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 : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (23403)10/24/2006 11:25:53 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
    This sort of forced logic does a poor job of masking CNN's
and its defenders' real motives. Their goal here is to
undermine the war effort, even if that means being a
mouthpiece for terrorist propaganda.

This is CNN

TODAY'S EDITORIAL
The Washington Times
October 24, 2006

A new Hollywood movie about the battle of Iwo Jima opened last week right about the time CNN began airing footage it obtained from terrorists showing U.S. soldiers being killed with sniper fire. It is a fitting contrast. The movie tells the story of the three surviving GIs who were immortalized on film raising the flag over Mt. Suribachi. The CNN tape shows the exact opposite: Instead of heroism, we see unsuspecting American soldiers being dropped one by one. No flag raising, no glory; just another dead U.S. soldier.

Of course the Mt. Suribachi photograph is a distortion. The United States did win the battle, but long after the flag had been raised. In fact, three of the flag raisers would never leave the island alive. In 36 days of fighting, there were more than 25,000 U.S. casualties -- one out of every three men -- of which nearly 7,000 were killed. By comparison, in the Iraq war's 1,680 days, the United States has lost 2,800 troops. Yet that single photograph further roused Americans to keep confidence in final victory.

Which brings us to Sen. John Kerry's defense of CNN's decision to air the terrorist footage: "As painful as the images of war are, it's important to understand what soldiers go through." If there had been a CNN equivalent in 1945, would it have been important to air footage of Japanese machine guns mowing down GIs as they waded ashore? Imagine watching hundreds of Americans being killed in one day of battle. Japan's imperial government couldn't have asked for a better propaganda weapon. The impact on a war-weary America would certainly have been emotionally crushing for those with sons and husbands still in battle, and might well have played in to antiwar sentiment. But it is much more damaging today when the nation is not as fully united as it was during World War II.

But let's take Mr. Kerry and CNN at their word and assume that this type of footage has journalistic merit. It follows that CNN should also have shown its hours of footage from September 11. We're talking about the people trapped in the World Trade Center who decided to jump and the other grisly images most Americans have never seen. Or what about the tape showing Iraqi terrorists beheading Nick Berg? CNN has kept this footage locked away out of some faux sensitivity for Americans' fragile spines. The only way one can see the full horror of September 11 and other terrorist carnage is by downloading amateur videos off the Internet.

In a mind-numbing article on Sunday, Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi also defended CNN's decision, because, as she understands it, Americans are too dim to appreciate the reality of war. "Without a draft, it is easy for the rest of the country to tune out casualties," she wrote. "Much of what is seen on television makes war feel as bloodless as a video game."

This sort of forced logic does a poor job of masking CNN's and its defenders' real motives. Their goal here is to undermine the war effort, even if that means being a mouthpiece for terrorist propaganda.

washtimes.com



To: Sully- who wrote (23403)10/24/2006 11:30:30 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Kim Priestap on "CNN's Shameful Decision"

Via Wizbang
    I'm still sick about CNN treating our troops in battle as 
enemy propaganda. I can't imagine how parents with sons
and daughters in Iraq must have felt watching the video of
that brave soldier being shot. Yes, CNN blocked out the
part where the bullet hit the soldier's head, but they
then showed him slumped and possibly dying. How
disgusting. And they actually have the nerve to act like
showing this terrorist snuff film was some kind of noble
deed.
http://feeds.wizbangblog.com/~r/WizbangFullFeed/~3/40996135/cnns-shameful-decision.php



To: Sully- who wrote (23403)10/25/2006 1:59:16 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
CNN, Stenographer to terror

By Brent Bozell III
Townhall.com Columnist
Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Our news media have long lectured us that their role is not to be "stenographers to power." Theirs is the pursuit of truth, we are told. But when it comes to networks like CNN, those ethical rules are crumpled and tossed into the nearest trash bin.

