Letters to the Editor
johnrohan
Published Letters: 9
-
Like a herd of sheep
[Read the article: Al-Qaida does it, too]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The reason that it is news that the U.S. tortures, but not news that Al Qaeda does, is because Al Qaeda is a barbaric and savage terrorist group which operates with no limits, whereas the U.S. is supposed to be something different than that. Isn't it amazing that one even needs to point that out?
Wow, you're right. Why did the media bother reporting 9/11? After all, we already knew terrorists were bad.
For that matter, I don't want to hear about the Holocaust or the evils of slavery in the US either. Or even anything about Jim Crow laws, or Rosa Park's seat on the bus. After all, we already know that Nazis, slave owners, and bigots are bad people. That's why we don't need to discuss it anymore...
Look, it was NEWS. It was a new story. Not only was a torture manual found, but also 42 prisoners freed, including a boy, and there were pictures of the torture wounds on some of the victims (for those on this list who apparently think it was all a fake).
But for some reason, it didn't get front page coverage anywhere, while Abu Ghraib headlined the NYT 43 times. I think this story warranted at least 1/43rd of the attention of Abu Ghraib. Don't you think?
Sure "man bites dog" warrants more coverage than "dog bites man". But this was a case of "dog disembowels man". The sheer brutality of it should have warranted a few mentions.
Incidentally, not everyone knows that Al-Qaeda are terrorists. Thanks to our media, most people around the world think the US is the actually the worst terrorist. Even in the US, recent polls among US muslims showed that 40% don't think Arabs conducted the 9/11 attacks. 40%!! The media, like Salon, plays a part in this and is complicit in this kind of ignorance.
Incidentally, I've served two tours in Iraq, and I'm a former interrogator myself. If you want to read more, I discuss this here.
-
Let's character assassinate our Generals. Why not?
[Read the article: How much credence should Gen. Petraeus' reports be given?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For the partisan issue, I would like to point out that earlier this year, Petraeus was unanimously confirmed to his position and rank of four star General by a heavily Democratic US Senate.
And more importantly, would it make any sense to appoint an anti-war general to command the Iraq theater? Wouldn't it be irresponsible for Petraeus, or anyone else in command, to go around telling all the troops the war is lost? Has it ever occurred to you posers that no matter what his personal feelings are, the reality is that American troops are on the ground in Iraq, and the Generals are not the ones who decide when/if we can bring them home. So while we are there, for the sake of the lives of the men in theater, Gen Petraeus needs to give us, and the enemy, the impression that we are determined to win.
Frankly, I feel like nothing would satisfy people like Greenwald and Sullivan other than a General who will turn rebel and set his guns on Bush himself.
I guess that when you are an armchair warrior, doing your best in the blogosphere to undermine the war effort as much as possible, even bashing on Bush and Cheney from your laptop in the comfort of your living room must get old after awhile. So it must be fun to take a little diversion and assassinate the character of one of our finest generals instead.
http://shieldofachilles.blogspot.com/2007/07/another-way-to-undermine-war.html
-
Glenn Greenwald, the "expert"
[Read the article: The growing link between the U.S. military and right-wing media and blogs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, let's listen to Glenn Greenwald, whose military experience adds up to zero, as does, I suspect, the amount of time he has actually spent in Iraq or even the Middle East. Your stereotypes are appalling and your cherry-picked anecdotes are not very persuasive either. Soldiers, even generals, are human beings like everyone else. Some support the war, some don't, some support Bush, some don't, and every combination in between.
Oh, and incidentally, I happen to a Captain in the US Army with two tours in Iraq.
And somehow I missed your indignation over the almost daily basis where damaging information about the military is leaked to fuel the media's anti-military crusade. I also missed the column where you wrote about how dangerous it is that the media has become part of the left-wing noise machine. For just one example, look how Gen Sanchez's recent criticism of the media was completely omitted by the large media outlets, while his statements criticising the President were reported everywhere.
Let's face it. You, Greenwald, were part of this left-wing noise machine that so badly wanted the Beauchamp/TNR story to be true: http://shieldofachilles.blogspot.com/2007/08/beauchamp-controversy-many-foots-in.html
Now, since it's fallen apart, you are now desperately trying to change the subject. Good luck with that.
-
To: retired military patriot
[Read the article: The growing link between the U.S. military and right-wing media and blogs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It would help you see the forest if you stopped listening to the right wing propaganda machine that has anything but your best interests at heart.
I'm not quite so right wing as you probably suspect, but in any case, if I was only listening to their "propaganda" then I wouldn't be here "stepping away from the trees" and reading Glenn Greenwald's column.