Posted on 12/05/2005 7:03:59 AM PST by conservativecorner
This is a war. You can be unhappy about it and sit it out. That's ok. That's what a democracy is about. You're right to dissent. You can criticize the war and vote for another government that will leave the field of battle. That's ok too. That's also what a democracy about. But while an elected government and the young men and women it sends into battle are engaged with a ruthless enemy in the field, you can't work to cripple their efforts , or do the work of the enemy side and expect the rest of us not to regard you as a saboteur and a Judas and an enemy within.
These thoughts are provoked by the lead story in Saturday's Los Angeles Times and then by a missing lead in the paper the next day. On Saturday the lead story headline in the Times was "Bomb Kills 10 Marines At Fallouja." What kind of a lead story is this? We're in a war. What's the big news that ten soldiers have died? And by one roadside bomb? It could happen any day -- even on the last of a war before a peace. There is no story. This is hardly news. It's like running a headline that today 110 people were killed in car accidents. Actually that's a fact (or a ballpark fact -- if 55,000 Americans die every year from car wrecks). But no one writes headlines about it because it's not news. It's life as we know it. As long as there are millions of cars on the roads and they're driven by people like us, there are going to be accidents and deaths. So too with war.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
So, if ten Marines are killed no one cares? And it's not news...to anyone.
Whether David likes it or not, it is news. Does it deserve a gigantic headline? Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on the circumstances surrounding the incident.
The bigger question is, "Why are the MSM so obviously biased against Republicans and selectively report only the things that will damage Republicans?
The answer is that the MSM have a dog in this hunt. They are losing market share to other forms if information dissemination, like this one, Fox News, talk radio, etc.
The MSM would clearly like more legislation like the Campaign Finance Reform law, which limit information flow through channels other than their own. Obviously, this is much more difficult to accomplish with Republicans in control.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the MSM are selectively reporting the news in a way to reduce Republican majorities and increase the MSM's chances to accomplish through legislation a return to their previous dominance that the free market no longer allows them.
What this malicious subterfusion conceals is the fact that while the Los Angeles Times and the Democratic leadership were busily sabotaging the American war on terror, the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld team was destroying Al-Qaeda as we knew it. Yes, today Al-Qaeda may be a decentralized collection of local terrorist cells, as the Times claims. But that is because America has taken the offensive, killed Al-Qaeda's leaders and driven them into hiding, destroyed much of its infrastructure and reduced its capabilities so dramatically that the United States has been safe from terrorist attack for more than four years.And shame on you Democrats and journalists for working so tirelessly in support of the enemy of the people of the United States of America.Thank you George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the thousands of men and women under arms who have had to fight a war against a ruthless enemy with half the country either on the sidelines or actively stabbing them in the back.
Excellent article. And yes, the LA Times are a bunch of traitors. They should be rotting in jail.
It is news when this happens. Major combat ended a couple of years ago. Ten Marines were killed as a result of terrorist activity. That should be reported.
And, yes, I do support the war.
It undermines the troop's morale. My son is a soldier. He will die someday and it will be a tragedy to me regardless of the way he dies whether it be in a car accident, sickness or old age. Should he give his life for our country it will be no more a tragedy.
In the words of Patrick Henry, "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.... If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged!"
Down with those in our own country that plot our failure. I hate them with a hate beyond rage because they threaten the very success of our nation. We need to determine who our enemy is, and fight them with a vengence.
Good for your son. I am sure you are very, very proud. I have lots of family and friends in Iraq who wear the uniform and they're doing a crackerjack job.
Having ten Marines killed as a result of terrorist activity, years after major combat ended in the country, is news.
I wish the MSM would also report on all of the very good things that are happening in Iraq.
Unfortunately, good news does not sell. I am afraid that is a fact, however much I wish it was not the case.
I thank your son for his service, and you for your thoughts.
You don't understand. It is news, but it is a part of a big picture: these soldiers were on a mission and the progress or lack of that mission is the news. How the battle goes is what's imprtant to the news, or should be.
I was a boy in WWII and I remember the news of the war. It was ground and enemy captured by the Allies. The casualties were subordinated to this and might at the end of the article or on an inside page.
The over-emphasis of our relatively small losses is anti-war, anti-victory and anti American!
I sent this to the wrong name; sorry! It was to: Conservative corner.
No! It was to RexBeach!
I agree that we should know about 1, 10, etc. of our troops when they are killed, but we also must know how many we kill and how effective we are.
The LA Times is showing all-out bias by placing BIG NEWS such as the death of Abu Hamza Rabia on page three, especially after having to hear forever, "Where is Osama? We have abandoned the fight in Afghanistan, our real enemy, to fight in Iraq, a made-up enemy."
The LA Times cannot run away from the bias nametag when this quote appears in what should be a good news story:
"[Unamed] experts cautioned that the killing was likely to have a limited effect because Al Qaeda is less a hierarchchical organization and more a movement that can carry out missions without directions from top leaders."
Check my earlier posts about this. I state that I would like this portion of the conflict, the killing of Marines, reported in the totality of everything that is going on in Iraq; and a lot of good things are going on there.
When troops get killed in that number, more than two years after major combat has ended, and it is the result of terrorist activity, i.e., a road-side bomb probably supplied by the Iranians, it is most defintely worthy of reportage.
The problem is what you state quite accurately: It is a piece of a much larger story which is not being reported.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I do understand, believe me.
Soldiers dying is NOT news. Soldiers dying is INTELLEGENCE, and using it against the enemies' morale is a legitimat tactic. Therefore the LA Times is an enemy combatant, and should be scooted off to Gitmo immediately.
Like hell you do! "Major" combat makes exactly "what" difference to treason?
I do support the war.
You have completely misunderstood everything that I have posted previously.
The only reason the Times ran the commonplace death of a few soldiers in war as its lead story is that the Times' editors want America to cut and run from the battle for Iraqi freedom and let the Zarqawi terrorists take over the country. So they are conducting . . . [the] psychological warfare campaign against the war . . . [that] the enemy would do if it had the means.The bigger question is, "Why are the MSM so obviously biased against Republicans and selectively report only the things that will damage Republicans?
Fundamentally, I think that Republicans represent the people who actually get things done, and Establishment Journalism represents itself. Represents, that is, superficiality and arrogance. Superficiality because of its deadline pressure, and arrogance because it promotes the conceit that cheap talk is more significant than action.And whenever the Republican "coalition of the competent" threatens to get PR credit for actually accomplishing some mission - even a mission that Establishment Journalism promoted, but especially a mission that the Establishment Journalism did not promote - Establishment Journalism attacks.
Democratic politicians merely profit by the action of Establishment Journalism, more or less as an adjuct to it.
"Major combat ended a couple of years ago"
The war BEGAN only a couple of years ago!! The MSM would like you to think this has been dragging on forever. It hasn't. Our men and women (and President) have accomplished great things in an incredibly short time. That there are still terrorist attacks going on should not be front page news at this stage--it's to be expected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.