Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sig who wrote (89196)	4/2/2003 12:40:20 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Everybody likes freedom, even if they believe that Elvis is still alive.-g-

To: Sig who wrote (89196)	4/2/2003 12:40:41 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"David Frum's Diary" The Turn Are my ears deceiving me, or are we hearing the beginnings of a great turn in the press coverage of the war? With the daring rescue of American POW Jessica Lynch after 9 days of Iraqi captivity, the opening of the battle for Baghdad, the sudden rush of reports of jubilation in liberated Iraq, and the over-running of Ansar al-Islam's base in northern Iraq, it seems at last to be dawning on the press: The allies are winning. So - can we get all those disgruntled retired generals off the front pages of the papers? Embedded I am not a believer in journalistic "objectivity" in wartime. Journalists who cover fires cheer for the firefighters. Journalists who cover crime don't keep neutral between the crooks and their victims. What kind of warped system of values forbids journalists to support their country when the guns are blasting? Some journalists fear that patriotism is just a euphemism for propaganda. But anti-patriotic journalists can engage in propaganda too, and (I would argue) often do so. In his first column for the Daily Mirror, Peter Arnett presents himself as a simple truth-teller, fired for ?stating the obvious.? But in a war that will last only so long as the enemy forces? morale lasts, it is not an ?objective? act for a famous Western correspondent to give an interview to Iraqi state-controlled television claiming that the Allies? war plans are failing because of the ?determination? and ?resistance? of the Iraqis. Every Iraqi who hears those words and believes them draws from them a sharp and ominous message: Saddam?s rule may yet survive. Since the fear of Saddam is the principal force keeping his army in the field, Arnett?s words have the effect of prolonging the war and increasing casualties to all sides. I find it hard to believe that Arnett did not and does not appreciate that fact. Certainly the Iraqis do. nationalreview.com