SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: abuelita who wrote (32904)12/18/2003 12:17:39 PM
From: laura_bush  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
Live from the new Iraq: Happy talk

ANTONIA ZERBISIAS

Every December, media organizations comb their archives for the iconic images
of the past 12 months. They're used for the "year-enders'' that obsess us in the
slow news period during the holidays.

As if anybody wants to relive 2003 and its almost relentlessly depressing
headlines. Not that good news is ever real news, no matter how much the
White House wishes it were so.

That's why the Pentagon is currently building what I call its own GNN — for
Good News Network — to do an end run around the networks and beam
directly from its press centre in Iraq. Just in time for election year 2004, the
satellite service will counteract all those terrible stories of bombings, shootings,
killings and maiming from the, you know, war.

Instead, TV stations stateside that pick up its feeds will be able to telecast
happy tales of school or clinic reopenings. (Not that journalists are allowed
unfettered access to Iraqi hospitals but that's another matter.)

As Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Joe Yoswa told the New York Times
yesterday: "It's to provide the full news story."

Meanwhile, some 40 million tax dollars are being invested in a TV studio
complex in Virginia. This new Arab-language news and entertainment station, to
be named Al Hurra (The Free One), will go head-to-head with the all-news Al
Jazeera, only with greater resources and slicker production values.

And, of course, an American point of view. For example, as the Times
reported, Al Hurra will refrain from pointing out that, when Israeli forces raid
Palestinian refugee camps, they're flying American-made aircraft.

Which brings us back to the pictures of the year.

Throughout my life I can recall all kinds of indelible images: Lyndon Baines
Johnson being sworn in on Air Force One while a shell-shocked Jackie
Kennedy stood by in her bloodied pink suit; Neil Armstrong landing on the
moon; Canadian soldiers in Montreal during the October Crisis; a naked
9-year-old Kim Phuc running from a napalm attack; Margaret Trudeau kicking
up her heels at Studio 54; the brutalized corpse of that American soldier being
dragged through the streets of Mogadishu ...

This year, there's plenty of competition for the picture of the year.

Will it be the toppling of Saddam Hussein's statue by a small claque of Iraqis
aided by U.S. tanks and troops? Will the winner be U.S. President George W.
Bush doing his topside Top Gun "Mission Accomplished'' strut aboard the USS
Abraham Lincoln?

Or his triumphant Thanksgiving Day turkey trot through that Baghdad mess hall
where, by the way, only handpicked soldiers were allowed to gain entry?

So many more to choose from: The dramatic rescue of Private Jessica Lynch,
which turned out to be more drama than rescue?

The stitched-together corpses of Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay, on display to
show that they were really most sincerely dead. And on and on.

This week, we have a new contender to add to the short list: a grizzled Saddam
looking like one of those evil drunken rapists of "squaws" that Clint Eastwood
shoots in Sergio Leone westerns. Is there anybody who hasn't seen that brief
video of Saddam getting his tonsils tickled replayed over and over? Even as I
write this, I can see it again. And again. (Which makes me wonder: How come
we haven't seen any more images of his capture because it's clear that plenty
was shot?)

Memorable as all these photos may be, they all prove one thing: The camera
does indeed lie. That's because all these images only tell one side of the story,
the one that the White House wants you to see. And all are, in some sense, just
as manufactured as the next.

Me, I'd prefer to see those images that nobody wanted to pose for: the U.S.
and British troop casualties, in their coffins and their hospital beds; the Iraqi
civilians whose homes, lives and limbs were demolished; the Americans who will
suffer economic hardship to pay for it all.

A picture is indeed worth a thousand words.

Too bad one is false while the words are too often lies.

torontostar.com