|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Subject: NPR--The U.S. attack on Iraq |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ali Abunimah via Dale Wertz
(No verified email address) |
17 Feb 2001
|
Mr. Abunimah's letter to National Public Radio concisely critiques the pitiful job that NPR is doing these daysin its coverage of the Middle East. It would seem that there is a lot of duplicated effort in government-funded news. I should think that NPR could just replay Pentagon briefings if they can't do a better job of objectively approaching news such as this, since they seem to be able to do no more than repeat the official story. Mr. Abuminah's website looks like a good source of an alternative view point on the Middle Esat at this time of generalized crisis.
Mike Lehman |
To: atc (at) npr.org
Subject: NPR--The U.S. attack on Iraq
February 16, 2001
Dear NPR News,
The Pentagon press office will be delighted by your coverage on All
Things Considered this afternoon of the latest attack on Iraq.
The 4PM GMT newscast reported President Bush's statement about the
attack, followed by a soundbite of a Pentagon spokesman stating that the United
States attacked "five command and control nodes," whatever on earth that
is supposed to mean.
The newscast ended with the sentence "Baghdad media are reporting that
some civilians were hurt in the attacks but there is no confirmation of
that."
Such journalistic scepticism is admirable, of course, except that you do
not apply it at all to claims from the Pentagon which on numerous
occasions in the past, oh say thirty years, have proven to be utter,
contemptible lies. In the Q&A betweem host Linda Wertheimer and reporter
Tom Gjelten, Linda would ask things like "What do we know about the
targets?" and Tom read back exactly what the Pentagon spokesman
said. Linda never asked, "do you have any confirmation of that, Tom?" It
is just assumed that The United States Government Always Tells The
Truth, Especially When Arabs Are Concerned.
So Tom reported "All of these attacks are what the Pentagon calls
self-defence measures that are meant to take out Iraqi air defence
facilities that are hitting U.S. aircraft."
Really? How many U.S aircraft have been "hit" by anything the Iraqis
have fired since the Gulf War?
When Linda asked about the targets, Tom answered (again relaying only
the information in the Pentagon briefing as if it were confirmed), "We know
that five targets were, four of them outside the no-fly zones, one north
of Baghdad, three south of Baghdad."
Finally, Tom reassured us that: "The targets that were chosen were part
of that anti-aircraft defence system. They were also chosen Pentagon
officials say because they were separated from civilian areas which
meant that the risk of collateral damage should have been less."
"Collateral damage." Who invented that terminology?
Tom did not volunteer any information at all about the reported civilian
victims, nor did Linda bother to ask. And neither when Tom referred to
the 7 or 8 previous times the United States bombed Iraq this year did he
report that civilians had been killed and injured and livestock of Iraqi
farmers destroyed.
Throughout, Tom and Linda referred repeatedly to the "no-fly zones," at
no point informing listeners that these are unilaterally imposed creations
of the United States with no standing in international law. Nor did they
ask why American pilots needed to be protected by bombing a country half way
around the world. After all, the safest way to protect American pilots
would be to not send them to violate the airspace of a sovereign nation,
bombing it, killing innocent civilians and destroying their property.
Quite misleadingly, in the introduction to the Q&A, Wertheimer said
"President Bush, who's in Mexico today...said Saddam Hussein has to
understand that the United States expects him to abide by the agreements
he signed after the Gulf War." Then, immediately cut to Bush saying "we
will enforce the no-fly zone south and north. Our intention is to make
sure the world is as peaceful as possible."
This juxtaposition clearly suggested that the "no fly zones" were part
of the Gulf War ceasefire resolutions and agreements. They were not. They
were unilaterally imposed by President Bush in April 1991. Iraq has
never signed any agreement recognizing them and nor are they contained in any
U.N. resolutions.
You've had ten years to get this stuff right. How much longer do you need?
Sincerely,
Ali Abunimah |
See also:
http://www.abunimah.org
|
|
Is Saddam Hussein the only person in Iraq? |
by Nancy
nancydietrich (nospam) juno.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
23 Feb 2001
|
Personal rant: Ok, I'm probably preaching to the choir, but:
If you listened to these reports from the mainstream media concerning the bombing/sanctions on Iraq, you'd think that Iraq is this deserted island w/ Saddam Hussein in the middle of it! They never talk about the Iraqi citizens, it's always "Saddam Hussein." S.H. is probably the only one NOT affected by the bombing/sanctions, while the millions of citizens (yes, there are people over there)are the ones that suffer.
Anyway, thanks for pointing out that NPR isn't as liberal as they & a lot of people think they are.
|
