04
Mar
More Bombs Bursting In Air
*WAS A TERROR CHIEF CAPTURED?
*MTV REJECTS ANTI-WAR AD
*THE MEDIA AND THE MOVEMENT
OFFICE SPACE NEEDED. In New York City, reality is spelled realty. MediaChannel and Globalvision are being forced to relocate as the corporatization and Disneyfication of Times Square marches on. We urgently need leads on about 2500-3500 square feet of affordable office space on the Island of Manhattan. Help! Write Dissector@medichannel.org
My day began with “breaking news” on the BBC, three bomb blasts on southern islands by guerilla groups, said to be either Muslim separatists or communists. (We haven’t heard about the commies in a long time) CNN and Fox seemed asleep at the switch on this one as was the BBC anchor who spoke of a Christian holiday–only to be corrected by his correspondent–who explained it was a mostly Muslin region. Give them credit for at least trying to get outside the THERE IS ONLY ONE STORY, AND ITS NAME IS “SHOWDOWN IRAQ.” Yes, there is still an under-covered world out there that most of the US media ignores–except when they report on what Washington wants them to report.
Turkey all but disappeared from the news after Saturday’s Parliamentary vote. There were reports that some US war cargo ships are already sailing out to the Gulf — to Kuwait, the liberated land that loves us. Our man in Istanbul, Adam McConnel, says not all the troops are leaving despite the vote: “NTV reported last night that the U.S. started to build structures in the port area at Iskenderun. Likewise, CNN Turk reported (accompanied by footage) that the U.S. military inspected land and storage facilities it plans to rent near the SE Turkish city of Silopi. Apparently the U.S. military feels that it is in Turkey for an extended stay, no matter what the Turkish parliament says. CNN Turk reported today that there is an increasing likelihood of a new U.S. troop-basing motion being introduced to the Turkish parliament next week.”
IS THERE MORE SHAKING ON THE SHEIKH?
CNN was buzzing with news that the Al Qaeda biggie said to be captured in Pakistan has been transferred to US custody and flown to Afghanistan for “interrogation.” Fox Newsies gleefully expressed the hope that this will mean that Osama will soon be in captivity. No mention of some questions that have been raised about this “arrest of Khailid Sheikh Mohammad or what “interrogation’ in Afghanistan really means.
First, on the arrest: Take a chill pill, says Robert Fisk of the Independent. There may be more here than meets the eye: He cites a “Taliban source”–this means the real Taliban but “source” is supposed to cover the fact that the old Afghan regime still exists — who claimed Mohammed “is still with us and in our protection and we challenge the United States to prove their claim.”
“By this stage, it looked like a case of the �whoops’ [sic] school of journalism: a good story that just might be totally untrue.
“Not least because the last post known to be held by the Kuwaiti with a Pakistani passport was media adviser to the marriage of Osama bin Laden’s son in Kandahar in January, 2001. Then there was the slow revelation that the man whose arrest was described by White House spokesman Ari Fleischer as “a wonderful blow to inflict on Al Qaeda,” had been handed over to Pakistani authorities (if indeed he had been handed over) by the ISI, the Pakistani Interservices Intelligence � for whom Mohammed used to work.
“Like the man accused of arranging the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, Mohammed was an ISI asset; indeed, anyone who is �handed over’ by the ISI these days is almost certainly a former (or present) employee of the Pakistani agency whose control of Taliban operatives amazed even the Pakistani government during the years before 2001.”
“HE’S A BIT SLOW”�.
This arrest– coming just a Democratic critics of the Administration have been complaining that the war on OBL is suffering because of the focus on Iraq–is just too perfect. Is it true? If so, it argues that old-fashioned detective work may be more effective than the bombs-away strategy pursued in Afghanistan. Incidentally, the family of another man captured in that raid swears: “he was the only person arrested in a raid by 20 to 25 security men armed with Kalashnikov rifles on their house in Westridge, a middle-class area of Rawalpindi �”My brother was the only man in the house when the raid took place,” his sister Qudsia Khanum said.
