Posted on 10/27/2005 6:18:41 PM PDT by freedomdefender
In war, the first order of business is to know whose side you are on, and who is on yours. In the case of the war to defeat the terrorists and establish a democratic government in Iraq, the answer is not always easy to come by. Take the American press. Take the Los Angeles Times. On Wednesday, October 26, 2005, the main headline spread across two columns of Times was “U.S. Death Toll In Iraq Hits 2,000.” The sub-headline began “Antiwar protesters plan demonstrations…” Two photos centered at the top of the front page showed President Bush declaring that “Iraq has made incredible political progress from tyranny to liberation to national elections” and an “anti-war” activist lighting 2,000 candles for the dead. Underneath the two photos a three-column story headlined “A Deadly Surge” began, “A year and a half ago, at the first anniversary of the U.S. occupation of Iraq, the death rate for American troops accelerated. Since then, none of the political milestones or military strategies proclaimed by U.S. officials have succeeded in slowing the death toll.”
The article on the death toll continues into a full two-page spread inside the paper, which further details the body count, including a half-page chart of the dying and a map of the United States showing where each of the dead soldiers lived. In other words, let’s bring the war home. Facing the charts and continuing the front page story the headline for reads “Fallouja Marks Divide.” The “divide” as the Times editors see it is not the battle of Fallouja which destroyed the main and only terrorist stronghold in Iraq and paved the way for democratic elections, but the “fact” that the death toll of American soldiers has only “accumulated” since Fallouja. As if this numbing repetition of a single fact which in itself has no significance (why not the 1999th death or the 2001st?) wasn’t enough, the Times has devoted another full page to continuing the “Deadly Surge” story (new headline: “US At Grim Milestone In Iraq War: 2000 Dead”) and a human interest column (“A Life Back In Flower When It Was Lost”) on one of the casualties. In all, the Times devoted 23 newspaper columns to a death toll which has no significance in itself and which is smaller in two years than the number of Americans who died in 10 minutes on 9/11.
Buried by the Times editors in a three-column story on page 6 (continued on p. 7) is the following item: “Iraq Charter Ratified by Big Margin in Final Tally.” What’s this? On the same day as an American volunteer was killed in Iraq, the final tallies of the vote on the new Iraqi constitution were reported. Here’s the news the Los Angeles Times worked so diligently to bury and subvert: Nearly seventy percent of the Iraqi people voted to endorse the most democratic constitution in the entire Muslim world -- and in the entire 1800 year history of Islam itself!
The margin of victory for the new Iraqi constitution was 4-1. Moreover, the majority of Sunnis who had boycotted the previous election, voted this time. This is huge news in itself. The Sunnis had oppressed the Shi’ites and Kurds for the previous forty years under the Saddam tyranny. They were a population sea in which the Sunni terrorists swam. But now they were voting in an election sponsored by the “occupiers” – the enemy, us. In other words, the news is that the majority of the population of a country whom every nay-sayer on the left has proclaimed to be incapable of supporting a democracy and resenting our “occupation” have now joined the political community that we have created in Iraq. Yes, the Sunnis rejected the constitution. By in voting they agreed to debate and haggle over its details – over the details of their new democracy -- in elections to come.
In other words, this was a victory for freedom in Iraq, a defeat for the terrorist opponents of America and democracy in Iraq, and a great boost for the security of Americans in the United States. Yet in reporting the events of October 26th, the editors of the Los Angeles Times (and – to be fair -- the New York Times and the rest of the American mainstream media) did their best to obscure these momentous facts and to spin them in the opposite direction.
In two years, with less loss of life than we suffered on 9/11, America has liberated 25 million Iraqis, ended the most heinous tyranny of the 21st Century, inflicted terrible defeats on our terrorist enemies, and created the first democracy in the history of Islam.
The words of the President – of America’s commander-in-chief – mocked by the Times are 100% correct: “Iraq has made incredible political progress from tyranny to liberation to national elections.” Thanks to George Bush and our men and women in arms. Yet the Los Angeles Times edition of October 26, 2005 is designed to make a mockery of his leadership and his words and to turn to Americans against the war for Iraqi freedom. What a shame. What a disgrace. What a tragedy for our nation.
Thanks for the pings. Horowitz is one of my favorites. He understands what's going on intellectually and by experience. His views have the teeth most of the journalists of the right lack.
Actually, it's a war between two cultures or civilizations. Each side has it's military forces. The west has a high tech military and the radical islamist has a low tech military. Because their's is low tech they primarily utilize human resources...............
I agree.
Amid all the noise of Plame and the SC stands the fact that Baghdad has been liberated from a medieval tyranny and a new Constitution has been adopted by the will of the people.
I don't think the U.S. necessarily wants to highlight this event precisely because it is so cataclysmic. The American military has achieved a monumental, historic success that is so overwhelming as to be ostentatious. We're supposed to walk softly while carrying the big stick.
Sometimes we stomp.
Buried. In the sand. Hidden until needed.
.
On a Day of Infamy, the Example was set in stone:
911 Lifesaving Hero RICK RESCORLA, R.I.P.
http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361
.
bttt
David Horowitz nailed it ~ Bump!
Indonesia is a democracy and has the most muslims of any nation in the world.
Turkey is a democracy and has a majority of muslims.
Either "the third democracy in the history of Islam" OR Horowitz was thinking something else.
Supposedly, Egypt, too, is a democracy with "president for life" Mubarak. (Same with Pakistan.)
But, you are correct. Indonesia & Turkey are democracies.
More than 2000 people die in any week from the carefully hidden side affects of prescription drugs, but the media make billions off of the advertising of these deliberately distributed poisons, so those deaths are not important.
Bump for Saturday Morning Reading. Thanks! :)
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.