Could exlain some disconnects between what Americans and Arabs perceive things. Of course, mostly it seems to have to do with programming by leaders seeking power.
Posted by: gorb ||
01/14/2008 05:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11124 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Why would I need to learn from the Arab media if I already listen to NPR?
How about the newspapers that printed "one in 40 Iraqis killed"? Anybody got a list of them? How on God's green earth could any reporter in Baghdad have missed THAT? The equivalent in this country would've been 7.5 million.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/14/2008 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The most startling thing I forgot. This was published in - are you sitting down - The Boston Globe.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/14/2008 14:18 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Soros should be stripped of his citizenship. He's an immigrant so its doable.
At last check, he still had an open arrest warrant out of France for his currancy speculation gambit. We should just honor any extradition request, though I think he maybe out of this country as well.
MR. RUSSERT: If General Petraeus says, "Senator, in September you called the surge the suspension of belief. It has worked, and you know its worked"let me finish"you can see on the ground. Im saying to you, Senator, or president-elect Clinton, dont destroy Iraq. Its working, the surge is working. Keep troops there just a few more months to get this reconciliation complete."
SEN. CLINTON: ...The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do what they should have been doing all along.
Nevermind the fact that she and the others have opposed the surge the whole time.
Or the fact she disgracefully told General David Petraeus, to his face and on the record, that to believe his progress report on the success of the surge in Iraq would "require a willing suspension of disbelief."
Or the fact she voted against a bill expressing support for General Petraeus.
Or the fact she and the others voted against a bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yeah, in spite of all of that, SHE deserves credit for the success of the troop surge.
#1
It is my belief (and prediction) that unless the eventual Democratic nominee comes out and starts to praise the surge and the resulting positives for America-- and the rest of the world, frankly-- the Democrats will lose the election. They have hedged themselves between Iraq and a hard place and unless they start turning things around very quickly, they are likely to remain there.
The Democrats' problem is of their own design. They hedged their bets against the war in Iraq some time ago, believing that eventual military failure over there would lead to electoral victory over here. It wasn't entirely out of stupidity on their part, as things were as bad as bad can get at one point. This was readily reflected in public opinion at the time, with polls in support of the war at an all-time low and polls in favor of a withdrawal at an all-time high.
After all, the Democrats claimed, when we call for an end to the war, when we vote to cut-off funding for the troops, we're only carrying out the wishes of the American people. If only.
They knew exactly what they were doing. Which was nothing less than engineering our defeat as a means to an end. An end which, as their anti-war drum beat grew increasingly louder and irrational, became ever more obvious. It never had anything to do with what is best for America and everything to do with what's best for the Democratic party. It was their lust-for-power-induced myopia that has led them to this point and they have no one to blame but themselves (like that will EVER happen).
Instead of thinking of what's best for America (which is so undeniably obvious it doesn't merit defining here), they opted instead to promote and endorse failure in the name of political expediency. While this may have provided short-term electoral gains for the Democrats, in the long term this strategy will be their downfall. Because it makes no difference whether you are a simple citizen or an elected politican, an enemy or an ally; when you bet against America, you lose. Simple as that.
Prof. Barry Rubin - 1/13/2008
What if a major news story is made up? What if it's just Hamas propaganda without being true? And what if this story is repeated around the world? Of course, nowadays it's not hard to imagine such things happening. When one gets to specific statistics, however, it should not be too easy to lie and get away with it.
But it is.
The story in question here is by Ibrahim Barzak, Israel cuts fuel, electricity to Gaza, January 7, 2008. Like all individual articles it might be of limited importance by itself but it is an example of a phenomenon which has grown to be almost daily.
In the version run by the Philadelphia Inquirer it carries the following subheadline: People have only a third of winter needs, said an official. The intent is to halt rocket attacks.
It is important to emphasizedo a computer search if you likethat this article has been published and broadcast around the world by huge media outlets, not to mention websites.
And the main pointand impactof the story is a fabrication.
Here is the lead:
With winter deepening, Gazans will be forced to live without lights and electric heaters for eight hours a day because Israel has cut fuel supplies to the territory's only electric plant in half, Gaza's top energy official warned yesterday .
Yesterday, Kanan Obeid, chairman of Gaza's Hamas-run energy authority, said Gaza now has only 35 percent of the power its 1.5 million residents need.
