LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

Harvard: How the Media Partnered With Hezbollah

Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 9:53:02 am PDT

During Israel’s war against Hizballah, at LGF we were continually outraged by the media’s uncritical promulgation of terrorist propaganda, and their overwhelming bias against Israel. The barrage of staged and manipulated disinformation culminated in the infamous Adnan Hajj fauxtography incident; and it can be argued that the culture of tacit cooperation with terrorists was at least partly responsible for that stunning case of phony news.

How could Reuters’ experienced editors miss a fake picture that was so bleeding obvious, at every step of the way toward publication? Answer: because they just didn’t care.

It’s interesting that in an age of obsessive media focus on scandals, no wire service or newspaper has ever followed up on that story in any real way. Adnan Hajj seemed to simply vanish off the face of the earth; no interviews, no photos of him, no investigations, just one statement—reported by Reuters—in which he claimed his fakery was to “remove dust,” then poof! Adnan who?

For blowing the whistle on Hizballah’s manipulation of Reuters, LGF was smeared by numerous leftists; the diversionary tactics ranged from personal attacks to attempts to minimize the importance of the faked photos.

Now the Harvard Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, hardly a bastion of neocon wingnut thinking, has issued a paper that absolutely skewers the media for their outrageously biased and terrorist-enabling behavior. Maybe this will be a little harder for them to ignore: How the Media Partnered With Hezbollah: Harvard’s Cautionary Report.

While the war between Israel and Hezbollah raged in Lebanon and Israel last summer, it became clear that media coverage had itself started to play an important role in determining the ultimate outcome of that war. It seemed clear that news coverage would affect the course of the conflict. And it quickly transpired that Hezbollah would become the beneficiary of the media’s manipulation.

A close examination of the media’s role during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon comes now from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, in an analysis of the war published in a paper whose subtitle should give pause to journalists covering international conflict: “The Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006: The Media as a Weapon in Asymmetrical Conflict.” Bernard Kalb [note: actually, it’s Marvin Kalb. —ed.], of Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, methodically traces the transformation of the media “from objective observer to fiery advocate.” Kalb painstakingly details how Hezbollah exercised absolute control over how journalists portrayed its side of the conflict, while Israel became “victimized by its own openness.”

The lessons from the Harvard paper go well beyond historic analysis. Kalb’s thoroughly and persuasively documented case points to the challenges to journalists in future “asymmetrical” conflicts in which a radical militia provides access only to journalists agreeing to the strictest of rules.

Journalists did Hezbollah’s work, offering little resistance to the Islamic militia’s effort to portray itself as an idealistic and heroic army of the people, facing an aggressive and ruthless enemy. With Hezbollah’s unchallenged control of journalists’ access within its territory, it managed to almost completely eliminate from the narrative crucial facts, such as the fact that it deliberately fired its weapons from deep within civilian population centers, counting on Israeli forces to have no choice but defend themselves by targeting rocket launchers where they stood. Hezbollah’s strong support from Syria and Iran — including the provision of deadly weapons — faded in the coverage, as the conflict increasingly became portrayed as pitting one powerful army against a band of heroic defenders of a civilian population.

Gradually lost in the coverage was the fact that the war began when Hezbollah infiltrated Israel, kidnapping two of its soldiers (still held to this day) and killing eight Israelis. Despite the undisputed fact that Hezbollah triggered the war, Israel was painted as the aggressor, as images of the war overtook the context.

UPDATE at 4/25/07 10:20:33 am:

Here’s the full report, in PDF form.

Advertisement

161 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 FQ Kafir  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 9:53:44am

'Bout time.

2 nnptcgrad  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 9:56:05am

Wow, somebody else was listening.

3 friarstale  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 9:57:17am

a crack forms in the wall of liberal orthodox thought

but ain't Harvard fulla Jooos? (kidding)

4 savage_nation[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 9:58:29am
5 andalus  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 9:58:58am

Harvard, pro-israeli?

I'm shocked

/sarc

6 looking closely  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:00:03am

Nice that someone else finally noticed, but I don't really see this report changing much.

7 Poitiers-Lepanto  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:00:12am

We don't know WHOSE money is behind today's MSM.

That is the question.

8 Occasional Reader  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:00:36am
Now the Harvard Shorenstein Center

"Jewish name! So nothing they say is valid."

/islamo-lefty kneejerk

9 Carl P  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:00:37am

This will go the way of other logical and blatantly obvious works of literature during these times...

off of the front page and labeled as "neocon rhetoric"

May they (MSM) gnash their teeth for eternity...and get syphilis.

Amen.

10 vxbush  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:01:16am

NICE! I'm so glad to see an actual analysis of this! Of course, getting people to actually read it and realize what happened will be a different story.

11 alexwest  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:01:39am

Harvard Shorenstein Center?!?!? Well, we won't have a good report free from Zionist propaganda until the Harvard Bakadakalaka Center releases its report!

/blech

12 Thorfin  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:02:36am

A Brief break for an Update from the US Congress

Democrat Congressional Creed

I support the troops; not the war
I support the doctors; but not them performing life saving surgeries
I support the teachers; but not them educating my child
I support the firefighters; but not when they want to put out a burning house
I support the police; but not them arresting criminals
I support the pilots; but not them landing a plane
I support the farmers; but not them harvesting there crops
I support the truckers; but not them making deliveries
I am proud to support everyone; as long as they don't do the job they're meant to do
Signed
Nancy Pelosi -House Majority Leader
Harry Reid -Senate Majority Leader

13 jxs2151  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:03:36am

I notice that now many LGF stories are making a reasonable impact on Digg but are not getting to the front page.

Just a Digg hint- one of the known factors in Digg's algorithm for how important a story gets on Digg.com is the number of friends a digger (or burier) has. So....LGF'ers should at every opportunity add like-minded friends to their friends list.

On Digg, click a username and select "Add Friend."

Just a suggestion.

14 MandyManners  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:04:42am

6 looking closely

The sad state of affairs didn't arise over night and it won't be corrected over night.

15 cfomahm  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:05:15am

Wow! A flying pig moment for sure.

Gradually lost in the coverage was the fact that the war began when Hezbollah infiltrated Israel, kidnapping two of its soldiers (still held to this day) and killing eight Israelis. Despite the undisputed fact that Hezbollah triggered the war, Israel was painted as the aggressor, as images of the war overtook the context.

My opinion of Bernard Kalb must be rethought.

16 nnptcgrad  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:07:29am

#8 Occasional Reader

Now the Harvard Shorenstein Center
"Jewish name! So nothing they say is valid."

Any bets on how long before that shows up somewhere?

17 itellu3times  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:09:06am

#15 cfomahm

My opinion of Bernard Kalb must be rethought.

Yah, that was one of my first thoughts, too. Had him down as a BDS type, though I can't quote you exactly why I thought that.

18 republic  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:09:20am

WOW!

I am stunned.

Someone who can carry some weight, goes against the msm establishment.

The msm are premeditated liars.

19 Fjordman  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:09:42am

Has this ever happened before in world history? That the media in one country or civilization is not only "neutral," but is actively siding with their nation's enemies?