“He was taken away while his wife and kids were herded into a room andlocked in.
“They didn’t even know when they took him… or where.
“My brother has never been involved in any bad things.
“Actually, he’s a bit slow, he’s not very clever, so I can’t even begin to imagine that he could be involved with any terrorist organization.
“He does not have any links with any terrorist organisation.
“They’re saying such strange things about him in the press.
INTERROGATION ANYONE?And finally, what’s “interrogation in Afghanistan”? In the case of the Sheikh, Fox says they also seized his children and will use their status as a way to press their captive. In a clearly related story, The New York Times reported that.”U.S. Military Investigating Death of Afghan in Custody.”The man in question is named Dilawar and he was 22,” Carlotta Gall of the Times who has done an excellent job of covering prisons there reports: “Two former prisoners, Abdul Jabar and Hakkim Shah, who recalled seeing Mr. Dilawar at Bagram, said the conditions to which they themselves were subjected at the time included standing naked, hooded and shackled, being kept immobile for long periods and being deprived of sleep for days on end.”
SPY v SPY
Yesterday, we noted the Observer’s report in London of US spying on members of the Security Council. The issue has still not been treated seriously or even covered in most of the US press. TomDispatch.com has been following this too: �A heightened spying campaign, a “surge,” directed against UN Security Council members? You would think that might be a story worth the odd paragraph or two, but today I could find nothing in the Washington Post, the New York Times, or the Los Angeles Times on the subject, not even denials (though Ari Fleischer was evidently asked about it). In the good old days, when we discovered Russian bugs in US missions, this sort of thing was front page news for days, if not weeks — with flaming headlines for foul deeds”
This is not totally true. The Washington Times did report on it, but only to debunk it. Here was the headline in the Moonie owned paper on March 3:
“Report of plans by U.S. to spy on U.N. states questioned
“Questioned!” By whom, you asked. By Matt Drudge, that’s whom:” The memo’s authenticity was questioned by Internet reporter Matt Drudge, who cited several misspellings — including the name of the memo’s author — on the document as published by the Observer, and an incorrect version of the agency’s “top secret” stamp.
” Mr. Drudge, in an article posted on his Web site (www.drudgereport.com), noted that the memo used British spellings such as “favourable,” “emphasise” and “recognise” instead of the American use of the letter “z” in the spellings, and that the spelling of the author of the memo was changed from “Frank Koza” to “Frank Kozu” on the Observer Web site (www.observer.co.uk)
“The Observer posted a footnote late Sunday after receiving “many queries from the United States,” saying it changed the spellings for the convenience of its British audience. The newspaper attributed other errors to typographical mistakes.”(Ed. note: deep background: there is at least one person who left the FBI after being asked to spy on the Israeli Consulate in NYC.)
ARI’S COMMENT: NO COMMENT
And yes, Ari Fleisher was asked about it at the White House but there was no headline saying “WHITE HOUSE REFUSES TO DISCUSS REPORTS OF PLANS BY US TO SPY ON UN STATES. Just this in the Observer: This afternoon, White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer refused to comment on questions about a story broken by the Observer newspaper in London. On Sunday the paper published an article headlined “Revealed: U.S. Dirty Tricks to Win Vote on Iraq War.”
As for spying, the most interesting story I can find is one Lyn Buchanan who has published a book on how he was a “psychic spy” for the US during the Gulf War. The book: The Secrets of Remote Viewing as Told by a “Psychic Spy” for the U.S. Military. Here’s what Paraview Pocket Books says about it:
“For the past thirty years, the United States government has secretly trained a select corps of military personnel in the art of “remote viewing”– the psychic ability to perceive thoughts and experiences through the power of the human mind. Now, for the first time, Lyn Buchanan — a world-renowned expert on remote viewing and its potential — tells the complete, candid story of his experiences. Assigned for nearly a decade to a clandestine U.S. Army Intelligence group, Buchanan trained people within a military unit that utilized a subject’s inherent psychic abilities as a data-collection tool during the Iran hostage crisis, the Chernobyl disaster, and the Gulf War.”
