What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast ! & the infamous Palestinian clip - a death setence?

Madina Archives


Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast ! & the infamous Palestinian clip - a death setence?
zanfaz
09/25/01 at 23:22:28
[slm]

Who says Palestinian Muslims dont understand the pain of the
Americans? May Allah (swt) have mercy on them. Please see links below.

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010912/wl/mdf51266.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010912/wl/mdf51263.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010912/wl/imdf12092001114736a.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010913/wl/1000414727mideast_us_attacks_reax_gaz102.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010913/wl/1000396879mideast_us_attacks_reax_jrl103.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010913/wl/1000389627mideast_lebanon_us_attacks_reax_bei106.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010913/wl/1000388734mideast_us_attacks_reax_gaz101.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010913/wl/imdf13092001090525a.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010913/wl/imdf13092001071952a.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010913/wl/imdf13092001060448a.html[/url]

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010912/wl/1000325911mideast_us_attacks_reax_jrl117.html[/url]


Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
shadow493
09/17/01 at 07:57:14
[slm]

ive even heard some responses saying that what CNN showed about the palestinians jumping up and down cheering the death of thousands no tuesday isnt even real!  the time of day is innacurate and the video was shot about 10 years ago... anyone know any truth to this? allah hu alim...

[wlm]

adami
Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
jannah
09/17/01 at 11:19:05
CNN news cheif denies that it is old footage. He said it was taken by a Reuters crew and that they also filmed an interview with one of the small boys comments on bin Laden.

Anyway they will continue to deny it. I think we should concentrate on dispelling this image of "ppl celebrating".
Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
blissfull
09/17/01 at 14:05:39
slm
if CNN did show an old footage, then far be it to put their neck on the line.

but if you can somehow approach BBC, they may mention it as speculation.

what one media giant doesn't say the other may be willing. to some it is only ratings.

if this can be done, then even mere speculation will ease the tension of the celebrating issue.

i don't know how to get in touch with the man who shot the initial footage,but if he can be contacted by mail

then perhaps a reporter would be willing to write it as speculation. the land of the so called free can not

prosecute anyone on grounds of freedom of speech and mere opinion.

may ALLAH(SWT) show us the way.

Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
se7en
09/17/01 at 20:54:04

THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE, AS A WHOLE, UNFAIRLY PORTRAYED AS SUPPORTIVE OF THE ATTACKS ON WTC

Written by Nigel Parry

13 September 2001 -- Yesterday and today, following the inhumane use of passenger planes as flying missiles to attack people visiting and working in the World Trade Center buildings in New York and in the Pentagon in Washington, most of the media broadcast footage depicting Palestinians celebrating.

The brief footage was typically broadcast cyclically and used as an interview aid, with anchors asking U.S. government officials and others how they felt about the images.

Almost universally on U.S. networks, anchors presented the footage as if it were representative of all Palestinians, additionally failing to note any context to the images. A number of points must be made, first about the actual footage:

1. There are three million Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and West Bank including Jerusalem, one million Palestinians living inside the borders of Israel, and another four million Palestinian refugees living elsewhere in the world, including the United States. The footage in question depicted between 20 and 40 individuals.

2. The Palestinians in the footage were mostly young children. Most of their behaviour in the footage appeared to be no different from how Palestinian children always behave when foreign journalists turn up in their towns, crowding and smiling at the camera and giving the victory sign that has been a symbol of Palestinian steadfastness under Israeli military occupation since the first Intifada in 1987. There is not a single reporter with any experience of carrying a camera into the Palestinian West Bank under any circumstance who couldn't get similar footage on any day they visited the occupied territories.

3. Where genuine rejoicing at the attacks was indeed apparent in the footage, anchors interpreting the footage made no effort to offer any context or background to the images, nor any attempt to separate those Palestinians portrayed from Palestinians as a whole. A comparable situation would be television anchors angrily reacting to scenes of the 1991 riots in Los Angeles, lamenting that "blacks do not respect law and order", while failing to note the preceding attack on Rodney King or endemic racial profiling of the black community in the U.S. by police forces.

4. The overwhelming number of Palestinians, like people of all nationalities, were sickened by the events in New York and Washington. Palestinians with relatives in New York and Washington spent much of yesterday worriedly trying to phone to check they were safe, exactly as many Americans did. Palestinian citizens of the United States will also turn out to be among the victims of the tragedy. Whatever a group of 20-40 Palestinian children happened to be doing yesterday morning in Nablus is no more representative of all Palestinians than the Klu Klux Klan rally -- which happened recently just down the road from where I live, in St. Paul, Minnesota -- is representative of all Americans.

In addition, there is an all-important context to the footage of Palestinians broadcast yesterday that anchors completely failed to communicate:

1. For the last year now, Palestinian civilians have been living through a nightmare in which Israeli occupation forces have been nightly shelling their towns using tanks, helicopters, and other heavy weapons. Palestinians do not need a subscription to Jane's Defence Weekly to learn the origin of these weapons when they can pick up shell casings from the floors of their homes and from their backyards with MADE IN THE U.S.A. stamped on them. United States weaponry supplied to Israel includes:

Heavy weapons: * F-16 fighter planes, Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, and Reshef patrol boats to attack Palestinian buildings and vehicles; and * Armoured pile drivers and armoured bulldozers to destroy Palestinian homes and agricultural land.