20 Chyron  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:03am
With Hezbollah’s unchallenged control of journalists’ access within its territory, it managed to almost completely eliminate from the narrative crucial facts, such as the fact that it deliberately fired its weapons from deep within civilian population centers, counting on Israeli forces to have no choice but defend themselves by targeting rocket launchers where they stood. Hezbollah’s strong support from Syria and Iran — including the provision of deadly weapons — faded in the coverage, as the conflict increasingly became portrayed as pitting one powerful army against a band of heroic defenders of a civilian population.

I am shocked that such a center would print something like this. They are usually so slanted against Israel, they can't see any of the facts.

Someone had to say it with a voice that would be heard, and I'm glad they did.

21 FriarsTale  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:12am

here's the synopsis of the report:

Marvin Kalb on Message Control and the 2006
Israeli-Hezbollah War
On Tuesday, March 13, the Shorenstein Center hosted a brown bag lunch with Marvin Kalb, founding director of the Center and a former reporter for CBS and NBC News. Kalb’s talk, “The Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006: The Media as a Weapon in Asymmetrical Conflict” illuminated the stark contrasts of how the respective governments handled—or mishandled—the media coverage of the 34-day war. Kalb addressed the significance of three major points: the distinct advantage that a closed society has over an open society in controlling its message; the fact that this war was the first ever to be broadcast live, both on television and the Internet; and Hezbollah’s effective use of communications technology to further its cause. Hezbollah understood that “the battlefield is in information as much as it is in any town or village,” Kalb explained. He also noted that media access on the Hezbollah side was so tightly controlled that not a single photograph of a Hezbollah soldier was ever published or broadcast during the war. Such restrictions meant that Hezbollah “controlled the message of the day.” Meanwhile, as Kalb described it, the media scene across the Israeli border was chaotic and undisciplined, and thus projected disproportionate images of the violence and destruction. Kalb's paper on this topic is posted here.

[Link: www.ksg.harvard.edu...]

22 ShumBaayaMyLord  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:40am

For what it's worth, it might be interesting to keep an eye out for specific reactions to this amongst al-Kos diarists. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them laces into Bernard Kalb with Qaradawi-quality anti-Semitism.

23 Bobbo  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:51am

And it has taken how long to have this said? 9 months.

Wow! The "electronic" MSM is so fast! So quick. So courageous!

24 American Jewess In Jerusalem  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:54am

Yeah, okay, this is good. But why did it take them so long? Why is the Awakening of America such a slooooow process?

25 lawhawk  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:11:00am
Maybe this will be a little harder for them to ignore: How the Media Partnered With Hezbollah: Harvard’s Cautionary Report.

For the left, that's already done. Ignored. Blacklisted.

If it doesn't fit the worldview, it is excised from the historical record.

This report confirms what we'd already known about the situation, but it wont change anyone's opinions of what happened or what is continuing to happen in terms of media coverage of the region. The same stringers/editors are largely doing the reporting from the region and when the next conflict happens, they'll engage in the same kinds of behavior.

And then, once that conflict is over, months later there will be yet another report showing the media had been biased in their coverage against Israel.

26 Ward Cleaver  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:12:07am

#16 nnptcgrad

It probably already has, along with the phrase "Israel Lobby".

A hearty BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA from here, and a hearty STFU to the MSM and the libs.

27 shlodidodi  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:12:40am

Harvard better watch out! The Jihadis might be comin' for them now

28 Kreuzueber Halbmond  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:12:42am

The Israelis should now have learned a lesson with regard to future military actions against Hezbollah. Act quickly and decisively and don't give the media a chance to spin matters. Next time take the battle immediately and directly to the source — Iran and Syria. Finish it once and for all.

29 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:12:54am

Ok, first thing we do is kill all the lawyers journalists.

30 Beagle  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:13:02am

Harvard has improved to several years behind LGF. That's a big step.

31 American Jewess In Jerusalem  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:13:35am

#11 alexwest

LOL! So true, so true.

32 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:14:06am

Maybe this will help with this summer's Israeli/ Hezzbolah war.

33 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:14:11am

Hey Charles, if you don't already have a degree from Harvard .. looks like you're due an honorary degree! Congratulations!

34 Necklace of Shoes  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:14:42am

You mean the hole in their story just wasn't in the top of a Red Cross ambulance?

35 jxs2151  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:15:31am

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."

-- Winston Churchill

36 simonml  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:15:42am

I'm just glad we finally have someone in the MSM telling the truth. I don't care if your story agrees with my beliefs or not, as long as it is the absolute truth. Thank God someone is calling the media out for this.

37 papawhisky  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:16:01am

The full report is here:

[Link: ksgnotes1.harvard.edu...]

And makes great reading. LGF gets more than a mention

38 Just_A_Grunt  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:16:41am
39 American Jewess In Jerusalem  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:19:04am

Send in the [Flying] Pigs

Don't you love farce?
My fault I fear.
I thought that you'd want what I want.
Sorry, my dear.
But where are the clowns pigs?
Quick, send in the clowns pigs.
Don't bother, they're here.

Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer,
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
And where are the clowns pigs?
There ought to be clowns pigs.
Well, maybe next year.

40 Beagle  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:21:07am

#19 Fjordman

During the American Civil War many Copperhead Democrats in the North and border states sided with the Confederacy, or their "peace" proposals amounted to a Confederate victory. Copperhead newspapers were common.

My father's family (mom's still in Poland) consisted of Republicans in a non-slave state. When modern Democrats discuss race and partisan politics they always stop at Nixon. Beyond him, they shall not pass. Similarly, JFK's actual politics are never mentioned (missile gap, lower taxes).

41 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:21:47am

#21 Friar's Tale,

"Such restrictions meant that Hezbollah “controlled the message of the day.”

Yet another manipulation shared by the extreme Left and other totalitarians.

As far as this observation by Mr. Kalb, "the fact that this war was the first ever to be broadcast live, .. " Not really true .. Vietnam was covered live (just about 24/7).. and manipulated into a loss by the MSM's Left-driven agenda.

42 RTLM  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:22:20am
#7 Poitiers-Lepanto 4/25/2007 10:00:12 am PDT

We don't know WHOSE money is behind today's MSM.

That is the question.

The MSM and the Majority of Dems have bewhored themselves to George $$oros.

43 Ward Cleaver  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:23:30am

Okay, wait: Is it Bernard Kalb, or Marvin Kalb? FriarsTale's post #21 mentions Marvin, but I assume it was Bernard.

44 oilbertan  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:24:01am

While it is nice to see this in print I do not think anyone on the right of the political spectrum is surprised by this information which simply confirms what many of us on this site and others have known for quite some time. However I can see the moonbats of the left covering their ears and going: nah nah I can't hear you.

Typical but hey, don't question their patriotism.

45 SkepticalOne  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:24:28am

Wow, this is amazingly devastating.

What critical readers have known for years is how the MSM has chosen sides in conflicts. It is always against the West. Now Marvin Kalb, who normally sees no collusion in the MSM is calling them out.

