PETER ARNETT FIRED

EMBEDDED IN DOHA

HAMMER SLIME

UPDATE: Peter Arnett fired for saying on Iraqi TV what many journalists and military strategists are saying on US TV. eg, that US military strategy is not working. He apologized on the Today Show. The news came in after I posted today’s blog….More on this later.

Anyone remember that anthem about praising the lord and passing the ammunition? As Muslims praise their most merciful and Beneficent God, “to whom we forever thank,” American soldiers are being advised to praise HE who praises the most holy every time we see him to the tune of “Onward Christian Soldiers.” In fact, yesterday was “pray for the president day” in Iraq, a fact I saw reported on no where on TV

ABC Australia is reporting on its web site that ” US soldiers in Iraq are being asked to pray for President George W Bush. Thousands of marines have been given a pamphlet called “A Christian’s Duty,” a mini prayer book which includes a tear-out section to be mailed to the White House pledging the soldier who sends it in has been praying for Bush.

IN TOUCH

“I have committed to pray for you, your family, your staff and our troops during this time of uncertainty and tumult. May God’s peace be your guide,” says the pledge, according to a journalist embedded with coalition forces. The pamphlet, produced by a group called In Touch Ministries, offers a daily prayer to be made for the US president, a born-again Christian who likes to invoke his God in speeches. ”

I’ll bet Christian Broadcasting is reporting heavily on this angle of the story. Actually, The New York Times did mention yesterday that the war itself was hatched with evangelic passion. ‘The foregone decision to go to war was made in a formal way, by a president conscious of the history of the moment, in the Situation Room on the morning of March 19. With his closest advisers surrounding him, Mr. Bush spoke to General Franks and the other commanders in the field by videoconference and asked each if they had everything they needed to win. Then the president gave the order, an administration official said, concluding with “may God bless the troops.”

“May God bless America,” General Franks replied, as Mr. Powell, the chairman of the joint chiefs during the first gulf war, reached out and lightly touched the president’s hand, said a senior administration official who recounted the scene, “because he’s been on the battlefield before.”

HERSH ROASTS RUMMY

That battlefield remains contested with US TV taking focusing on the debate over whether more troops are needed while the administration regurgitates the mantra that we are on plan. How far we have come from the days of Vietnam when the escalation of troop levels was challenged by the press. Now the armchair generals on the Sunday talk shows call for more, more, more. Seymour Hersh says that the problem is not with the warriors but with their boss, the Don of Defense, Mr. Rumsfeld:

HE writes: “As the ground campaign against Saddam Hussein faltered last week, with attenuated supply lines and a lack of immediate reinforcements, there was anger in the Pentagon. Several senior war planners complained to me in interviews that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his inner circle of civilian advisers, who had been chiefly responsible for persuading President Bush to lead the country into war, had insisted on micromanaging the war’s operational details. Rumsfeld’s team took over crucial aspects of the day-to-day logistical planning — traditionally, an area in which the uniformed military excels — and Rumsfeld repeatedly overruled the senior Pentagon planners on the Joint Staff, the operating arm of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “He thought he knew better,” one senior planner said. “He was the decision-maker at every turn.”

AL-JAZEERA ROASTS US MEDIA

Georgie S raised Hersh’s point with Rumsfeld on ABC’s This Week which seems even more hawkish than its competitors this week. Rumsfeld denied it, and that was that. No follow-up. And so it goes as TV shifted to more pictures of Baghdad burning and the light show resulting from a stepped up bombing campaign. Commentators prattled on about how the Ministry of Information was under assault, and that Iraqi TV had been taken off the air. Imagine my surprise then to clock on CNN this morning to see none other than Iraqi Foreign Minister Sabri holding forth from the Ministry of Information claiming that the foreign invaders were being defeated. An earlier report on the “most trusted” TV news net showed that what you saw depended on where you lived and which TV stations you relied on. The Arab World is watching Al Jazeera,

And Al Jazeera, whose website is back in action, says its doing a better job than its western counterparts. Faisal Bodi offer the station’s rationale in the Guardian: “I do not mean to brag - people are turning to us simply because the westernmedia coverage has been so poor. For although Doha is just a 15-minute drivefrom central command, the view of events from here could not be moredifferent. Of all the major global networks, al-Jazeera has been alone inproceeding from the premise that this war should be viewed as an illegalenterprise. It has broadcast the horror of the bombing campaign, theblown-out brains, the blood-spattered pavements, the screaming infants andthe corpses. Its team of on-the-ground, unembedded correspondents hasprovided a corrective to the official line that the campaign is, barringoccasional resistance, going to plan.

