...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

December 02, 2005

Another Anti-MSM Post

Ten Marines were killed by a roadside bomb near Fallujah today. This is tragic, obviously, and i'm exasperated that we haven't killed all them fuckers yet. But really, it only takes a couple of lowlifes to plant these bombs, and how many are discovered and destroyed without killing anybody? Yet everytime the enemy gets lucky, the anti-war media (who are on the side of the enemy) use the event to hammer another wedge into our resolve.

Here, Reuters Foundation Alertnet (i'm not sure what that is, but their slogan seems to be "Alerting Humanitarians to Emergencies," whatever that means.) chose to highlight the latest casualties by celebrating some past terrorist successes in Iraq.

Surprise, people die in a war. Civilians die. Soldiers die. Marines die. It's how wars are fought and won and lost. i understand the political reasons for not focusing attention on enemy body counts. It wasn't really a good indicator in Vietnam either. But i do detect a little bit of glee in these left wing media outlets, whenever some of ours die. How about a little perspective? How about a list of the "Deadliest Incidents" for the terrorists since we began kicking their asses over there? That list would be much longer.

But since the media is on the side of the enemy, they wouldn't want to publicize anything that might hurt enemy morale, or boost our own.

Update: Not all of the media is on the side of the enemy. Thank goodness for the exceptions.

Via Sarah.

Posted by annika, Dec. 2, 2005 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annikapunditry


Last time i say a number of terrorists killed, it showed that we killed 40 of theirs to each one of our deaths.

Posted by: Jake on Dec. 2, 2005

I like to remember the burden that Lincoln carried until July 4th 1863 when the Union won two major battles in one day, Gettysburg & Vicksburg. Until then all of the war news had been damned ugly for the yankees. As you know, Lincoln didn't think that he was going to win the election of 1864, and it was the overwhelming support of the Army that put him back in office.

Posted by: Casca on Dec. 2, 2005

Don't kid yourself about the MSM being in some kind of deep woo-woo conspiracy. They just don't have the time. Last quarter Knight-Ridder implemented yet another 15% cutback on staffing in newsrooms. Next quarter, they're looking at a $350 mill cutback to please Wall Street while they try to unload their media properties.

This, after years of already cutting staffs to the bone. Reporters no longer do any actual reporting. They don't have the time. They are churning out "content" (as opposed to news) as fast as they can or they are out the door. So whatever it is that appears in the MSM is something that came straight up from a news source ... in this case, from a Pentagon spokesman.

Any detection of "glee" is on you - you don't have to try to call the families of the people killed to get a comment from them. Reporting on people dying is a lot like having to be the guy that comes to the house with the bible in hand to break the news to the next of kin. There's nothing gleeful about it. But it has to be done. The stories about the soldiers killed are the last notices that these men and women will get in this world. Would it be better to just ignore them, pretend that they don't even exist? How much of a Big Deal do you or do you not make about the ultimate sacrifice, the final price that American servicemen pay?

Posted by: Wordyeti on Dec. 2, 2005


Maybe there is no conspiracy, but the results are the same in the media because they have black listed conservatives for the last 25 years.

Plus the media executives currently in power were all radicalized by the Vietnam War. This war made them hate Americans, America and the military.

They only hired people who believed in advocacy journalism. Thus suppressing or distorting the news was acceptable as long as the end result brought the left to power.

You say that the Wall Street is forcing these layoffs. No it is the customers that are forcing these layoffs. The customers are tired of having every page of the newspaper insulting their intelligence by engaging in news suppression and distortion. They are tired of seeing every news story looking like an editorial. Their contempt for media people is reflected in the polls as well as their refusal to buy a contemptible product.

The people who work in the media have only themselves to blame. They put out a product that people were not stupid enough to buy. The free market has spoken, and it has kicked media in the ass to the applause of hundreds of millions of people.

Posted by: Jake on Dec. 2, 2005

The reason Iraq War coverage is such crap has to do with a multitude of causes working together: pack journalism, entrenched bias, the generally low IQ of most journalists, laziness, cowardice, and lack of resources brought on by selling a mediocre product in an era of intense competition.

Posted by: annika on Dec. 2, 2005

Nothing sexier than a smart blond.