WHERE DOES THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT GO NOW?
What about the anti-war movement? What happens now? Right-wing groups have launched a campaign, as I noted yesterday, against celebrities who speak out against the war. The Guardian reports today that �President Bartlett’ aka Martin Sheen, a long-time supporter of the Catholic Worker movement, is being targeted. “NBC is under pressure to sack him from its hit show or face a boycott or withdrawal of advertising. Sheen said in Los Angeles the channel’s executives had indicated that his high profile could damage the show and had called on him to explain his views. He had also received thousands of hate emails, been accused of being a traitor and accosted in the street.
“Many actors and singers are being lambasted by conservative talk show hosts for expressing their opposition to the war. A website, Citizens Against Celebrity Pundits, has been launched, for “American citizens [who] stand against wealthy Hollywood celebrities abusing their status to speak for us”. The site calls for donations for ads to counter the anti-war movement.”
ENTER HARRISON FORDThis is not stopping other celebs from speaking out. Rush and Malloy report in the NY Daily News: “Harrison Ford wants off Dubya’s team - because he says he was never on it. Numerous reports have contended that the actor, who played a two-fisted President in “Air Force One,” was backing President Bush’s policy against Iraq. Fox News claimed in December that Ford opposed a statement signed by 104 actors and directors calling themselves Artists United to Win Without War. But now Ford tells us Bush’s military strategy is “exactly the opposite” of the way he feels. “What I’m for is a regime change on both sides,” Ford said through his manager, Patricia McQueeney.
World Net Daily reports today that Saddam Hussein is using Hollywood films to train his troops to prepare for a US invasion. He is reportedly recommending that they see “Black Hawk Down” for instruction on how to drive US forces out, and another movie about the Soviet defense of Stalingrad against the Nazis.
MTV REJECTS ANTI-WAR AD
Back to those anti-war commercials for a moment., activists from Not in Our Name tried to buy ads on MTV, which at first said they would accept over $30,000 from them to run the ad made by Academy Award winner Barbara Kopple and others. But then they changed their minds, citing some rule against editorial advocacy commercials. The activists argued that by accepting millions from the Defense Department to run military recruitment ads, MTV is taking sides and acting unfairly. They plan to continue to challenge the Viacom-owned network. An official told them that 80% of MTV viewers are against the war.
JOINING THE MARINES FOR SEX
As for kids joining the military. Why do they do it. A paying job is one big answer — but there’s more according to author Anthony Swofford, a former Marine who has published a memoir called “Jar Head” which speaks of what the military is really selling. The New York Times review explained; “Violence, sex and male camaraderie are the big draw for many adolescent men who enlist. As a 14-year-old, Swofford was moved by pictures of the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1984: �The marines were all sizes and all colors, all dirty and exhausted and hurt, and they were men, and I was a boy falling in love with manhood. I understood that manhood had to do with war, and war with manhood, and to no longer just be a son, I needed someday to fight.’
“But the clincher comes three years later, from a Marine recruiter: �He gleefully talked to me about buying sex in the Philippines and Italy and Sweden and Panama — information my mother would never see in the brochures. The recruiter guaranteed me I could book a threesome for 40 American dollars in Olongapo. . . I’d just turned 17. I’d had sex three times. . . . I was sold.’”
BET GOES ANOTHER WAY
Unlike MTV, another Viacom channel, an entertainment website reports that “Black Entertainment Television says it coming out more critically on the war “Borrowing its theme from Marvin Gaye’s What’s Going On, BET is planning coverage of a potential war with Iraq that poses questions about whether military action is necessary. The cable channel aimed at blacks is reporting on the war buildup on its daily program, BET Nightly News, and will likely pre-empt its regular schedule for more coverage if war breaks out.
“Lee Gash-Maxey, BET’s news vice president, said Black EntertainmentTelevision’s theme for war news is Iraq: Is War the Answer? That’s an allusion to Gaye’s Vietnam era song, which includes the lyrics �war is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate.’”