“Last Tuesday, while western channels were celebrating a Basra “uprising”which none of them could have witnessed since they don’t have reporters inthecity, our correspondent in the Sheraton there returned a rather flat verdictof”uneventful” - a view confirmed shortly afterwards by a spokesman for theopposition Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. By reportingpropaganda as fact, the mainstream media had simply mirrored the Blair/Bushfantasy that the people who have been starved by UN sanctions and deformedby depleted uranium since 1991 will greet them as saviors.”

PETER ARNETT BACK ON THE HOT SEAT

As the Arab media challenges western media, some in the western media are targeting one of their own. The New York Post, part of the Murdoch media empire (owners of Fox News) now has Peter Arnett to kick around some more. Arnett, who was the right’s favorite target during Gulf War 1 for merely reporting from Baghdad has aroused their ire again for saying US war planners have misjudged the situation, and for thanking Iraqi officials for “the degree of freedom” that US journalists enjoyed. Arnett has now rejoined their axis of evil.

While the NY Post trashed him today, yesterday the NY Times wrote about him sympathetically. Frank Rich quoted him: “It’s déjà vu all over again, the idea that this would be a walkover, the idea that the people of Basra would throw flowers at the Marines,” he said from Baghdad when I spoke with him by phone last week. Unlike many of his peers, he had been there to see the early burst of optimism in Persian Gulf War I, which he covered for CNN. “This is going to be tough,” he said just before it became tough. “When I interviewed Tariq Aziz two weeks ago — it was not put on the network — he said: `You’ll have a hard time tearing us down. We’re ready to be martyrs.’ Whatever you think about Saddam Hussein, there is a sense of nationalism here. The Iraqis like American culture — American movies and pop songs. But are they really going to like American tanks?”

For sentiments like this, Arnett is likely to be targeted even more. The Guardian predicted that his comments” are likely to make Arnett a renewed target of Republican lawmakers, many of whom already contend that his reporting is slanted in favor of the Iraqis.

“NAUSEATING”

“Iraqi TV showed the interview at least twice on Sunday afternoon. CNN and Fox News Channel showed excerpts of it last night. Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen told Fox News Channel she found the interview “nauseating.” She added, “It’s incredible he would be kowtowing to what clearly is the enemy in this way.” So far, MNBC is sticking with their free lancer.

As for Fox News, I just loved watching convicted perjurer Ollie North reporting for Fox from the field. The man who lied to Congress, who sold arranged arm sales to Iran during the bad old days of Iran Contra is a correspondent in the field. Fox anchors referred to him reverentially as “Colonel” and “Sir.” Last week I reported on the question raised at the CENTCOM briefing in Doha by New York Magazine media columnist Michael Wolff who asked briefer General Brooks why anyone should even go to these briefings. Now Wolff has written about his experiences. The Guardian picked up his report which will probably also appear in New York, although they don’t say so. Wolff calls himself an embed:

WOLFF SHOWS NO MERCY

“I have embedded myself in the million-dollar press center at General Tommy Franks’ central command (CentCom) forward headquarters in Doha, Qatar. Camp as-Sayliya, where the press center is safely stowed, is far enough from the center of Doha that you get a clear and eerie sense of what Qatar was like before it became oil rich and development-happy two generations ago.

“It’s pure moonscape. Not a tree, not a bush. Hardly a structure. Just a horizon of flat limestone. And then you come upon the US base - really, just a ring of wire and then a no man’s land behind which there is the base…..

“It takes about 48 hours to understand that information is probably more freely available at any other place in the world than it is here. Eventually you realize that you know significantly less than when you arrived, and that you are losing more sense of the larger picture by the hour. At some point you will know nothing.

“This may be the plan, of course. There are two kinds of forward reporters: the official embeds with units on the ground in Iraq, who know only the details of the action they see, and those posted to military press centers in Kuwait or Qatar (as close to Franks, the presumptive conqueror of Baghdad, as it’s possible to get), who know only what they are told.

“Which happens to be nothing much at all. ”

REALITY IS TOO “UNSETTLING”

Criticism of US coverage is not restricted to the Arab World or the contrarian worldview of Michael Wolff. Roger Franklin writes in the Age in Australia than “America sees no evil

“What we’re seeing in the US are network anchors posing heroically in ruggedly tailored camouflage fatigues as legions of lesser reporters peer over sand dunes to catch the whump of artillery with the microphones of their satellite-phone cameras. That and the Pentagon’s greatest hits, each clip featuring a tank or building vanishing in a spout of grainy flame beneath the bomb sight’s crosshairs.

“The hard stuff - the stone-cold close-ups of the reaper’s latest recruits - well, as a talking head on CNN said only the other night, those images are just “too unsettling for public consumption”. Yes, we viewers get the wide-eyed kids in their hospital bandages and briefly, every now and then, the roadside piles of slumped and crumpled uniforms that contain what once were Saddam’s soldiers.