Showing the organizational malfeasance of Reuters in their coverage of Israel. They refused to acknowledge that Israel was not the aggressor and that they still don't have the soldiers that were kidnapped.

This same MSM has spent the last 40 years trying to convince us all that conservatism and capitalism are wrong. But their methods and means were corrupt, we need sunshine on the people making those editorial stances.

46 SkepticalOne  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:25:48am

sorry Bernard..

47 EtNorskTroll  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:26:26am

Thanks to taking the "Green pill" that Charles gave me, my eyes have been opened and I no longer believe the MSM.

It was a hard pill to swallow, but once you do, you'll never regret it.

~Norsk Troll

48 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:27:33am

#16 nnptcgrad,

"Any bets on how long before that shows up somewhere?"

Story posted at 10:20:33 PDT
Your comment, #16 @ 10:07:29 PDT

Easy bet! :)

49 RTLM  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:27:54am

David Broder dropped a bomb on the absurd Harry Reid yesterday.

The LLL skull is not meant to ingest this volume of clear thinking.

50 Charles  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:29:46am

Notice, please -- it's Bernard Kalb the ex-CBS guy, not Marvin Kalb the ex-CBS guy. Don't know if they're related...

51 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:30:10am

#43 Ward C,

You probably know by now .. "Marvin Kalb on Message Control and the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah War"
(see link on Friar's Tale #21)

52 EtNorskTroll  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:30:45am
#34 Necklace of Shoes 4/25/2007 10:14:42 am PDT

You mean the hole in their story just wasn't in the top of a Red Cross ambulance?

Yep.

That's what put the "nail in the coffin", for me (sorry for the pun).

Once I saw those pictures of the ambulance and then compared them to what the MSM was presenting, I realized that the MSM (as a whole) NO LONGER TELL THE TRUTH.

I now get my hard news from multiple sources on the Internet.

Anything I read from the MSM now gets taken with heavy doses of salt.

They've betrayed the trust....they shall now reap the consequences.

~Norsk Troll

53 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:31:05am

#43 & 51 Ward C,

Never mind .. :)

54 Charles  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:33:57am

Oops! I'm wrong -- or rather, the article quoted above is wrong. It is Marvin Kalb.

55 savage_nation[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:34:26am
56 Cato the Elder  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:34:43am

Wait now . . . wait just a few seconds.

There, I think you can hear it already. The sound of CAIR & Co. shrieking and seething.

57 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:34:51am

Note to MSM:

Gotcha!

58 Dripping Sarcasm  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:37:16am

I guess after years of "looking into the liberal abyss" I must have gotten infected, because the scenario that jumped into my mind immediately upon reading this was;

As soon as someone sees that the paper was produced by a group with a name like, the Harvard Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy anyone who is already inclined to hate the West, will instantly say, "Shorenstein? Oh, come on! This is just thinly veiled Jewish/Zionist propaganda. This paper is biased, and I choose to ignore it. I'd better go post my brilliant insight over at Kos before anyone gets fooled!"

Sorry, fellow lizards, they got inside my brain!

59 Frank_Mtl  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:37:32am

I doubt the MSM will give this report as much coverage as it did the Walt/Marsheimer paper.

60 lawhawk  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:38:58am

#50 Charles:

The report was written by Marvin Kalb - see page 1 of the report. The article gets the attribution wrong.

61 pat  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:39:40am

Would have been nice if they got the right Kalb. Nevertheless, all of our news from the Mid-East appears to be from Muslim stringers whose unreliability and bias are revealed every day her and on others sites. The MSM has no shame.

62 Just_A_Grunt  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:41:14am

But the Baker Surrender and Iraq Study Group says we should engage these people in dialogue.
We should engage them with a lot of things but dialogue isn't something I would put on the list.

63 grumpy_old_soldier  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:42:43am

Horns at the walls of Jericho?

GOS

64 Cato the Elder  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:44:28am

#41 Daisy:

The Vietnam War was not covered "live" in any sense of the word as understood today. There were no satellite uplinks, so no "live from the battlefield" coverage. The three major networks also did not cover the war "24/7" - it was on the nightly news that you got your dose of antiwar propaganda from Walter Cronkite and ilk.

65 lawhawk  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:45:09am

Isn't it funny that an article highlighting the media's gaffes itself has a gaffe of significant proportions - namely getting the author of the piece highlighted wrong. /sheesh...

OT:
Mass casualty incident declared in Spenser, Mass. after water treatment facility screwed up and sent too much lye into water system - causing burns and irritation to people who came into contact with the water.

Agnew did not know the exact number of people taken for treatment, but the fire department declared a mass casualty incident.

The DEP advised residents to discard any liquids or foods that had been made with town water on Tuesday or Wednesday.

State officials were working with town officials to flush the water supply so water service could be quickly restored, Coletta said.

Spencer has about 12,000 residents and is about 10 miles west of Worcester.

66 WriterMom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:48:12am

#19 fjordman

I would say the NY Times has a pretty clear history of siding with the enemy.

67 funkyfantom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:49:24am

I wish that the Harvard report would have dealt with the issue of the reliability of the "civilian" casualty count.

There seems to have been a general agreement among practically everyone during this war to blindly accept casualty counts, which were controlled by Hezbollah, as gospel truth, despite the obvious interest of Hez to minimize their own casualties while maximizing those of "civilians".

If you are going to tell me that any dead Hezbollah terrorist is not going to get labeled a "civilian" by Hezbollah ( which in turn winds up in a media report ) that is just an insult to people's common sense and intelligence.

68 American Jewess In Jerusalem  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:50:08am

#65 lawhawk

Good grief! That is a devastating mistake to make. Ingesting lye is almost always deadly. What idiots. Unless . . . it wasn't a mistake . . .

69 Joel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:50:37am

66 WriterMom
And let's not forget how the Times during WWII under the aegis of Arthur Hays Sulzberger deliberately downplayed the Holocaust that they knew was taking place.

70 Highrise  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:51:09am

7 Poitiers-Lepanto 4/25/2007 10:00:12 am PDT

We don't know WHOSE money is behind today's MSM.

That is the question.

You are right. If the money support and ownership was transparent among Stores and MSM, people would be wiser to where they placed their money for sure. So far, the only two on tv that try to expose the man behind the curtain are Beck and O'reilly.

=====================

This article is a keeper. It says what I've known all along and it's great to see it in black and white print! I'd love to send this to a loony leftist I met a bit ago telling me to give the press a break because they have deadlines to meet and that was the ONLY reason there would be misinformation...and I should trust the MSM more. Idiot. I wonder if this thread will get a visit from the MSM doesn't lie folks today /snicker.

71 Tricky Dick  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:51:22am

OT

Bombshell Cripples Case Against Haditha Marines

The facts of what happened early that November morning clearly show that the incident was part of a planned ambush by insurgent forces, that the civilians tragically killed in the were used as human shields by the insurgents, and that despite claims by Rep. John Murtha, there was indeed an ongoing firefight between the Marines and the enemy.

