Blogs > HNN > MSM RUSHES TO SHOW MORE ABU GHRAIB PICTURES/ update

Nov 23, 2006 2:10 am


MSM RUSHES TO SHOW MORE ABU GHRAIB PICTURES/ update



If you thought that maybe, just maybe, the MSM (mainstream media) is reluctant to publish the Muhammad Cartoons because it does not wish to put American soldiers in harm's way, think again. They just laid their hands on some old (but, yet, unpublished) photos of the infamous prison scandal and, lo and behold, they are rushing to show them.

No, the MSM has not just surrendered to the Islamists, they have emerged as their best allies.

Please, please, phone, email, send letters, cancel subscriptions. Do something (non violent, of course) to show your displeasure.

BBC news this evening tried to have its cake and eat it too. It began the broadcast with the newly released pictures AND some of the old. Then, the anchor interviewed the Austalian Olivia Rousset, who got it from her" contacts" in Iraq. He asked her what was the news value of showing these photos given the fact that they are years old and that the guilty have been punished. Wasn't it just pouring oil on fire? She said something about insufficient accounting of higher ups. All the while, the pictures remained on the screen. They were rebroadcast at the end. The entire treatment was reminiscent of the Janet Jackson episode when the TV was showing over and over the"wardrobe malfunction."

Please, click here and let them have a piece of your mind.

To complain to CNN, email: Jack.Cafferty@turner.com

ACLU also released new photos it attained through the freedom of information act today. They want another investigation but claimed they are not behind the ones released in Australia. Just a coincidence. Defense complains it will cause additional violence.

ACLU Contact information: John Heffernan, 202-728-5335, ext 304, jheffernan@phrusa.org

They are also suing Rumsfeld.

The New York Times was not bad this morning. It merely printed one picture in the inside page.

The Financial Times, on the other hand, put a disgusting photo up on the front page. (email: letters.editor@ft.com London fax: 44 (0)20 7873 5938 NY fax: 1 212 641 6504

Again, unlike the cartoons these photos lack news value and serve merely to inflame.

Michelle Malkin raises questions but LGF concludes The Media are the Enemy

Kudos to FDD for posting the Saddam torture tapes. Perhaps we should send them to the MSM to suggest they can post them?

To read a public letter send by a jounalist to Australian SBS TV challenging their publicizing Abu Ghraib pictures but failing to show the cartoons, click here



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


ramrod the republican - 3/19/2006

And let me get this straight: Because "None of my tax dollars went to publish the Mohammed cartoons..." the Comics story shouldn't reported with the same level of intensity as Abu Graib by the American media?

Clearly, full and continuous reporting of the arrest and prosecution of the accused perpetrators at Abu Graib would have been more than sufficient, and would have made clear to the world our moral standards.

As such, the Abu Graib photos were published simply with the intent to undermine our national reputation in the Muslim world. Whereas the Comics were not published so as to avoid creating an environment in which Islam would have further opportunity to vividly demonstrate its backwardness and bigotry.

Thus you did answer the question.

IS THE HYPOCRACY NOT EVIDENT?

Clearly, it is. And treasonous, I think.


Andrew A. Gill - 2/17/2006

The arrival of new photos about Auschwitz is always trumpeted loudly in the media. People want to deny that the Holocaust occurred, or that Hitler knew that it was happening. New photos cause us to reflect that such horrible things do indeed happen, and that we must be forever vigilant to keep them from happening again.

I think that it is a good thing that the media are showing the people whose anus our tax dollars are helping to rape, and what people decorated by the American Flag (and one of the few groups allowed to be so decorated) are doing in my name and your name. None of my tax dollars went to publish the Mohammed cartoons.


CanRev - 2/17/2006

The point is, the incidents conveyed by these images have *already* been investigated, there's been a trial, people have gone to jail, and that should be the end of the story. It's like as if new photos of the torture at Auschwitz were recently "discovered" and the MSM published them and said, "We're so ashamed of Germany. We need an investigation and hold the German people to account." Oh wait, they were held to account, just as those involved in the Abu Graib events were held to account. Also, how is this not an act of "provocation" for the Muslim world, which only last week the MSM has been going on about for why they won't publish the innocuous Danish cartoons? Surely you can see the hypocrisy.....?