“But those casualties are our side’s doing, so that’s OK. On the non-commercial PBS network, the closest America gets to a government network, the clips are apt to be followed by sober, serious chats with experts from institutes or think tanks, the talking heads who offer a sound-bite or two about the mood in the Arab street or the difficulties of moving a mechanized column through a hostile desert.It’s fine, so far as the coverage goes. But sadly, given that death is what war is all about, that isn’t very far at all.”

MEDIA DEBATE HEATS UP

The debate over media coverage is now joined at the hip to the debate over the war. Allessandra Stanley reports in the NY Times: “As the conflict in Iraq deepens, so has the debate about television coverage. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld complained on Friday that “media mood swings” were distorting the depiction of American military strategy. Actually, the movement was less up and down than across the ideological spectrum.

“In the initial phase, the loudest complaints about bias were lodged by antiwar groups frustrated that television gave scant attention to their protests. As casualties mounted, so did conservatives’ laments about a liberal bias at the networks.

“Fox News led the charge. Bill O’Reilly, the network’s most popular commentator and most fervent France basher, described the ABC News anchor, Peter Jennings, as an “internationalist,” which he defined as someone “who puts foreign countries on the same plane as the United States in the war on terror.”,, On the left, antiwar activists argued that the consolidation of media ownership by corporate giants has led to a “foxification” of American news shows….” At least the media role in all of this is finally being scrutinized even as Times reporters follow their ‘on the one hand, on the other’ middle of the road coverage pattern which appears neutral but rarely is.

MEDIA WATCHING GLOSSARY UPDATE

It is not just the images, or the lack of them, that defines the coverage. It is also the language. May we praise the Guardian as well for updating our growing glossary of deadening war terminology like:

“Speed bump

“Anything that slows down the progress of war - including skirmishes. The resistance at Basra and the protracted resistance at Umm Qasr were particularly nasty speed bumps.

“Effects-based warfare

“A nuanced approach to war, combining strategic firepower (”graduated destruction”) and pyschological operations (or “psyops”) - such as leaflet dropping and interfering with TV or radio broadcasts. Some Iraqi commanders have even made “capitulation agreements” already. The effects-based approach is backed up by the provision of humanitarian aid to create a “benign campaign”.

“Digital battlefield

“The US Army’s 4th division is equipped with command and control systems that allow tank movements to be monitored on computers, seen as a first step towards a “digital battlefield” that involves “total situational awareness”, ie, everyone can tell where everyone else is. The idea is to dispel the “fog of war” that leads to deaths from “friendly fire”.

“Hammer time

“A US admiral was shown invoking the spirit of 90s Christian rapper MC Hammer - albums include Let’s Get It Started and Please Hammer, Don’t Hurt ‘Em - when he declared to his fist-pumping troops that “hammer time” was upon us.” Dissector addendum: Before Gulf War 1, the real hammer participated in the remake of the song “Give Peace A Chance.” The song was suppressed, and Hammer’s career was later hammered. Now he is singing in support of the troops.

BEWARE THE MOSQUITO ARMYOn the war front itself, it is slow-mo time with ground forces digging in around Baghdad. Marc Crispin Miller passes on two items or interest from a friends overseas; “Yesterday the Hungarian news wire (MTI) carried a story quoting a number of US soldiers who wished to remain anonymous to the effect thatthe ground war was on hold until the supply problems were solved. Theyhad had their field rations reduced by 1/3 until further, I watched CNN, butthey didn’t report it, just the non-specific denial from the Pentagon.” He then sent an update: “The cut ration story did make it (later) onto CNN, as did the “4-6 day delay”story. The question remains, if supplies are short and the most vitalsupply of all is water, are our people going to face massive dehydration?

” And, what CNN didn’t include, however–weather satellites say sandstormsare returning to the area in (you guessed it), 3 days or so. Also didn’tinclude a nugget that came to me from a pal that used to work in oilexploration–April is mosquito season south of Baghdad (swamps). In hiswords, ‘they’re thicker than carpets’. In their haste to win before the thermometer hits 120 by 4/15, the groundforces hauled ass faster than their vehicles could carry supplies to them.”

WHY THE SURPISE?It should be noted that asymmetrical warfare — challenging conventional forces with unconventional one is what armies at a disadvantage usually rely on. That was Ho Chi Minh’s approach in Vietnam. Writing in Slate, Fred Kapan writes: ” Much has been made of Thursday’s remark by Lt. Gen. William Wallace, commander of U.S. Army forces in the Persian Gulf. Talking about the fierce and guerrilla-style resistance of Iraqi militia groups, Wallace said, “The enemy we’re fighting is a bit different than the one we war-gamed against.”