72 junkcoast  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:52:13am

Media Matters bogus "refutation" in 3..2..

Seriously. If the MSM had any concern about fair and honest reporting, they would refuse to go into a hizzy controlled area and "report" with such obvious and onerous restrictions placed on them. If you are told that you can film one thing but not another by a gun-toting madman, then how can anything newsworthy come out of that situation? The only report filed under such circumstances should be "Unfortunately we were not able to cover the entire story due to overt threats and fear of death placed on our reporters, staged incidents, and attempts to control the press. Because these actions would be unnecessary in a free and open press environment, we deem any information given to be slanted and biased, and therefore not newsworthy. We consider ourselves to be a platform for revealing truth, and the truth cannot be accurately assessed under these unfortunate circumstances."

The fact that this has never happened says volumes, no?

Seriously, why not just quit faking it, and simply translate everything FARS says and substitute that for "fact?"

Attention worldwide press: If your Press Liaison is carrying a Kalashnikov, drop your pen and camera, and just go home. You will see nothing there but mountains of carefully sculpted crap.

73 Joel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:53:14am

What is Walt & Mearsheimer up to these days anyway? Distributing copies of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion on David Duke's website?

74 zombie  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:57:35am
UPDATE at 4/25/07 10:20:33 am:
Here’s the full report, in PDF form.

Pout.

There's no mention in the report of the Red Cross Ambulance Hoax.

And the whole thing is supposed to be about the media's cooperation with Hezbollah during the Lebanon War.

Harrumph!

They missed one of the most egregious examples of media/Hezbollah collaboration!

75 Irene NYC  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:59:05am

Maybe - if we're lucky - this report will make some difference. But I don't think the MSM is going to trumpet their shortcomings to the world at large by airing reports about this report any time soon.

76 Jimash  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:06:00am

#38 just-a-grunt
No
This Marvin Kalb
[Link: www.gwu.edu...]

77 Yankee Zionist  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:09:28am

Money Quote:

Were it not for an American blog site called Little Green Footballs, run by Charles Johnson, it might have won a prize for wartime photography. But with determination and ingenuity, Johnson found that the photograph had almost certainly been doctored. He compared it with others shot of the same building at the same time and discovered that in Hajj’s photograph the dark smoke was darker—and there was more of it.

Yeah!

78 Earth2moonbat  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:12:33am

#68 American Jewess In Jerusalem

It depends on the concentration. They couldn't possibly put enough into a drinking water system to be really dangerous. There's more lye in lutefisk.

I have heard of municipalities cross-connecting sewage and drinking water systems. Thank God for chlorine!

In the Seattle area about 10 years ago, a utility left a lid off of a reservoir, and found bats hanging from the roof. Again, thank God for chlorine!

79 Theseus  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:13:08am

Another nail in the traitorous coffin of the quislings of the MSM and the political left.

80 mattm  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:17:49am

About time a major University has done good research. Now only if the MSM could this....

81 ointmentfly  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:21:43am

Did we really need a report to tell us what is easily apparent?

Osama just came out and took credit for blowing up 20 afghan workers outside Bagram AFB in Afghanistan. Will the editorialists here and abroad condemn Bin Laden for killing civilians in the name of Jihad or condemn the Bush administration for "taking their eye off the ball in Afghanistan to attack Iraq"?
One bomb that kills 20 afghan civilians will mean that Osama is somehow still relevant. If the US military kills one civilian in error, charges are filed and restitution paid and the earth shakes in the arab world for months.
Hmmm

82 MoonbatBane  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:23:41am

Two major errors, fixed below:

Gradually lost as soon as possible in the coverage was the fact that the war began when Hezbollah infiltrated Israel, kidnapping two of its soldiers (still held to this day) and killing eight Israelis. Despite the undisputed fact that Hezbollah triggered the war, Israel was painted as the aggressor, as images of the war were used to change overtook the context.

In short, I don't think that the MScuM accidentally changed the context and painted Israel as the aggressor. I think that they did this on purpose because by and large they are on the same side as Hezbollah and other terrorists. Seriously, not even a little /sarc here. They are traitorous terrorist allied scum, and many of them should be treated as such: namely arrested, tried for treason, and if convicted, imprisoned for a long time or even executed. A bunch of Lord Haw Haws (who was hanged after WWII), that's what they are...

83 Silhouette  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:23:45am

#77 YZ

I agree with the first sentence of the quote but as for

... with determination and ingenuity, Johnson found that the photograph had almost certainly been doctored.

I'd say more like "... by glancing at the photo for half a second, Johnson (and the reader who first forwarded the photo) found that...."

The determination came in to play during the weeks of having to explain and explain how it was clearly altered to those who didn't want to see what was staring them in the face, and to keep up the pressure so that Reuters couldn't just sweep it under the rug. IMHO.

84 oonly  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:25:50am

Touché, I hope that this catches on with the rest of the "enlightened" media. There needs to be as much noise over this scholarly work as we can muster. Shout it from the rooftops so all can hear.

85 Shari  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:28:10am

#15 and others

It is Marvin Kalb, not Bernard. I makes a difference!

86 Shari  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:28:43am

Woops. "It" makes a difference

87 grumpy old codger  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:35:30am

Charles,
It's a rather nice reference in the media report (page 25). I suggest you give the hamsters a day off, extra carrots and a double ration of grog.
Well done.

88 Maine's Michael  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:41:33am

ShorenSTEIN Center.

And they're supposed to be credible?

Not even a mention of Syria's helpful role in trying to stabilize Lebanon.

One need look no further than who benefits from this 'report'.

Case closed.

89 MoonbatBane  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:42:13am

#44 oilbertan 4/25/2007 10:24:01 am PDT

However I can see the moonbats of the left covering their ears and going: nah nah I can't hear you.

They won't have to "cover their ears" or their eyes -- the problem goes much deeper. Their brains quite literally will not accept what the report says. They'll find some excuse, any excuse, to discount the facts. Given the cognitive dissonance and anti-semetism so rampant on the left these days, my bet is that they'll say this is Zionist propaganda because its put out by an organization with a Jewish sounding name (i.e., Shorenstein). That thin reed will be used to discount the entire report: It allows them to preserve their worldview, lets them continue to blame the Joooos, and gives them an excuse not to look at any other facts that might challenge their worldview. Thus, once they blame "the Zionists" (they won't say Jews because in their worldview they aren't racist, we are), they will simply ignore the report and the facts it contains. Again, not even a little /sarc

90 Merovign  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:45:21am

#88 Maine's Michael

If you keep forgetting your /sarc tag, people will get the wrong idea.

Or were you baiting newbies? :)

91 Shari  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:47:09am

They can pick on the Shorenstein name all they want. This report is from Harvard University - John F. Kennedy School of Government. What does brother Teddy think of this?

92 Ziggy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:48:21am

#88 main's michael

Jew gotta be kidding me?

93 cbinflux  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:49:27am

AND YET, Harvard called for Liberal POTUS candidates to boycott Fox?!

94 Ojoe  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:49:52am
...kidnapping two of its soldiers (still held to this day) ...

