in one home his whole life, but Jonathan did, said Nancy Sandler, a social worker supervisor with the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, who attended the Eagle Scout ceremony Sunday.
"When Jonathan was 10 he went to court and told the judge that if it meant leaving the Prectls, he didn't want to be adopted, so he stayed. They're a very special, amazing couple."
Yes, they are. I wrote a column in April about Rita, deciding to retire after 36 years of opening her home to more than 75 foster children. She laughed and said she was the only woman at her 50th high school reunion who had to hire a baby-sitter to get out of the house.
At 72, she thought it was time to let some younger women step in to be a temporary mom to children without a home. But she had one favor to ask.
Jonathan, the baby who stayed, was turning 18 in June and needed a little help with his Eagle Scout project. He had been a Scout since the second grade and was graduating from Kennedy High, heading for Pierce College in the fall in hope of becoming a landscape architect someday.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below:
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~21377~2658725,00.html
Pair sees foster son soar as an Eagle
By Dennis McCarthy
"What really matters is they wanted me when no one else did." -- Jonathan Compton He was 6 weeks old, a preemie weighing all of 4 pounds, the first time Rita and Bob Prectl held the foster-care baby named Jonathan Compton in their arms and hugged him 18 years ago.
Today the kid's more than 6 feet tall and built like a linebacker -- but still not too big for the Prectls proud foster parents to hold and hug.
Along with two other Scouts from Venture Crew 415 in the Balboa Oaks district, the baby no one had wanted 18 years ago stood with his proud foster parents Sunday on the stage in the auditorium at St. John Baptist de la Salle Church in Granada Hills to receive his Eagle Scout badge of honor.
Then he turned and pinned a special Eagle Scout pin on his parents standing behind him -- giving them a hug for providing him the best home and upbringing any child could ever have had.
"I could see they were proud of me, but I was more proud of them," Jonathan said. "They raised me. They're my parents, and I love them."
It's rare that a foster child stays in one home his whole life, but Jonathan did, said Nancy Sandler, a social worker supervisor with the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, who attended the Eagle Scout ceremony Sunday.
"When Jonathan was 10 he went to court and told the judge that if it meant leaving the Prectls, he didn't want to be adopted, so he stayed. They're a very special, amazing couple."
Yes, they are. I wrote a column in April about Rita, deciding to retire after 36 years of opening her home to more than 75 foster children. She laughed and said she was the only woman at her 50th high school reunion who had to hire a baby-sitter to get out of the house.
At 72, she thought it was time to let some younger women step in to be a temporary mom to children without a home. But she had one favor to ask.
Jonathan, the baby who stayed, was turning 18 in June and needed a little help with his Eagle Scout project. He had been a Scout since the second grade and was graduating from Kennedy High, heading for Pierce College in the fall in hope of becoming a landscape architect someday.
Read the entire article. Click on the link below:
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~21377~2658725,00.html
Monday, January 17, 2005
The Memory Of MLK Is Again Exploited By Jesse Jackson
I bet Dr. King is looking down from heaven upon Jesse Jackson with scorn and disappointment. This latest exploitation is another reminder: Read on.
Jackson says war, poverty sap King legacy
By HARRY R. WEBER, Associated Press WriterSunday, January 16th, 2005 06:34 PM (PST)
Related Information
The life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
JONESBORO, Ga. (AP) - War, poverty, violence and social injustice are dampening Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy as the nation prepares to celebrate the slain civil rights leader's birthday, the Rev. Jesse Jackson told a church gathering Sunday.
In a passionate speech at Dixon Grove Baptist Church in Jonesboro, south of King's native Atlanta, Jackson assailed the war in Iraq and insisted the gap between rich and poor in America is widening despite King's message of peace and equality.
"It's easy to admire Dr. King," Jackson told the 650 people at the church. "It's a challenge to follow him."
Jackson, who was standing beneath the motel balcony where King was fatally shot in Memphis, Tenn., on April 4, 1968, suggested a good birthday present to King would be for Americans to strive more for financial and social equality.
"You can be out of slavery and out of segregation and have the right to vote and starve to death without access to capital and industry," Jackson said.
Yes, Jesse it IS a challenge to follow in Dr. King's footsteps. You above all should know that all too well. Is is YOU and other so called divisive "Black Leaders" playing the "We Are Still Oppressed" race card that dampen Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy as the nation prepares to celebrate the slain civil rights leader's birthday. Remember that (Rev.) Jesse Jackson is the guy who jumped up and ran to the balcony where Dr. King lay dying and smeared Dr. King's blood on himself for a photo op. This individual lives off of the exploitation of Dr. King's memory and the bones of his own followers. When will we all see ourselves as merely Americans instead of some color of American? When will we honor and practice the ideals of Dr. Martin Luther King without colorization?
You can read the entire article by clicking on the link below:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/24hour/front/story/2022705p-10054389c.html
Jackson says war, poverty sap King legacy
By HARRY R. WEBER, Associated Press WriterSunday, January 16th, 2005 06:34 PM (PST)
Related Information
The life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
JONESBORO, Ga. (AP) - War, poverty, violence and social injustice are dampening Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy as the nation prepares to celebrate the slain civil rights leader's birthday, the Rev. Jesse Jackson told a church gathering Sunday.
In a passionate speech at Dixon Grove Baptist Church in Jonesboro, south of King's native Atlanta, Jackson assailed the war in Iraq and insisted the gap between rich and poor in America is widening despite King's message of peace and equality.
"It's easy to admire Dr. King," Jackson told the 650 people at the church. "It's a challenge to follow him."
Jackson, who was standing beneath the motel balcony where King was fatally shot in Memphis, Tenn., on April 4, 1968, suggested a good birthday present to King would be for Americans to strive more for financial and social equality.
"You can be out of slavery and out of segregation and have the right to vote and starve to death without access to capital and industry," Jackson said.
Yes, Jesse it IS a challenge to follow in Dr. King's footsteps. You above all should know that all too well. Is is YOU and other so called divisive "Black Leaders" playing the "We Are Still Oppressed" race card that dampen Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy as the nation prepares to celebrate the slain civil rights leader's birthday. Remember that (Rev.) Jesse Jackson is the guy who jumped up and ran to the balcony where Dr. King lay dying and smeared Dr. King's blood on himself for a photo op. This individual lives off of the exploitation of Dr. King's memory and the bones of his own followers. When will we all see ourselves as merely Americans instead of some color of American? When will we honor and practice the ideals of Dr. Martin Luther King without colorization?
You can read the entire article by clicking on the link below:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/24hour/front/story/2022705p-10054389c.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
