| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| The Belmont Club: The High Hand |
| 2005-05-22 |
| Wretchard analyzes the current fascination with prisoner abuse annd flushed scriptures, in light of Kipling's poem The Grave of the Hundred Head. His conclusion: But if the US has been at pains to avoid the image of ruthlessness, the enemy by contrast has made a special effort to magnify his brutality by attacking mosques, beheading women, mutilating children, etc. often on camera. And the really disappointing thing it is that the intended intimidation works. If George Galloway's standard response to his critics is a lawsuit and radical Islam's first recourse is a fatwa then terror's first answer to insult is always the Grave of a Hundred Dead. Intimidation brings them respect from the very people who style themselves immune to intimidation. It is plain to the lowliest stringer from the most obscure tabloid that to insult America is cheap but to insult the local 'militants' very, very expensive. Kipling's cynical dictum is proven again and the lesson not forgotten. We live in a strange world where the Beslan story vanishes in weeks while Abu Ghraib lives on for years. Maybe it reflects the inherent importance of the stories but it more probably demonstrates the media's ability to prolong the life of some stories while ignoring others. I hope it is not impertinent to observe that the media's demeanor towards terrorism bears more than a passing resemblance to cheap cowardice; but though outwardly similar it really springs from a high-minded idealism, deep courage and profound learning. Or so I hope. |
| Posted by:Phil Fraering |
| #4 The MSM keeps talking over "overstretch" in terms of troop availability, so they can bash Rummy, but I wonder if the real risk of military "overstretch" is how long the military is going to tolerate being lied about by these guys. A hundred field grade officers walking up and down in front of NYT headquarters, or emails to CBS from 10,000 serving Marines, might have some consequence. At least it would be news in my book. "Dear Dan, We're going to have a chat with you when we get home. Sincerely, The First Marine Division" |
| Posted by: Matt 2005-05-22 15:34 |
| #3 I took Media 101, too, but that doesn't explain anything. Of course media outlets are going to concentrate on local news first, that's a given. But the sad fact is they don't actually do that. They focus on their agendas and on their own personal ideal view of what they are reporting on, not the facts and certainly not the truth. That is why we are hearing stories from US field grade officers who complain about how poorly the media, who was suposedly on our side, report the actual events of the day. Sure the medai will report on dead Americans, but they don't seem to want to report too much on what the living ones are doing to win the war terrorism. They only want to report on dead Americans. You want conconvince me otherwise? Do this then: Require every American reporter to stand morning formation with the closest unit in the field, including saluting the flag, if there is one available -- every morning, no photos, no nothing; just a simple show of respect for our miltary and the good they are performing. Or, in the alternative, if that is too much, they can always film themselves flushing a Koran down the toilet/latrine... then maybe a night on the town in Fallujah. ;o) |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-05-22 14:08 |
| #2 Dead Americans are NEWS (at least to the MSM). Consider two potential news stories - a bus with eighty six people plunges off a road in India killing them all - or - the police shoot a bank robbing perp after a high speed chase. Which story is on page one and which is one gets a paragraph on E-56 next to the tire ads. US, or US-related news always takes precedence over foreign news. Local news always takes precedence over national news. And making Bush, Republicans, conservatives, or Christians look bad, always takes precedence over everything (including the truth). |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-05-22 13:42 |
| #1 I hope it is not impertinent to observe that the media's demeanor towards terrorism bears more than a passing resemblance to cheap cowardice; but though outwardly similar it really springs from a high-minded idealism, deep courage and profound learning. Or so I hope. The media's fascination with Abu Ghraib and their lingering yawn over Beslan is a definitive vector to their sympathies, I agree. But more than that it is the persistent egomania that characterizes a socialist or a communist's view of others they maintain, that has infected the media at the highest levels. Our media loves to report about dead Americans. It doesn't matter if they are military or if they are civilian; they love dead Americans. And if they can create the conditions that will eventually lead to the deaths of even more Americans, our media will embrace that element as though it a bnous from the boss. Call it depraved or call my views of them depraved and cynical, but I have seen scant evidence on a consistent basis that could lead me to conclude otherwise. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-05-22 13:23 |