And why shouldn't it be a bloody mess until they ARE returned?

I don't get it.

95 alexwest  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:56:54am

Thanks, AJIJ!

96 steve young  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:00:53pm

And yet even today the MSM continues to print Palestinian stringer reports verbatim which portray Israel as the aggressor and those poor victims of Hamas as only responding to Israeli violations of the "ceasefire". What obvious garbage. Every year the sales and subscriptions to former media giant news conglomerates continue to plummet. Thank goodness for the bloggers that doggedly shine the light on this MSM infestation of lies.

97 Smilin' Jack  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:05:20pm

Hmmm.....Is it time, yet, to chuck the MSM into Boston Harbor? Will it ever be time? If/When it is time, will there be enough real patriots around to do it? Have we all unlearned the ability to take outraged action against traitors?

Just askin'
SJ

98 Walahi  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:06:41pm

The leftist media loves Hezbollah and Hamas - they fit their ideals perfectly. Here are two 'grassroots' groups, fighting against the 'Zionists'. Little beknown to the western sporters of ubiquitous yellow t-shirts is that Hezbollah rolls in the gazillions in the funding from Iran.

They way the MSM portrayed the Summer Conflict was the Israel was bombing the ever-loving crap out of Lebanon for no reason other than Israel is Israel, you know, big bad racist horrible Israel. The MSM did a great job in hiding the fact that Hezbollah has been preparing for something like this a long time and actually was provoking it for up til the start. Exactly a year before, it was certain that Hezbollah was going to hit Israel.

The media was complicit (check here and here for examples). There is not enough outrage from journalists, who should be objectively (as humanly possible, obviously everyone has bias) covering events. This episode in journalism is dreadfully serious and its implications go farther than most people think.

I don't care if these journalists had a shot of tequila everytime a katyusha flew into Israel. They can pick a side personally all they like. Just like when I hear there has been arrest of terrorists, or major Taliban ass-kicking in Afghanistan, I applaud the courageous men and women whose job that is. But when they crossed the line and deliberately ran propaganda (to the point of ALTERING and CREATING stories!) they have ceased to be journalists. We should call them goebbel-ists. The literally threw their lot in with Hezbollah.

The problem is that its not just the news that is throwing their lot in with terror. I was disgusted with the film Syriana. Pure leftist Hollywood at its best. However, one of the noble characters was the Hezbollah leader who keeps his word in not allowing George Clooney to get his head cut off. Nope, the only backstabbers and overall bad guys in that movie are power-suited white Americans, preferably with southern drawls.

People hate Israel simply because and even when a self-acknowldged terrorist group attacks Israel, people are pre-conditioned to support them.

...ahhh..ok, its off my chest. Back to regular programming...

99 ploome hineni[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:11:04pm
100 WriterMom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:17:34pm

#69 Joel

Yes. "European Jewry slaughtered-see page A32".

101 WriterMom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:19:54pm

#74 zombie

Pout not, my zombie friend. We here in Lizardia are well aware of your coup. You should e-mail the Harvard dude.

102 ploome hineni[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:21:57pm
103 WriterMom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:23:15pm

#64 Cato the Elder

And don't forget that the Soviets were advising on PR matters, too. They were very useful to the local communists in shaping the conflict as a national liberation struggle, they were expert in American public opinion. There was nothing innocent about the language that was used. All Marxist influence concepts and positioning.

104 WriterMom  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:24:18pm

#102 Ploomie

When Rosie votes Bush.

105 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:25:33pm

Mar 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? [in the very end Mat 13:49]

Hbr 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment

1Cr 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

Psa 2:4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

When God laughs - if you are too - it only means that you got the joke.

But these ones - the media giants - the lawyers - the judges - the politicians - the 'elite' professors - have all missed the 'Ark'

and they will reap [all will] what they have sown.....only though - they'll be the first to blame everyone else - but themselves.

It doesn't take 'a team of scholars' to see the wickedness that is in the Koran - nor 'a team of psychiatrists' to understand the outcome of feeding the teachings of the Koran to the young.

Where O Where are the "Tolerance" preachers? the "Diversity" preachers? the "Humanitarians" of this world?

Is this whole situation not laughable? [if it weren't so serious?]

Yes - it is.

106 gringo  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:35:49pm

Where, exactly, is this available other than at LGF or other blogs? Doesn't really matter, I guess, since it won't make any difference.
It doesn't go far enough. Other than to mention the NY Slimes, Wash Post and Reuters once, it doesn't name names and hold specific individuals and organizations to account.

"The challenge to keep from being used will be greatest for journalists in the field, but editors back in the newsroom also must look closely at what their organizations produce."

This is a waste of print because they're completely missing the point. The stories aren't slanted against Israel because journalists and editors aren't being vigilant...they're slanted because journalists and editors WANT to slant them against Israel.
The whole thing makes it sound as if the media was unwittingly letting itself be used by Hezbullah. That's simply not true. Nobody used anybody. Hezbullah gave the media exactly what it wanted to print.

107 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:37:13pm
108 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:41:53pm
109 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:42:39pm
110 jxs2151  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:51:03pm

#97

"Is it time, yet, to chuck the MSM into Boston Harbor"

That is exactly what we here and blogs elsewhere are doing this very minute. The revolution will not be televised.

111 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 12:52:40pm

107 taxfreekiller

If the leaders of the U. S. Democratic Party succeed in defunding the war in Iraq assisted by this cult of lies aka the msm, if they together succeed in electing a Pres. who will leave these women and children of Iraq behind with purple fingers so the mad dogs can find them then a more true dark co-evil ever existed on the planet.

So True!

How often has the media shown som U.S. politician walking out of some church with Bible in hand?

How many are appalled?

Jam 2:13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.

They have no compassion in them. And they don't even know it.

By pointing it out - won't they crawl with shame?

lest there be no shame in them

[Scary - isn't it?]

112 PatrioticNaturalizedAmerican  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:00:18pm

In case you haven't caught me posting yesterday, here is "Yalla ya Nasrallah", a great Israeli song, which was marked as inappropriate then removed by YouTube but still stays on Google:

In Hebrew with English subtitles.

113 erisldysnomia  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:14:21pm

#7 Poitiers-Lepanto

We don't know WHOSE money is behind today's MSM.

That is the question.

Sure we do.

Rich leftists and Arabs.

114 ErislDysnomia  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:19:29pm

#73 Joel

What is Walt & Mearsheimer up to these days anyway? Distributing copies of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion on David Duke's website?

No, writing a book about the evil Jewish Lobby, based on their previous essay.

115 wanderer  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:27:41pm

The solution to the lies of the lamestream media media's age old practice of consorting with the enemy is simple. Do not purchase the products of the media's empires be they their lying newspapers, amen chorus left-leaning magazines, books spwed from their publishing houses, the television productions and programming of their tools, and last but not least stay away from the scat that comes out of Hollywood.
The LSM conglomerates care nothing for the truth but are very conscious of their bottom lines.
Pinch will feel the squeeze just as has the Chica trib and its fools at the nearly moribund LA Slimes.

