Friday, February 03, 2006

Media for Who?

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

During the first Gulf War, when fighters were taking off from their bases in Saudi Arabia, CNN dutifully reported their take-offs, and made statements that they would know where they were going in about 1 to 2 hours. Of course, this gave Saddam's military time to get ready, and higher losses of aircraft and crews were the result. After the conflict was over, one of the senior Iraqi generals made the statement that CNN was one of their best sources of intelligence.

Also during the same conflict, the media reported in great detail the use of laser guided bombs & missiles and their limitations. Saddam's response was to ignite the Kuwait oil fields, resulting in one of the greatest ecological disasters in the region. All to thwart those lasers.

During the hunt for Bin Laden, the media reported that our forces were closing in on Bin Laden's position. Our forces knew his position because of his use of a satellite cell phone, and were triangulating his position from that source. The day after that report aired, the phone was never used again. I wonder why?

A reported incident at the Guantonimo Bay Detention facility concerning the desecration of prisoner's Korans was reported, and a huge world wide uproar ensued. Later, it was found out that this report was false, but that note got nowhere near the attention that the original report got. One can only wonder how many people were put in danger after this untrue report.

Last and more recent example. The media reported that the FBI, NSA, and other intelligence sources were eavesdropping on known terrorist cell phones to learn of their plans and to locate the terrorist's location. Many of those phones went silent, and there was a run on the purchase of one-time and temporary cell phones that could be purchased in cash. There were reports from a couple of Wal-Mart's in Texas that 6 Middle Eastern men were apprehended when they attempted to buy 60+ of these cell phones, and were wanting to pay cash for them. It was later reported that these men were connected to al-Qaeda.

The First Article of United States Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is a powerful liberty to allow the press (or media) uncensored freedom to publish what they want. It also carries great responsibility. For instance, during Orson Welles's broadcast of War of the Worlds, people panicked because they thought Earth was being invaded by Mars. Another example is yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Both have the potential for getting people hurt. So does the careless reporting of military activities and/or secure information.

While we normally think of war as being between countries, the terrorists have declared war on the United States, and have attacked our citizens & military numerous times. And we have declared war on the terrorists and any country that helps them. Does anyone doubt that this is a war? Do you remember September 11, 2001?

Article 3 Section 3 (in part) of the United States Constitution deals with the subject of Treason, and declares that "Treason against the United States, ... or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." By this definition, the media is dangerously close, if not in fact, to committing treason against the United States. Giving the terrorists information that will aid them in avoiding detection and apprehension is definitely helping them, and hurting us. And I know that there are other laws, Federal laws, that list penalites for behavior damaging to this country and its citizens.

The problem is that the media, print and otherwise, is now an entertainment industry, not a news reporting industry. In the rush to report the latest, greatest story so that better ratings can be gained, responsible journalism has gone out the door. This lack of regard for the safety of this country and its citizens & soldiers sickens me. Where will this irresponsible behavior stop? What will it take? Personally, a good start would be the prosecution of the idiots that can clearly be linked to security breaches or actions that can be proved to have caused harm or death to United States citizens and/or military personnel. Sorry, in my book, freedom of the press should not be used as a shield for giving a self-declared enemy information of what is being done to thwart their activities.

To those journalists who take issue with the above statement, consider this scenario. You report live that the FBI is closing in on a terrorist cell in Mytown, USA, your home. Tipped off by the report, the terroists flee before they can be captured. They are spotted leaving, and a running gun battle races across the city, ending up in your neighborhood on the street you live. The terrorists break into your house to take refuge. Your wife and children are home. Rather than surrender, they scream "Allah Akbar!!" just before they detonate their last bomb, reducing your house and everyone in it to splinters and hamburger. So how would you feel? Think a responsible application of the First Amendment was in order? Or would you take comfort in the higher ratings your station just received? Think it can't happen? Go talk to the Israelis.

2 comments:

Nightcrawler said...

For decades, the mainstream media has been the mouthpiece of dissidents, communists and the enemies of our country. If you remember, the New York Times vehemently defended Alger Hiss who was a KGB agent working in our State Department. Many journalists still refuse to admit that the Rosenbergs were KGB spies. The New York Times published a ringing endorsement of Fidel Castro in the early years.

Times may have changed but the media hasn't. They are still the mouthpiece and defenders of anyone at odds with our country. They have been aligning themselves with our enemies for so long that it is instinctive with them.

BTW, I'm linking you.

Teresa said...

It is all about ratings and who breaks a story first. This is a great post. Very informative and kind of scary.