“In fact, however, militia fighters did play a crucial role in a major war game designed to simulate combat in Irag but the Pentagon officials who managed the game simply disregarded or overruled the militias’ most devastating moves.” So none of what we are seeing should be surprising including the announcement that more martyr (we call them suicide) bombers are on the way. Iraq created more news with an exploding taxi cab than the US did with some its air raids.

THOSE OH SO “PRECISE” BOMBS

The New York Times devotes an editorial today praising precision bombing, but noting “It is always possible, as American military leaders suggest, that damage was caused by Iraqi air defense missiles falling back to earth or by explosives set off by the Iraqis themselves for propaganda purposes. But whatever the case, the widely publicized civilian deaths have generated anger at the United States and sympathy for Iraq in many nations. The incidents inevitably raise the question: How precise are our much-touted precision weapons?”

Who done it? The irrepressible Mr. Fisk of London’s Independent was actually on the scene and reported what he found: “…the missile was guided by computers and that vital shard of fuselagewas computer-coded. It can be easily verified and checked by the Americans -if they choose to do so. It reads: 30003-704ASB 7492. The letter “B” isscratched and could be an “H”. This is believed to be the serial number. Itis followed by a further code which arms manufacturers usually refer to asthe weapon’s “Lot” number. It reads: MFR 96214 09.The piece of metal bearing the codings was retrieved only minutes after themissile exploded on Friday evening, by an old man whose home is only 100yards from the 6ft crater. Even the Iraqi authorities do not know that itexists. The missile sprayed hunks of metal through the crowds - mainly womenand children - and through the cheap brick walls of local homes, amputatinglimbs and heads. ”

As for what is in those weapons, The Sunday Herald in Glasgow is reporting what I have yet to see in the American press — the use of depleted uranium in US ordinance: Neil Mackay reports: “British and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction.”

As you can seem making sense of the news in America requires that you leave America, if only through the Internet to seek out information and perspectives missing in the TV News accounts. This daily column is one dissector’s attempt at reporting back on what is out there. Happily, your letters and items are fleshing out the picture further.

YOUR LETTERS: PRAISING CNN

Jackie Newberry sees a welcome change at CNN: ‘ “Well, I have to say that Aaron Brown has really done his job tonight. A lot of diverse views, a lot of revelation about the fantasy of the administration. I don’t know if there will be a transcript, but I am really pleased to see this shift. I have seen Koppel and Jennings moving the same direction. But Brown and CNN really do deserve some credit for turning things around. He interviewed the CSM journalist who was kicked out of Iraq by the military this week. He’s also interviewed some retired generals who are critical of what is happening.”

PRAISING YOURS TRULY

Dr. Betsy Krueger writes from Pullman Washington: “I have been reading the Dissector for many months now, and it’s so useful to me, well I just can’t thank you enough for speaking out. Imagine my surprise and delight when I heard that you were coming to the Edward R. Murrow Symposium in mid-April, here at Washington State University, as part of a panel discussion!!

“I’m an assoc. professor in the School of Communication (no “s” on communication, we had a whole faculty meeting about the “s”!!). I teach in the broadcasting area, specifically radio news, public broadcasting, computer-assisted reporting, and digital divide issues. It’s hard to be enthusiastic right now about broadcast news, and we’re the major school turning out new, green reporting-types in the Northwest… Still, I try to start those conversations in class. They can’t know what they don’t know, unless someone shows them. That’s me, I guess.

I will be trekking out to the North West in the middle of next month to speak at an Edward Murrow symposium. He was the man that inspired me to become a journalist, so it is only write that I pay homage at the Mecca of Murrowdom.

THE SOLOMON ISLANDS JUST SAY NO

Final item today comes all the way from the Solomon Islands which discovered that it was being listed as a member of the Coalition of the Willling. Guess what. They are not willing:Says one Alan Perott: ” Sorry, President Bush, but if you are counting on theSolomon Islands National Reconnaissance and Surveillance Force to watchyour back in Iraq, you’re out of luck. Solomon Islands Prime MinisterSir Allan Kemakeza yesterday said “thanks but no thanks” after hearinghis nation had been shanghaied into the US-led Coalition of the Willing.

“The Government is completely unaware of such statements being made,therefore wishes to disassociate itself from the report,” said SirAllan.

I will dissociate myself from you now, asking again for your continued help in keeping Mediachannel alive. We could use a few competent and committed volunteers as well as whatever lucre you can spare and send our way. Your comments and suggestions are welcome as well at dissector@mediachannel.org