Pomerol - 2/16/2006

I don't think it would do any good if the alternative media replaced the MSM. Sons and fathers are alike - and the alternative media would grow up to be the MSM as you know it.


Andrew A. Gill - 2/16/2006

Anomylous--

Remind me never to play any contact sports with you. For the record, shoving a lightstick up somebody's anus is not my idea of playtime, either to give or receive.

By the way, if you're defending something by saying, ``Yeah, but Saddam was worse,'' that's pretty sad.

Sadly Insane was really, really, really bad. If what we're doing is only really, really bad, that's still really, really bad.

What's next? ``Oh, he only killed a tenth of his population? That's OK; he's better than Pol Pot.''


vadkins - 2/16/2006

18 months ago. That's when I decided to cancel satellite TV to my house. Enough of seeing the Abu Ghraib photos. I didn't like the MSM bias so I stopped funding them through my satellite TV monthly payment. Our TV is never on unless we're watching a DVD movie.

It's time that the alternative media stop commenting on/whining about the bias of the MSM. Alternative media needs to replace the MSM.


Anomylous - 2/16/2006

None of the published "facts" justifies such scathing self-recrimination.
What US troopers did was nothing compared to what Saddass Hussein's did to their own.


- 2/16/2006

Treason in wartime is usually best answered with a rope; publicly is more productive, too.


Andrew A. Gill - 2/16/2006

A more constructive way to report this? Such as...? Maybe describing the photos? ``In photo 1, there's a bunch of blood on the ground, and what looks to be a...MRE wrapper? I don't know.''

We fought to get these photos released. If we don't fight to keep the public aware of them, they will be censored again. And then the people who did this will get off scot free.

The Danish cartoons, a bunch of poorly-drawn cartoons, are not going to be censored, and the violence is being committed by foreign countries where we don't have any interest (no troops, no major trade) against another country where we don't have any interest.

And I think that the government does arrest treasonous citizens. q.v. Iyman Faris.

Oops! Sorry, I'm simplistic and naive.


Ramrod the Republican - 2/16/2006

Are you really that naive? Is it too much of a stretch for your simplistic little mind to think there *may* have been a more constructive way to report this?

Further, is the hypocracy demonstrated by these same media outlets in refusing to publish the Islam Comics not painfully evident to you?

How's this: Isn't the government's job to arrest treasonous "citizens" and throw them in the slammer?


Dennis Caldwell - 2/16/2006

Jack Cafferty rules, and David Gregory has cajones!


Dennis Caldwell - 2/16/2006

Shouldn't we, uh, be upset at what went on at Abu Grahib rather than the media that published photos of the atrocities?


Andrew A. Gill - 2/16/2006

Isn't it the job of the media to, y'know, report when our tax dollars are going to help sodomize young boys?


Dwight in IL - 2/15/2006

Um, I don't really know how to put this, other than:

SHE DID!

Look at that strange underlined phrase at the end of the first paragraph. We call those hyperlinks. In this case that one goes to the Google News feed on the images. Which has over 700 articles, at last check.

Then, near the bottom, there's another link to the Physicians for Human Rights site, which....oh, I'm sorry, that just seems to link to substantive documents about the abuse, not inflammatory pictures of it. Actual news and information, not immediately useful for defaming the US in the Muslim world.


sonic - 2/15/2006

So much for your commitment over a free media and freedom of speech. That lasted a week!

Why did you link to the cartoons but not these pictures


garygnfp - 2/15/2006

here is a direct email to Jack Cafferty - CNN host of "situation Room"
Cafferty, Jack [Jack.Cafferty@turner.com]


roy estes - 2/15/2006

It is a waste of time to complain to cnn. Note who the advertising sponsers are, do not buy their products and then email or mail to the advertisers what you did and why.


Not Tony - 2/15/2006

Unfortunately, I can't unsubscribe to the New York Times without ever being dumb enough to subscribe in the first place.

How about a protest march?


. - 2/15/2006

MSM = Mainstream Media


Newbie - 2/15/2006

I'm new at this blog reading thing.
What does MSM stand for?