Letter to the Prime Minister, March 25, 2002
“For Iraq, “regime change” does not stack up. It sounds like a grudge between Bush and Saddam. Much better, as you have suggested, to make the objective ending the threat to the international community from Iraqi WMD […].”
How did Tony Blair come up with his propaganda strategy? Who were his fellow strategists in the Bush administration?
Why are American media so lethargic about telling the public that their emotions about the national tragedy of 9/11 were cynically manipulated into the urgent need to invade Iraq? Why don’t more US media voices, whether from the right or left, express the same revulsion about this premeditated war crime as Eric Margolis, quoted below, who writes for a conservative Canadian newspaper.
Web of cold-blooded lies By Eric Margolis, Toronto Sun
[…] And so it went. Lie after lie. Scare upon scare. Fakery after fakery, trumpeted by the tame media that came to resemble the lickspittle press of the old Soviet Union. Ironically, in the end, horrid Saddam Hussein turned out to be telling the truth all along, while Bush and Blair were not.[…]
U.S. mass media amply confirmed charges of bias and politicization levelled against them by first ignoring the MI-6 memo story, then grudgingly devoting a few low-key stories to the dramatic revelation. Front pages, meanwhile, featured outing of the Nixon era’s “Deep Throat,” who, it turned out, was part of a cabal of Nixon-haters rather than a selfless patriot.
In retrospect, former president Richard Nixon’s misdeeds appear trivial compared to Bush’s illegal, unnecessary and catastrophic war against Iraq […] ((06/12/05,Eric Margolis, Toronto Sun))
Why aren’t more voices in the US media decrying the ginned up case? Maybe media silence today relates to keeping a lid on their own bad behavior during the conjured march to war.
- Too few stories offered alternative perspectives to the “official line” on WMD surrounding the Iraq conflict;
- most journalists accepted the Bush administration linking the “war on terror” inextricably to the issue of WMD; and
- most media outlets represented WMD as a “monolithic menace” without distinguishing between types of weapons and between possible weapons programs and the existence of actual weapons. (03/09/04 by E&P Staff, Editor & Publisher)
Media Coverage of Weapons of Mass Destruction (pdf format), also available in summary form, is available at the CISSM web site
I know I have it and I assume I got mine working but I confess I don’t know how to tell. (What if it breaks? Who do I call?) I recall a candy when I was a kid (60s-70s) named Mojos that were individually wrapped soft minty taffies. That’s what I imagine when I see the ratings.
Hi, BooTribbiani. I’m still getting to know the site and have been reading through the intro’s, so forgive my absence from the receiving line. (diane101, thanks for the personal welcome — the second one 😉 — and the invite to introduce myself. I promise to take you up on it and contribute to the conviviality later in the week.)
I blame my temporary flakiness on the combination of heat, piled up work/personal commitments, and a <u>WTF is it now???</u> organizing principle for make this frazzled juggling act resemble something that would get me the hook on the worst dinner show on the planet.
Correct. Before we continue this never-ending media-bash we should look back with clear eyes. There is a reason that hindsight, not foresight, is “20/20”.
If you haven’t yet, be sure to read Paul Rosenberg’s diary yesterday.
Thanks for the tip; I’ll check it out that diary.
I don’t expect “my” media sources and pundits to be, as human beings, less susceptible than I am or any fellow human is to daily stresses and disorganization.
However, I DO expect a certain level of commitment to duty and professional pride to put more of a firewall between themselves and the agenda and passions of — well, I can’t think of them as other than war criminals and high level terrorists at this point.
It was WAR they were unleashing. Who i are these people; inside their private being, I mean?
I’ve just spent the last two days arguing with a republican family member about the war. After four exchanges of message, his last letter came down to: well, we had to take the fight to them, right?
Fear is a very powerful emotion.
Response: If we really had to take the fight to someone, we should have taken it to someone who was fighting us. Instead, troops and other resources were pulled away from the hunt for Osama bin Laden and sent to invade a country that was no threat to us. Iraq has now become a training ground for terrorists, and there are reports that some of them have already “graduated” and have headed off to other parts of the world. It’s probably only a matter of time until some of them end up in the US.
And what makes it worse is that the arrogant actions of the current leaders of the US have alienated many of our allies, whose help is absolutely necessary to effectively fighting terrorism.
The MSM is now taking the tactic that the Downing Street Memos are not big news because ‘everybody’ knew that BushCo was determined to invade Iraq, with or without a reason like WMD.
Now, the insider reporters may have known, but that does not mean the public did. The public only knows what the media tells it, and the media decided not to share this insider info with us.
They are SO culpable in all this. The next time you hear some reporter saying that DSM is not news because everybody already knew, write a letter, phone or whatever, just don’t let them get away with that!
Ask them why they were they not reporting on it at the time if “everybody knew.”
Ask them to explain themselves to the families of the dead civilians or servicemen, if they knew this was going to happen despite there being no just cause for it — and they chose not to report it.
Ask them how they sleep at night …
Also, C-Span has decided to carry the John Conyers hearings, but only on C-Span 3. Quite a lot of areas do not get C-Span 3 and its not as prominent as the other two channels.
If you are inclined, drop them a note at events@c-span.org to ask them to move it to one of the other channels. OR call: Main Number: (202) 737-3220
Viewer Services: (765) 464-3080.