Knowing full well that certain video footage was made for the expressed purpose of terrorist propaganda, what is it CNN decides to do with footage of American troops being shot by terrorist snipers in Iraq?Anderson Cooper first describes what happened, then misses the point
Last night, we ran a controversial piece produced by our Baghdad correspondent Michael Ware. The backstory is that through intermediaries Michael had been communicating with Ibrahim Al-Shimary, a shadowy leader and spokesman for the Islamic Army. Michael had sent him a series of questions concerning the insurgency in Iraq and its motives. He was surprised when he received two videotapes in response. We aired portions of both last night. [...]Confederate Yankee gives some valuable background to explain why this propaganda is so valuable to the terrorists.
Whether or not you agree with us in this case, our goal, as always, is to present the unvarnished truth as best we can.
In any event, the article and video provided by CNN—brace yourselves—doesn't provide anything approaching a honest telling of why insurgent snipers are a "newsworthy" item.Blackfive protests:
[... much of value omitted, read it all!]
This leaves the filming of sniper attacks as the only real viable option for insurgents wishing to film an attack that won't also inflame the Iraqi population against them.
I sent an email to CNN asking how the decision to show the video was made and whether or not they considered the war effort, the feelings of the families back home and the troops fighting this war.Uncle Jimbo cusses a blue streak and concludes
CNN has made a conscious choice and they chose the wrong side. By promoting these evil killers, by giving them credibility, by treating them as simply our opposites, they have decided that the terrorists are our equivalent.So now, Ted Turner's CNN is serving as a propaganda arm of the terrorists.
Is this news or propaganda?
Why did the terrorists film that video? Why did they put it out on the internet, if not to be seen, if not to propagandize, if not to show how effective they are at murdering coalition soldiers in cold blood? It's propaganda. CNN has aired enemy propaganda as if it were the objective truth. But it isn't. It's ene-effing-my propa-effing-ganda!
The mujahedin's script of conquest goes like this. First, they frighten us, fill us with doubt. Propaganda. Attacks. Explosions. Terror. Uncontrolled terror fills the state. Nobody seems to know where it comes from or who is doing it. The state government doesn't want to repress its own people, doesn't want to turn to the darkside, and so becomes increasingly ineffective. We the people fear, plead, finally despair. Then in the midst of our universal despair, the pleasant ones, the well dressed, manicured, perfumed, educated ones come in and offer to save us from the real bad guys, the ones they can't control (stifling a giggle behind their hand), and we agree to let them protect us. So they take over and we agree to live under their laws to restore some semblance of order. See Afghanistan from twenty to ten years ago, and Somalia for the last ten years culminating this year to see how the script has played out before. That's when they have us and can kill and rape and steal at will. At least, that's the way they want it to happen. That's the way they have done it before, starting 1400 years ago in the eternal jihad.
Do we follow the script, or break it?
That's what they want. But we have a choice in it too.
The right choice is to say "NO" to the mujahedin, to do the opposite of whatever they want, to insult and belittle and ridicule and mock them and everything they hold dear. The mujahedin, jihad enablers and fellow travelers must all be killed or humiliated and their faith destroyed, and must come to learn through bitter experience that they have been led down the wide, easy road of sin by generations of imams and ayatollahs and that when the final judgement day comes jihad only leads to utter defeat, death, and total humiliation.
What can we do to oppose them?
We must oppose jihad at every turn. We must pass laws that declare jihad to be wicked, evil, a barbarous survival of the bad old days. Specifically it is the exact equivalent of Espionage and Treason. When they attack us, we retaliate and kill them. When they infiltrate our lands, we expose and expel them. When they turn buildings of worship into arms depots and military training facilities we condemn and knock down the buildings and arrest the mujahedin and their accomplices. When they try to terrify us with their propaganda we ridicule it, we turn it back on them, but we never, never, ever play it straight. When they threaten their co-religionists who drop the dime on them, we protect the righteous ones who have upheld the good and defied evil. If they attempt to convert ours to their jihad cult, we do not allow it. On the other hand, we encourage everyone to convert the jihad fellow travelers away from the death cult, and if their hands are not bloody then we embrace them within Christianity, or Wicca, or Confucianism, or Hinduism, or Buddhism, or any way that doesn't base its iconoclastic cult on idolizing a book and reviving a barbarous lifestyle from the 7th century after Christ.
It starts with a "T"
On the other hand, what has CNN done? They have volunteered to be tools of the jihad against us. They have volunteered to give comfort to, to aid and abet the actions of, those who are at war with our country.
What is that archaic legal term again?