116 NiceLass  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:29:31pm

All we really want is honest reporting. Is that asking too much?

But, "Honest" reporting is not "Politically Correct" reporting, and liberals have already shown which they prefer. Why? Because they're snivelling cowards, that's why.

The pattern keeps repeating itself and PBS is also guilty of capitulation.

117 looking closely  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:42:04pm

#25 lawhawk

This report confirms what we'd already known about the situation, but it wont change anyone's opinions of what happened or what is continuing to happen in terms of media coverage of the region. The same stringers/editors are largely doing the reporting from the region and when the next conflict happens, they'll engage in the same kinds of behavior.


No amount of these exposes will ever give Israel a fair shake in the media.

Maybe Israel will learn and proceed with a better tactical attack on the media front next time around.

Or just maybe it will proceed with what needs to be done irrespective of negative media coverage.

118 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:43:08pm

#7 Poitiers-Lepanto

We don't know WHOSE money is behind today's MSM.

George Soros is the perfect place to start.

Words have power - even more so than Soros money.

Use them - relentlessly - against those who pave the path for murderers.

119 dhg4  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 1:55:05pm

The report isn't perfect. Yes Kalb got a lot right, but he still spends most of his time defending the media. And then he has this bit of moonbattery:

When bin Laden wanted to help tip the 2004 presidential election in the U.S. to the incumbent, George W. Bush, he criticized Bush in a taped message delivered to Al-Jazeera. In Washington, such an approach would be called “media manipulation,” and it works there as it does in the Middle East.

Bin Laden was threatening Americans not to vote for Bush.

As far as his approach to the media is concerned, Kalb quotes studies that show that both sides consider the media bias. His unstated QED is: if both sides think we're wrong then we must be objective. Kalb quotes Bill Keller of the NYT:

Keller of the Times said that the issue is so irresolvable that he refuses to pander to the prejudices of his critics. “They don’t want you to be balanced in your coverage; they want you to portray the morality of the war as they see it.”65

But earlier Kalb had written that international law was on Israel's side. Shouldn't that have been written into every single dispatch?

Kalb got a lot right, and I guess I shouldn't be looking for problems. It's just that the problems seemed rather obvious.

120 penitentman[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:00:11pm
121 Q-Burn  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:11:27pm

#119 dhg4

The report isn't perfect. Yes Kalb got a lot right, but he still spends most of his time defending the media. And then he has this bit of moonbattery:

When bin Laden wanted to help tip the 2004 presidential election in the U.S. to the incumbent, George W. Bush, he criticized Bush in a taped message delivered to Al-Jazeera. In Washington, such an approach would be called “media manipulation,” and it works there as it does in the Middle East.

The CIA reached the same conclusion, that bin Laden intended to help Bush:

[Link: www.consortiumnews.com...]

122 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:14:11pm

120 penitentman

The Right's ever-present paranoia, its rousing "everyone's against us" mentality, is most unbecoming. Ugh.

The article at the top involves Hezbollah? No?

Here is what Hezbollah bows to:

009.029 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book { the Jews and Christians. Other non-Muslims are not so lucky] until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [THEFT and TREASON!]

"deep breath..."

004.101 When ye travel - through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.

"Ugh"

009.005 But when the forbidden months are past [when 'treaties' expire, although they may break them at any time - if it benefits Islam} then fight and slay the Pagans wherever' ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.

"deep breath..."

008.067 It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war [slay them first] until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. {TREASON AND MURDER]

"Ugh"

002.216 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing [war] which is good for you and that ye love a thing [peace] which is bad for you?

033.061 They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy. {Genocide, no matter how you look at it

"deep breath..."

Hey penitentman - Did no one ever tell you - that the tree is known by its own fruit?

If you lend support to murderers in any way - you are one.

"Ugh"

123 Daisy  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:25:50pm

#64 Cato the Elder,

"The Vietnam War was not covered "live" in any sense of the word as understood today.."

That's technically correct - and - I was not commenting on technological variety, but upon the (mis) use of the technology that carried the message of much of the MSM during the time of the Vietnam war. Sure, Al Gore had not yet invented the internet, satellite coverage was a dream ( maybe Ted Turner had dreamed of Jane Fonda, but CNN was off in the future ) ... lots of things were different. However, within the limits of existing technology, Vietnam was a televised war. The impact of the images from Vietnam (and from the USA w/ major coverage of protest marches) broadcast by the MSM certainly lent themselves to leftist manipulation of the war efforts. As far as 24-7, again, you're technically correct .. but insofar as the MSM could barrage the public w/its propaganda (which included at least 3 daily newspapers delivered to the household I lived in) it did so and did so rather effectively.

124 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:29:09pm
125 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:44:56pm

124 taxfreekiller

OK, your a moon bat, [pent man] we disregard you as all others should.

I disagree - in some cases.

Sometimes - you can make very good food out of their posts.

How many see these posts everyday?

The point is - to make a difference - for the innocent.....like the Beslan children were.

126 Captain Sensible  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:54:46pm

Whoa, someone has analyzed the press coverage and seems to have gotten it largely correct. Someone check the barn, I think the flying pig has gotten out. I only wish this could come earlier or provide some insight on how to reign in the MSM during the next conflict.

Oh, #120 penitentman

You forgot the /sarc tag and if you didn't then you are a moonbat.

127 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:58:26pm

#120 penitentman

The Left's ever-present, knee-jerk defense of the indefensible (such as terrorists, such as gangs like Hizbollah) is most unbecoming. Ugh. (And awk, blech, retch, gag, yuck, etc.)

Really, what Left-wing totalitarian regimes haven't you guys supported during the 20th Century? Stalin? Mao? Pol Pot? The Vietcong? That's beyond "unbecoming"---it's downright psycho.

And why shouldn't the Lizard King print a Harvard article, if he thinks it's a good one? It's the Left, with its "Eees party line, Comrades!" that refuses to listen to any ideas, and sneers at all other viewpoints. (Another unbecoming trait, to be sure.)

128 deacon  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:58:46pm

#120 penitentman 4/25/2007 2:00:11 pm PDT
Socrates was executed for filling "young people's heads with the wrong ideas." Ahh, the good old days.

Socrates was not really executed, but committed suicide (as was the method of judgement in ancient greece)

And 2 of his students did briefly over throw the Athenian government resulting in a reign of terror. He was also known for his undemocratic views. I could ask my wife if you wish to know more about him, she has read his works in the original ancient greek.

129 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 2:59:53pm

#118 Wei

Don't forget Saudi oil-tick funds, either.

130 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:10:39pm

#118 We1

Sorry I misspelled your name!

131 we1  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:12:18pm

129 TalkinKamel
Don't forget Saudi oil-tick funds, either.

NEVER! TalkinKamel.

But then agian - Their memory shall perish

This is why I put all of the Koran writings in green

132 pat  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:17:00pm

OT
Alec Badlwin decides to move his fat ass out of the country. Don't forget to rip up your passport, Al.
[Link: www.drudgereport.com...]

