Skip to comments.Double Standards: Bandits Are Good, Terrorists Are Bad (CNN calls Chechen terrorists "rebels")
Posted on 10/27/2002 1:55:44 PM PST by FairOpinion
Double Standards: Bandits Are Good, Terrorists Are Bad
For CNN, and actually not only for CNN, the Russian Government and Chechen rebels are almost the same thing.
Already several hours after Baraev captured the audience of the musical Nord-Ost, the main site of Chechen militants kavkaz.org became practically inaccessible. The reason why the main information calibre of the terrorists broke down so soon is easy to guess. Just after the start of the events, the universally known TV company CNN started to add two links to all its publications about the Moscow tragedy bringing to Russian Information Centre (official Internet resource of the Russian Government) and to the site kavkaz.org.
It is very curious how they characterize the links: Russian Government: Official Information and Pro-rebel Website: kavkaz.org.
Now, about the word rebel. It is too weak and too respectful. It is a traditional characteristic of revolutionary parties. Irish separatists are rebels, soldiers of General Washington in time when American colonies battled for their independence from Great Britain were rebels as well. However, brothers-in-arms of bin Laden are terrorists. Do you see the difference?
If you do not trust me, you can look it up. It would be enough just to look through a few CNN articles about bin Laden.
Chechen gunmen are still rebels to CNN. For example the article Theatre Gunmen Fire at Escapers. The author never calls the Chechens the politically incorrect word terrorist; however, there are anti-terrorist forces in the article.
So, how do the US journalists call the Baraev killers? Very blandly: Chechen gunmen, Chechen guerrillas, Chechen rebels, and finally Chechen dissidents. Though, these Chechens are never called killers or terrorists.
The most troublesome thing is that CNN is not alone in its sympathy for Caucasian bandits: The Associated Press - Chechen rebels, Seattle Post-Intelligencer - Chechen rebels and Chechen guerrillas. Why? We know that the hostage-taking in Moscow and the terrorist acts of September 11 in New-York and Washington are links of one chain. Vladimir Putin said directly: the terrorist act in Moscow was planned outside of Russia.
If this is so, and Americans admit it, why do well-known TV and radio channels continue to have sympathy for the Chechens. For, the question is not about the Russian President who was first presented his condolences to the US after the September 11 tragedy. The question is that here is about double standards: there are good rebels and bad terrorists.
Today, the US representative to the Asian and Pacific Countries summit, Lawrence Greenwood, said that the US considers the hostage-taking in Moscow as a form of terrorism. He said that the US government agrees that the attack on the theatre in Moscow could be characterized as a terrorist act. Yes, we can see here that this is a form of terrorism, Greenwood said. Following the US leaderships logic, the terrorists are under US TV and radio channels patronage. Is it a rebellion?
They think that "fairness" is treating Israel the same as Palestinian terrorists, treating us the same way as Bin Laden's terrorists, treating Russia the same way as the Chechen Islamic terrorists. How pathetic that they don't see that THERE IS right and wrong, good and evil, and they are NOT all the same, and their reporting legitimizedes terrorism.
While I know that honest, unbiased and fair reporting seem to be concepts difficult for the Los Angeles Times to grasp, I am still curious as to why, in reporting about the Chechyn terrorists who captured 800 hostages at the theater in Moscow, they are referred to as "Militants" or "Rebels", but no mention is made that they are Moslem terrorists and that there were several Arabs among them from Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Is the Times too concerned about not offending people that it has to color the truth? Whatever happened to objective and truthful reporting?
Chechnya is located in the Caucasus Mountains. People from that region are referred to as Caucasions, or Kafkazi in the native language.
Blacks, oddly were not called Africanoids from their land of origin but Negriods based on color (again because there was no understanding of true genetics/DNA) and Mongoloids becaue all Chinese looking people must have originated from the more primitive Mongols.
Grabage science all of it but the classifications stuck.
To say Caucasian is correct in terms of Georgians and Chechens and Armenians, etc.
Merriam-Webster dictionary - terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.
Night of fun turned to horror
When the audience of around 700 took their seats for the second act of a popular musical at a Moscow theatre on October 23, they had no idea they were about to become part of a deadly drama. A group of about 40 Chechen separatists took over the building, demanding an end to war in Chechnya, and threatening to kill everyone inside.
I sent them a little e-mail about this, as follows:
"Rebels, separatists, and hostage-takers" are words used by CNN on the air and on its web site to describe the Chechen terrorists. I find CNN's choice of words especially "interesting" because, when I read an article in The Telegraph today by Christina Lamb and Ben Aris, for example, they wrote that "a senior Western diplomat said, There were definitely Arab terrorists in the building with links to al-Qa'eda.' According, also, to The Telegraph, "the Russians will now want to know how much help the Chechens received from bin Laden's organisation." It would be incredulous to believe that CNN overlooked this "little" piece of information. My opinion: at least The Telegraph prints the truth, in all its ugliness.
CNN's credibility of "fair" or "neutral" reporting have long been repudiated. CNN's continued "tainting the truth" affirms this repudiation remains justified. CNN's anti-conservative, pro-Democrat, views are transparent to all but yourselves. I suggest CNN, its anchors, and staff read "The Emperor's New Suit" by Hans Christian Andersen; it might be an enlightening read.
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.