WHERE IS THE MOVEMENT MOVING?
A meeting of anti-war activists in the UK suggests that more militant action can be expected. The Washington Post reports: “More than 120 activists from 28 countries emerged from an all-day strategy session here this weekend with plans not just to protest a prospective U.S.-led war against Iraq but to prevent it from happening. They want to intensify political pressure on the Bush administration’s closest allies — the leaders ofBritain, Italy and Spain — and force them to withdraw their support, leaving the United States, if it chooses to fight, to go it alone. And they intend to further disrupt war plans with acts of civil disobedience against U.S. military bases, supply depots and transports throughout Europe. In Italy, activists are already trying to stop trains carrying US troops.”
In the US, new questions are also being raised about movement strategy, one of them by your news dissector. But, first, part of an Alternet.org comment By Karin Rosman who says:
“The peace movement’s call to “Let the Inspections Work” is becoming about as effective as duct tape against biological weapons. We’re weeks away from an invasion of Iraq and we’re still hoping the UN will save the day. My biggest problem with the peace movement’s pro-inspections message is that it accepts the Bush administration’s version of events � that UN inspections are about preventing terrorism by an evil dictator.”
My own concerns have to do with whether anti-war activists realize that they have a responsibility to press the press and move the media to more fairness and regular reporting on anti-war movements, not just event based episodic coverage. I submitted a piece on this to a well-known weekly progressive magazine which held it for two weeks and is not running it: It may be a bit dated, but I will share it here:
THE MEDIA WAR AND THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT
In the run up to the massive February 15th protest in New York, a group of media activists proposed to anti-war rally’s organizers that the headquarters of media organizations also be targeted. It was likely that not all who wanted to join could do so. They suggested that all that opposition energy be channeled against the companies who, more often than not, are misinforming the American people about the issues.
The small group, calling itself “The Information Liberation Front,” an offshoot of the IndyMedia movement, argued that the movement’s goal should not be to just get a few seconds of episodic airtime for an event — but to pressure media outlets to offer more balanced coverage all the time. Their argument is that media is not a side issue, but a central one. Most activists acknowledge the problem, but do little about it. They seem to want to be on the media more than transform it.
An organizer, “War Cry”–like many militants he uses a nom de guerre–says, “Going to empty gov’t buildings like the UN and City Hall is a waste of time - sort of a hollow symbolic gesture. But going to the MEDIA and DEMANDING a national platform - is NOT symbolic. It might be worthwhile both in terms of opposing the war effectively by getting the public support we need, and asserting our basic rights of freedom of speech and assembly.” (Rapidly eroding rights I might add).
Protest organizers, understandably caught up in testy negotiations with police, city officials and members of their own coalitions jockeying for platform time, were unwilling to entertain a more multi-dimensional approach. They were bent on orchestrating the one big photo op — showing sizable and significant protest.
Undeterred, the ILF tried to mount a side protest anyway. CNN was the target. The police proved less receptive than the mainstream-oriented movement. An intra-First Amendment conflict resulted with cops defending CNN’s “freedom” of press over protesters freedom of speech.
Here’s what they say happened: “A few dozen people showed up with signs at CNN HQ in NYC. However the cops managed to cut off a contingent headed to CNN and detained them (based on what we don’t know) until people had dispersed from CNN to join the larger marches. Also, the ILF had received a last minute e-mail from UFPJ saying that CNN was going to cover the rally and that we should not antagonize them. This was organized in a week and a half time and that’s not enough time to do adequate outreach and build or express the kind of pressure it takes to make corporate giants acknowledge our demands”
Within this conflict are the seeds of a larger challenge. Should protest movements adapt a passive, hands-off attitude toward media institutions in hopes of getting coverage?
The ILF people think a strategy aimed at getting some air time is fated to fail. Cries War Cry: “After witnessing F15 and subsequent corporate media coverage (TV and print) is that, most of it was superficial and not in depth about the issues we were out there for. When they didn’t ignore us, they either distorted our numbers and/or downplayed our intelligence (almost never saw an interview or meaningful soundbite from a protester) However, this is not surprising.”