133 tantraman  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:24:31pm

How about the media partnering with the Bush Administration over Tillman and Lynch?

134 squarepeg  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:38:13pm

#71 Tricky Dick

Devastating.

And what more damning leftistmedia/terrorist convergence than this:

"The officer also showed how the insurgents used allegations of wrongdoing by Marines as propaganda to support their cause. . . . . Another witness testified that since the Haditha incident received so much negative attention, terrorist propaganda alleging law of war violations against American servicemen in Iraq has ‘ballooned.'"

135 PapaWhisky  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:45:58pm

What does this mean?

The views expressed in the KSG Faculty Research Working Paper Series are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the John F. Kennedy School of Government or of Harvard University. Faculty Research Working Papers have not undergone formal review and approval. Such papers are included in this series to elicit feedback and to encourage debate on important public policy challenges.Copyright belongs to the author(s). Papers may be downloaded for personal use only.

136 squarepeg  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:48:22pm

#133 tantraman

How about some f***ing idiots in the military partnering with some f***ing idiots in the media over Tillman and Lynch?

Has a line to the White House been established?

Or is our very purpose here to talk facts and dispel myths?

137 republic  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:49:40pm

#133 tantraman

How about the media partnering with the Bush Administration over Tillman and Lynch?

You're too stupid to even try and have a conversation with.

138 LeftJustAintRight  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:50:45pm

If any lawmakers are reading this,we need legislation to make the MSM accountable when they do not check the facts or knowingly report false information.Rathergate
The law needs to be in place before the next election.
Just a little check and balance is all we need.
David

139 Mich-again  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:50:46pm

Cool story. I read the whole thing I'm glad to see Charles getting his due, from no less than the U of M of the East, aka Harvard. But I sensed more LGF references than just Fauxtography... The writer also mentioned how UNIFIL press releases listed Israeli troop locations and movements and he noted that Hezbollah could have actually been using UNIFIL for intelligence gathering.

Ha. I think I was first to make that observation here last July 25. (And observe the hat-tip on that thread.) Nyuck, nyuck..

140 penitentman[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:52:01pm
141 squarepeg  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:54:11pm

#107 taxfreekiller

they blame this on the all powerfull Cheeny person who has the power to hold him self high above the ground and with his mind, bend the whole world to go to war in Iraq

who will leave these women and children of Iraq behind with purple fingers so the mad dogs can find them

Best imagery of the day.

142 republic  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 3:56:30pm
#140 penitentman

#122 -

Those Muslim quotatioms reminded me of a charming bible passage (Deuteronomy 13)--one pastors rarely seem to preach on:
---------
“If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known, some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. And all Israel shall hear and fear and never again do any such wickedness as this among you."

The New Testament covers it all.

The New Covenent.

Shows your true colors about Christianity, you know little, at best.

Funny, the Koran doesn't have a"new testament" to it.

You're a viper, be gone with you.

143 deacon  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 4:13:46pm

#140, FYI, Deuteronomy chapter 13 has deals specifically on what Israel shall do when they reach the lands that God has promised them, and how they shall honor him and protect their lands. Remember, he is a jealous and vengiful God at this point. He does not tell Israel to go into other nations and bring them to worship Him. For only they are his people. As republic states in #142, there is a New Covenant which is what God through Jesus made to the Gentiles. And it is the Gentiles that are to spread his word in a peaceful method.

Mat 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

144 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 4:49:37pm

#122 penitentman

Well, I think deacon, #143, pretty much sets you straight on the good book.

Now, the ball's in your court; explain to us why you'e okay with the "Smite the infidel" stuff in the Koran (and, presumably, terrorist groups like Hamas/Hizbollah).

I honestly don't understand your rage at Charles' linking to this article. You accuse conservatives of hating institutions of higher education, but when LGF links to one favorably, you have a tantrum---why? Because we're not doing the Leftist "EEEEES PARTY LINE, COMRADE!" Hey, sometimes we do listen to ideas outside (what you think) is our particular sphere; you should try it yourself sometime.

#133 Tantraman

Not to mention the nefarious plottings of that nefarious, spacely---and ghostly---overlord, Baldwin IV, the Leper King, and his army of singing, psychic dolphins! Not to mention the sinister plottings of the bug men of Scopianus, with the backing of Haliburton and Wal-mart, and those Simian buccaneers, the Cosmic Space Monkeys!

(Hey, if Tantra can try to derail the thread with irrelevancies, I can too! So there!)

145 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 4:53:56pm

#131 we1

Thanks for the links!

:>)

(Should we point out to penitentman that the Bible also contains un-violent stuff, such as the "Book of Ruth", many of the Psalms, "The Song of Songs", etc., and that there really is a lot more in the OT than just smiting, or being smitten?

Naaah, his head would probably explode.)

146 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 4:56:10pm

I mean, seriously, are we supposed to believe that penitentman would have been pleased if we'd insulted Harvard?

(Are we also supposed to care if he's offended? Ugh.)

147 legalpad  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 5:54:49pm

#120 penitentman Well - you may not want to keep up with all the responses but here's another.

The conservative nature of the website of course comes from Charles, but as to it being exclusive - well- no one asked me and obviously, you as to political views. Many of my views are decidedly left, actually most of them.

You must remember it is primarily the left who insists of utter uniformity of thought. The right only does something close to that in it's religions. It is not hypocritical to praise Harvard. In fact the point being made is that a leftist University is accusing a leftist media so it should have credibility on the left. And the posters on this site regularly recognize accuracy from anyone who speaks it, regardless of their usual political orientation. On the left you rarely, if ever, see that.

I find it difficult to understand why some leftists seem to need to debate conservatives who are mostly a product of the leftist imagination: Casting aspersions on their intellect, condescending insults, pleasing themselves with their own clever rhetoric. Most conservatives are neither the idiots that you need them to be, in order for you to feel able to "debate" them, if you call insults and false assertions debate, nor the paranoids you imagine them as . (Vast right-wing conspiracy?)

As for Harvard - fear it? I don't think so. Read some of these speeches of a Harvard graduate and ask yourself if it is conservatives or leftists who fear what is said.
Crichton

Leftists, by the way, are generally not actually liberal, they just like to posture as such. They are usually devious and totalitarian, wanting power, not in the hands of the people, but in the hands of a nearly all-powerful central government.

I tell my liberal friends and relatives (almost all of them) that they have no need for deviousness or insults because they are right on so many issues. They can simply use facts and reasoning, and be kind and patient with those who differ from them politically. That even sounds liberal, doesn't it?

148 deacon  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 6:06:44pm

#147 legalpad 4/25/2007 5:54:49 pm PDT

That was very well presented.

149 penitentman[deleted]  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 6:44:29pm
150 R2D2  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 6:55:32pm

#149 penitentman

So, basically, you have nothing to say?

As we say in Russian, bug off.