Posted by: Casca on Dec. 3, 2005


Not to disuade CASCA form his fantasies about you but sexy as you may be, it's you IQ that is in doubt when you suggest that the opponants of this criminal involvement in Iraq are rooting for the enemy (who ever that may be since Iraq was never actually the ememy until the MSM said it 10,000 times) Yours is a simplistic, unlearned approach to a difficult dilema. How do good, well meaning people-people who cherish this country and all that it has stood for, watch as their forces are sent to do unspeakable things (things you casually call fighting a war) to a country that, although run by a terribel dictator we loved for a while, are decent people cought in the cross hairs of a dimwitted mis-directed foreign policy administrated by liars, crooks and cluless neo-consertative ideologues whosw agenda has yet to be unearthed. You my dear would do well to stop the silly knee jerk conservative mouthing of the baseless underpinnings and biases against the media and smell the coffee, get serious about caring for our soldiers, our national security and stature. All are suffering with this policy and dumb belief that these "insurgents" are anything other than the by-product of our intervention.

Posted by: strawman on Dec. 3, 2005


You, my dear, would do well to stop mouthing your silly unprogressive views and go back to working in the kitchen while us liberal adults try to lead the nation to greatness and fight for your gender's rights, or you can at least wait in my bedroom to do something more...ahem...productive until you start re-affirming the proper views that we share, little lady.

Remember, we're the ones that respect women and minorities the most.

Posted by: Spanky on Dec. 3, 2005

Interesting note that never seems to be mentioned in the news: Major K in his blog notes this about US forces: "(We) have been asked to supervise or arbitrate at every level from neighborhood to national repeatedly... Whether Sunni, Shia or Kurd, the presence of Americans at neighborhood council meetings, disputes and detention facilities is not only favored, but is often greeted with a sigh of relief. The Iraqis know they will get fair treatment from us because ethnic group, tribal affiliation and political power do not weigh upon our measurement of justice. "


He also notes:
"This brings two things to mind. Firstly, the average Iraqi will often (not always) trust us more than other Iraqis outside of their family when it comes to fair and humane treatment. Secondly, for all of the people at home and in the media (my emphasis, not Major K's) that think we are such a widely hated and mistrusted "occupying force," I would like to know why they think the Iraqis hate their honest broker.

Also, the troops have the same complaint Annika does about the news folks:

"As one Marine put it, it's like if I spent $7.99 for a slice of pizza and the headlines the next day read, "Marine Out Eight Bucks!"


Wordyeti: In all due respect, no one's ever suggested that the media ignore US casualty reportage. Those are indeed important; we must konw what's happening. All many of us have asked for is balance and perspective, such as reportage of the successes, the safe areas (yes, they do exist), the Iraqis who do trust the US presence (see Major K's link above). That's all.

Posted by: E.M.H. on Dec. 4, 2005


My dear boy, I think it is pretty weird that you suggest that I have transgressed some PC boundary or violated the feminist credo of my liberal masters by the use of the simply condescending "my dear” while the men on this blog are sniffing around Annika's feet looking to dress her in Blahnik's, refer to themselves as "her bitch" (Mr. macho Casca) and I believe have affectionately called her "little lady" in the context of her shooting fetish and you have a problem with me? Let's also not forget that our hostess engages in a little painted toe wiggling of her own.

Not for nothing, the fact that you choose to address this possible slight to our host, as we discuss the sickening slide into anarchy occurring in Iraq and the death of 10 more Marines is indicative of something far sicker in your core than my PC-lessness.

Posted by: strawman on Dec. 4, 2005

Hey, I'm not disagreeing with you. Iraq is a chaotic mess and we need to get out of there as soon as possible. It will also be good for our cause(which is ultimately good for America) when we can keep pointing at the epitome of the unprogressives' failure in Iraq for the next few decades of elections.

No one will ever think about putting a conservative into nationally-elected office again when everyone sees terror attacks originating from Iraq on our soil. We will clean up the Repubs' mess and bring greatness to our fellow countrymen for generations. We will finally restore our nation's reputation and bring back the good feelings from overseas towards our country. It will be a wonderful world.

Posted by: Spanky on Dec. 4, 2005


WOnderful world may be a bit of a stretch but I'll settle for throwing the scum out.

Posted by: strawman on Dec. 5, 2005

Send them bombs not boys. Kind of hard to have a road side attack on B-52.

Posted by: Eddythedancingbear on Dec. 5, 2005