A protest against CNN does not a strategy against media myopia constitute. Clearly media plays a central role in defining issues and the political environment. This was a point made in the New York Times by Paul Krugman, who explained that the massive European rejection of US policy occurred in part because of a supportive media while our media downplays and undercuts opposition.
He cited Nation columnist Eric Alterman’s new book “What Liberal Media” approvingly to argue, yes, it is the media, stupid, writing, “At least compared with their foreign counterparts, the �liberal’ U.S. media are strikingly conservative and in this case hawkish�.For months both major U.S. cable news networks have acted as if the decision to invade Iraq has already been made, and have in effect seen it as their job to prepare the American public for the coming war.”
This is an issue that protest movements ignore at their peril. While a Nation editor may pop up on a talk show, usually “balanced” by a bullying neo-con and conservative anchor, most of the news and analysis that shapes the activist agenda is not reaching the mass audience. Is this not a political challenge?
Putting anti-war ads on TV is important but insufficient. We need to sharpen our own understanding of the way media works and doesn’t. How can we believe that government will be responsive to pressure, protest and lobbying but that the media isn’t? The far right targeted the so-called liberal media and took it over. Pressure works. Maybe its time to press the press to make media coverage an issue, not just a complaint to cry about.
MICHAEL SAVAGE LIVES UP TO HIS NAME
In our media news today, we have a savage response from radio talk show host Michael Savage who has been hired by MSNBC, the network who just dropped Phil Donahue. Tvzap2it.com reports. “When word reached conservative radio host and author Michael Savage that certain gay and women’s groups were peppering MSNBC with letters asking the cable news network to reconsider their decision to bring “The Savage Nation” to television, he went ballistic.
“You rats. You stinking rats who hide in the sewers. You think you can go after my income? You think you can kill my advertisers? You think I’m Dr. Laura? You think I’m gonna roll over like a pussy? You’re wrong. I’m going to find out where you get your money from. You live by handouts, all of you. You live off grants, all of you. You’re a bunch of beggars, but you don’t know how lucky you are,” Savage ranted on his Thursday (Feb. 27) radio broadcast.
“He goes on threaten the protesters, “If you continue this, we’re going to go after your funding sources. And we will do everything we can within the legal realm to cut off that funding. We are also going to go to the U.S. Justice Department under John Ashcroft. What you are doing is illegal. You think it’s 1965 and I’m South Africa? I’ve got news for you: it’s not 1965 and it ain’t South Africa. I’ll cut your funding off, and if you break the law any further, I’ll put you in jail.”
US MEDIA ADVISOR OUT
The Media Guardian reports that: “Charlotte Beers, the former advertising high-flyer in charge of the US government’s global campaign to improve the country’s image in the Muslim world, has resigned�.. Secretary of state Colin Powell praised Ms Beers for bringing “incredible expertize from Madison Avenue to Foggy Bottom”, adding that her goal of “reaching younger, broader and deeper audiences”, particularly in the Muslim world, would continue.” Beers cited poor health for stepping down.
Finally, saludos to Al Giordano the no compromise always on fire jefe/creator of Narco News Network, who is turning over his job and site to Gary Webb to take a long sojourn through Latin America. He says: “I’m off to look for Am�rica… Six years ago, after almost a decade in the Commercial Media, I left the offices, the computer screens, the Internet, all of it, and headed to the mountains of the Mexican Southeast where I learned Spanish and a new way to fight. To find the real news in this world one has to get away from the Media and its technologies of domination, and go where the people who don’t have computers, who can’t buy advertising, live and work. It was the best decision I ever made and everything that came after it, including Narco News, began there, away from the Screen�..
In the EMAIL, Gary writes from the UK to tell us how much he is looking forward to an interview with Donald Rumsfeld tonight on BBC “Garry
Adios companero. And to all of you, adieu, hasta manana. Your comments and help are welcome, most welcome. Write; Dissector@mediachannel.org