151 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 7:02:07pm

#144 Penitentman

It is absurd, extremely lame, and downright laughable, to say I called you a terrorist, or that anybody here called you a murderer. You made sarcastic snarkisms about how awful we were to point out the violence of some Koranic quotes, and the violence of Hizbollah, by quoting from the Bible---"SEE? CHRISTIANS ARE JUST AS BAD!" Deacon, in Post #143 pretty well refuted your comparison; I then asked you to respond. That's not calling you a terrorist, so stop whining. It's asking you to respond to an issue you, yourself raised. If you're so offended by violent Biblical passages, you surely can't agree with even more violent passages from the Koran---can you? And if you disapprove of terrorism, how can you criticize Charles for running an article---from Harvard, no less---exposing how they subverted the media, using it as propaganda arm? If you're not a terrorist, and don't sympathize with them, I'd think you'd welcome this being exposed.

Instead you're hissing and spitting and stamping your feet and growling about Conservatives and higher education, as if that had anything to do with anything---and dragging the Christian Bible into it all---why, exactly? Okay, the Bible contains violent parts. And that proves what, exactly? That we can never, ever criticize anything about Islam, or Hizbollah (or even Harvard) because of this?

This sort of silly "reasoning" doesn't make you a terrorist or a murderer. It does make you look pretty foolish, however. For pity's sake, go back and re-read legalpad's post, and take it to heart this time.

152 ctrlL  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 7:08:58pm

147 legalpad
149 penitentman


The conservative nature of the website of course comes from Charles,

I have been reading and occasionally participating on this blog for a little over 3 years. I needed to understand, first of all, what blogs were. LOL. I clicked all of the areas and read alot. What you will find, is that the statement above is NOT correct; at least, at the outset. Look back in the archives and see for yourselves. I do not claim to have knowledge of Charles current political persuasion, but I would bet that he does not count himself on any side. I think we all, Charles included, attempt to listen to all factually based arguments, do our own research and then come to individual conclusions.
/Call me an unenrolled fact-based voter

153 TalkinKamel  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 7:14:43pm

Penitentman

Also, when you snarked about the "paranoia" of the right, I pointed out that the Left has supported some extremely evil characters over the past several decades; that's not calling you a murderer, or a terrorist; it's asking you to really think about some of those groups, and "revolutionary leaders" the Left sometimes supports so enthusiastically; and do you really think it's just "paranoia" that makes conservatives (and a lot of other people as well)uneasy about gangs like Hizbollah?

154 theblakester  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 7:20:59pm

#81 ointmentfly 4/25/2007 11:21:43 am PD

Dam you ointmentfly, next time ask before you take the words right out of my mouth!

155 deacon  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 7:31:39pm
149 penitentman 4/25/2007 6:44:29 pm PDT

You called me a murderer. Puhleeze! Absurd. Lame. Extremist. Fringe. Dangerous. Entertaining. It's not every day I get an accusation like that. Talk about getting off topic - the whole Islam thing didn't come up in my comments. Today I was questioning an embarassing aspect of American conservatism. These are the rabid conservative views that prompt me to write dissenting posts here, just to get an amusing reaction. I always do.

I think you just demonstrated what legalpad was talking about in #147. Please, go and think a little more on what he said before you post.

156 siiras  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 10:10:29pm

Perhaps Penitentman's moniker is short for incarcerated in a penitentiary man? because he seems the opposite of penitent for his leftist views, coming here with the typical "pearls before swine" attitude. He throws down his trite and thousand times refuted "arguments" presumptuously imagining he's qualified to teach on this site. Instead he merely demonstrates a thread-bare reasoning ability (e.g. pointing out that the Bible has violent imagery without even the most basic separation of Old from New Testament and falsely conflating it with the violent teachings that permeate the Koran and have never been superseded by appeals to mercy and Man's better nature).

legalpad seems a decent sort, and has demonstrably not lost all critical reasoning ability, so I wonder why he/she thinks that the left has gotten so many things right, that it doesn't need to use dirty tactics? From where I'm sitting, the left has gotten everything wrong, except black civil rights in America and even there, they went on to destroy the black family in a way that even slavery could not accomplish with their Welfare, anti-marriage and abortion policies.
Legalpad, continue to use your reasoning abilities and come completely into the light.

98 Walahi, who discussed the movie Syriana, I agree that the problem of propaganda is much larger than merely the news media. Tonight I was unsuspectingly watching "Crossing Jordan" on TV and saw before my amazed eyes a sub-plot unfold in which a main character "Bug" who's Hindu I believe on the show, was shanghaied from his high prestige job as a medical coroner and entymology expert by evil government agents who waterboarded him because "he had a foreign name and looked like people they think are dangerous". Jordan then sighed, "And we think we are in control of our lives"...

Yep folks. Any day now, the evil government may come and snatch you for torture on the flimsiest of pretexts. The biggest laugh in this fantasy is that the writers disprove their own leftist smearing immediately, since instead of moping about, Dr.Bug would logically be on the hotline to the ACLU, suing the government into bankruptcy and giving interviews to the NYT.

Finally, 72 junkcoast, yes, principled journalists who are led about by the nose by terrorist keepers should be very candid about how stringently they are controlled or better yet, refuse to report the propaganda altogether. The problem is an inflated sense of their own worth and the belief that some news even if heavily doctored is better than no news from behind enemy lines.

They are greatly mistaken. Someone much wiser than them said as much:

"The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them insomuch as he who knows nothing is nearer the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors."
Thomas Jefferson

I have very much enjoyed the high level of discussion on LGF during my brief enrolment so far. Penitentman is way out of his league.

157 deacon  Wed, Apr 25, 2007 11:36:17pm
#156 siiras

"The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them insomuch as he who knows nothing is nearer the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors."
Thomas Jefferson

I have never heard that qoute before...It is now my new favorite. Thanks for sharing that with us.

158 SpiritOf1683  Thu, Apr 26, 2007 1:34:48am

#82 MoonbatBane

Lord Haw Haw was nothing compared with the traitorous sods of the present day MSM. He was hanged for doing far less damage to our war effort than the Western journalists of today. Back in the 1940s, Haw Haw's broadcasts from Berlin actually made us more determined to defeat the Nazi menace. But there is one crucial difference between Haw Haw and our present day MSM. Back then, nobody took any notice of Haw Haw, but today, people believe or want to believe every vicious anti-Israeli and anti-Western epithet they come out with. And it is reflected with the attitude of 1940 when everybody, including the journalists, knew that losing against Nazi Germany meant losing everything we had, whilst today they stupidly believe that losing against the Islamonazis is no great deal.

159 Boazhorribilis  Thu, Apr 26, 2007 5:49:29am

Beware of the enemy within!
The visible enemies are more easily dealt with.

160 Hot Rod Kid  Thu, Apr 26, 2007 5:58:43am

Harvard: How The Media Partnered With Hezbollah is a very important story. Thanks for posting it, Charles. I caught it on M. Savage website. I'm repeating the link in this post cuz I think it's a real significant story that definitely should be looked at.

161 Carl B  Thu, Apr 26, 2007 10:56:49am

Bet this gets as much press as that other recent Kennedy School paper by Walt and Mearsheimer

/NOT


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

Would you like fries with that?