Well, perhaps Gazas top energy official said that but it is a lie. AP and the media that depend on APfell for this lie. Or perhaps the author and institution are not so innocent because there is no Israeli source provided for the main issues at stake. When I investigated the story it took me five minutes to get an official who totally denied the claims made by it.
Here is the true story, so obscured by the AP article that one can only believe the distortion was deliberate.
1. Gazas electricity comes about 70 percent from Israel (the article says 60 percent though this changes nothing about the analysis that follows), 5 percent from Egypt, and 20 percent from Gaza itself.
2. There has been very little cutback in the electricity provided directly by Israel.
3. The only reduction is in supplying diesel fuel, some of which is used in the Gaza generating plant, though more is used by trucks.
4. Thus if the diesel fuel supply was cut back by half, the Gaza generator would lose less than half of its supply, even less if the Hamas government made it a priority. At most, the electricity supply would be cut no more than 10 percentnot 65 percent.
5. Note also that while it sounds rather horrible not to have electricity eight hours a day, this merely would mean that you dont use electricity when you are sleeping. It should also be added that winter in Gaza is not exactly like Maine.
6. In addition, Barzak tries, and no doubt succeeds, in fooling readers by stating in passing: The power outages, which will rotate across Gaza . In other words, at worst each sector would only have temporary power reductions, taking turns, rather thanas the article states earliereveryone having eight hours without electricity.
After trying to convince readers that people in Gaza are suffering greatly from existing cuts, the article slips into making its case by talking about things that have not happened yet. The Israeli government wants small cutbacks in the electricity directly applied to the Gaza Strip. Even if these cuts were madeand this may not happenthe result would still fall very far short of the claims made about huge reductions and tremendous suffering.
The article continues:
Israel said the purpose of the cutback was to nudge Palestinians to call on extremists to stop their daily rocket attacks on southern Israel. But Gazans contended they have become targets of unfair punishment, and 10 human-rights groups took that argument to the Israeli Supreme Court.
Note that while, technically, Israels motive is presentedso the AP can claim to be balancedwe are quickly told that this claim is untrue. Israels statements are questioned; Hamass statements are accepted as fact.
The point here is to avoid telling readers three other things as well:
1. Israel is a remarkable democracy where even wartime actions against an enemy openly declaring an intention to kill all its people and carries out daily attempts at terror attacks are fairly adjudicated in court.
2. Israel is still supplying directly and indirectly the vast majority of Gazas power despite the war being waged against it by a regime there which sponsors cross-border attacks, holds an Israeli soldier as hostage, and proclaims that it will never accept Israels existence.
3. If the Hamas regime were to change its policy there would be no sanctions at all.
The articles goal, therefore, is to muster support for Hamas within the Gaza Strip and to mobilize forces throughout the world against sanctions. That may be the job of Hamas but is it the task for the world news media and Associated Press? Instead, this article is not reporting news but attempting to indoctrinate readers in the belief that Palestinians are suffering, Israel is responsible, and Israels excuses for doing so are false.
But it is this article that is false by claiming Israeli activities have reduced Gazas electricity by two-thirds.
Oh, by the way, on January 11, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said that the restrictions on even diesel fuel oil would be lifted. So residents of the Gaza Strip will get everything necessary for 100 percent of their usual electricity production.
While rocket attacks, attempted terrorist operations, and incitement continue, Israel will provide power for Hamass offices, broadcasts calling for the killing of all Israelis, and arms workshops. This, we are told by too much of the media, is the way things are supposed to be according to morality and international law.
Prof. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary university. His new book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan).
#2
Shit. You mean they haven't cut these leeches off ??? I was so happy to have heard the good news. Now I'm crushed to hear that it's mere falsehood. Please make it so Ehud.
#3
we are living under a propaganda machine that is better than that operated in Germany in 1938 in that it has global reach.
The MSM has dropped all pretence and is doing it openly - and they are successful. Until there is another news source, they will continue to be successful in hiding the threat of Islam, hindering American interests world-wide and effecting the national and local elections.
Posted by: anonymous5089 ||
01/14/2008 10:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
I'd say let him speak out now and forewarn the idiots while he still can. I'm not at all certain he still can in France. If the Muzz is focused "on the end of time", I say yippeee, let's help them find it. I'd like to end time for all of them. Let's start with Pakland. How about a few thousand megatons on target tomorrow morning ?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