Editorial writers at The Washington Post and elsewhere have raged against the Pentagon placing positive stories in Iraqi newspapers, thus violating the journalistic sacristy of objectivity. But they have no rage at all for CNN placing glorifying publicity from terrorists on a global television network.

On the Oct. 18 edition of "Anderson Cooper 360," CNN aired a story by reporter Michael Ware, an Australian correspondent renowned for his contacts with terrorist groups. The story showed video filmed by terrorists calling themselves the Islamic Army of Iraq. From the very start, the viewer sees this for what it is: enemy propaganda. The grainy video shows Islamic terrorist snipers time and again shooting and presumably killing American boys.

(CNN, bless its heart, cut the footage just before each bullet found its mark, but not before the sound of the rifle fire that launched it.)

Here's what CNN also aired, without editorial comment of any sort, as "news": The translator has the terrorists saying they should wait to shoot the American soldier, since there are innocent "people" around. Later in the report, the shooter claims to be trying to target an American soldier, not Iraqis. Since when have these insurgent murderers cared about killing Iraqi soldiers or civilians? They've massacred thousands with remorseless regularity.

The video is sickening. Imagine being the mother or father, sister, brother, wife or child of that American soldier murdered so brutally.

So why did CNN air something that cannot be defended as newsworthy? That video was given to CNN by terrorists in order to demoralize the American people about the hopelessness of Iraq just before midterm elections. And CNN did exactly what the terrorists wanted, and CNN knows it. In his introduction that night, Anderson Cooper said, "Insurgents"
-- never terrorists, mind you, always "insurgents" -- were "delivering a deadly message, aiming for a global audience." CNN is the terrorist's messenger service, FedEx for the fanatics who want us dead.

It's part of a long and increasingly shameful history.
CNN first came to prominence as a tyrant's bootlicker in the first Gulf War in 1991, when the network agreed to allow Saddam Hussein to edit its reports in return for preferential access in Baghdad. Once entrenched, the perpetually embarrassing Peter Arnett reported on the Allied bombing of baby-milk factories -- that weren't baby-milk factories. CNN didn't fire Arnett. They retained him even after his atrocious 1998 CNN-Time documentary asserting that Americans gassed their own soldiers in Laos, another story that fell apart under scrutiny. Sense a trend? CNN seems eager to pounce on stories that make Americans look evil and/or lethally incompetent. Whether they are true is irrelevant.

The story of evil in a foreign land was easily crumpled by CNN in a slavish desire for access. In April 2003, days after Saddam Hussein fell, CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan wrote an op-ed in The New York Times admitting he had scrapped stories from Iraq out of fear of violence from Saddam's regime. He struggled to keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open, but couldn't seem to report vital news, even news that his own producers were subjected to electroshock torture. His career at CNN didn't end until he recklessly claimed American soldiers were targeting reporters for assassination in Iraq.

This isn't even the first occasion of CNN being used as a terrorist sock puppet this year.
In July, CNN's Nic Robertson traveled into a heavily damaged Beirut neighborhood to decry Israel for bombing civilian areas. It also transpired that all along, he was being escorted by and taking instructions from the terrorist organization Hezbollah. The Hezbollah "press officer" even instructed the CNN camera: "Just look. Shoot. Look at this building. Is it a military base? Is it a military base, or just civilians living in this building?" Robertson later claimed Hezbollah had "very, very sophisticated" press operations and the terrorist group "had control of the situation." Hezbollah had control of CNN.

It's also not the first terrorist video distributed by Michael Ware.
In 2004, when Ware was a Time reporter, he was handed an insurgent videotape of the killing of American contractors in Fallujah. Ware confessed, like Robertson, to losing control of the situation with terrorists: "I certainly go out there and expose myself. I've been to the safe houses. I surrender myself to their control. I've sat in living rooms face-to-face with these men," he said.

He surrenders himself to terrorist control. This from the man who works for CNN -- the network whose role is not to be a "stenographer to power."


Brent Bozell III is a lecturer, syndicated columnist, television commentator, debater, marketer, businessman, publisher and activist.

townhall.com