Heavy ammunition: * Naval and tank artillery including 76mm, 105mm and 120mm high explosive rounds; * M114 TOW rockets and Hell-Fire air-to-ground missiles; * Shoulder-fired, anti-armour Light Anti-tank Weapons (LAW) rocket launchers firing 84mm or 90mm rockets; * M203 and MK19 grenade launchers; * 40-90 mm mortars; and * A modified version of the M494 105mm, an anti-personnel cluster bomb.

Smaller ammunition: * 5.56 mm bullets for M-16 machine guns; * 7.62 mm high velocity bullets for general purpose machine guns and Galil sniper rifles; * 12.7 mm bullets for Browning machine guns and Barret sniper rifles; and * The "less lethal" rubber-coated and plastic-coated metal bullets.

2. The U.S. weaponry listed above has not been used proportionally for the purpose of defending Israel -- as one would hope any military aid is used -- but rather has been used disproportionally and offensively to kill over 600 Palestinians, one-third of whom are children, 60 percent of whom were killed outside of clash situations. The U.S. weaponry listed above has additionally been used to seriously injure another 15,000 Palestinians, 1,500 of whom have been crippled for life. That Israel has used "excessive force" to suppress the current Palestinian uprising against 34 years of its military occupation is a fact according to the United Nations Security Council, other UN bodies, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem, and the US State Department. However offensive the images of the small groups of Palestinians that were celebrating may be, the fact is that all those depicted in the images -- if they are under 34 years of age -- have known nothing but military occupation for the entirity of their lives. That celebration was a minority reaction of a people enduring such a situation is a testimony to the Palestinians' maintainance of human values in a situation devoid of them.

3. Not only does the United States sell weapons and ammunition to Israel, but many of these weapons are supplied as U.S. aid to Israel. A current figure for U.S. aid currently given to Israel is $3 billion per year, which includes $1.2 billion in economic aid and $1.8 billion in military aid. It is difficult to offer this as a conclusive figure since additional money is given to Israel that is buried in the budgets of individual government agencies such as the Defense Department. Every Palestinian is aware that the U.S. supplies the weapons that Israel uses against them. That celebration was a minority reaction of a people enduring such a situation is a testimony to the Palestinians' maintainance of human values in a situation devoid of them.

4. Every Palestinian is also aware that their television screens are never filled with images of Americans protesting the use of their tax dollars to pay for the missiles that shake their cities and create similarly distressing scenes of injured and shocked civilians, as seen yesterday in New York. That celebration was a minority reaction of a people enduring such a situation is a testimony to the Palestinians' maintainance of human values in a situation devoid of them.

The U.S. media broadcast the footage yesterday without explaining any of the above, something that is neither new nor -- any longer -- acceptable in light of the anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab and the anti-Muslim sentiment it creates. No organisation of journalists who seek to bring their viewers an accurate representation of reality should be broadcasting contextless, unrepresentative images that encourage racism against nationalities and their associated ethnic groups.

In the first few days following the 1995 attack on the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma, Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. reported more than 200 incidents of harassment, threats and actual violence. According to reports received by The Electronic Intifada and a press release yesterday from the Council on American-Islamic Relations there have already been reports of harassment and attacks against Arabs and Muslims in the United States. Hate mail and threats have also been directed at The Electronic Intifada and other Palestinian, Arab and Muslim websites.

As those of us who live in the U.S. are currently feeling justifiable anger at the perpetrators behind yesterday's shocking and horrifying events in New York and Washington DC, let us not misdirect it at an entire people who continue to suffer through one of the darkest periods of their already bleak history. The Palestinian people, who sit glued to their television sets in disturbed silence like the rest of the world, are actually better placed than most to understand what those of us living in America currently feel and are finding it hard to express.

Nigel Parry can be reached at nigel@electronicIntifada.net

Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
amatullah
09/18/01 at 04:52:36
Bismillah and salam,

http://www.counterpunch.org/carvalho.html

www.counterpunch.org reports that the footage broadcast by CNN of palestinians celebrating the WTC bombings is fake.  the footage has been examined by brazilian researchers and deemed to be identical to footage shot in 1991.  also, please note that it was nighttime when the news reached palestine.  please distribute this news widely, as those clips are responsible for a lot of hateful sentiments -- within the past two days, mosques across the US and canada have been vandalized/firebombed/set alight (a story that hasn't been broken to any significant extent by the mainstream press), and the progressive media in nyc is reporting dozens of bias-crime incidents against arab-americans and south asian americans...
Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
amatullah
09/18/01 at 17:18:34
Bismillah and salam,

Here is a retraction on the CNN 1991 Palestinian footage question. It is
very important  to verify and confirm information and ensure that there
is a credible source that is clearly identified for sources of
information. Information that has no reputable source is of no value or
is even destructive. I apologize for sending the info out but I received
it from at least 4 different sources. However the info was erroneous.



CNN did no such thing. The allegation is false. The source of the allegation has withdrawn it and apologized. See below.

OFFICIAL STATEMENT
17/09/01
UNICAMP would like to announce that has no knowledge of a videotape from 1991, whose images supposedly aired on CNN showing Palestinians celebrating the terrorist attacks in the U.S. The tape was supposedly from 1991, and there were rumors that the images were passed off as current.
This information was later denied, as soon as it proved false, by Márcio A. V. Carvalho, a student at UNICAMP. He approached the administration today, 17.09.2001, to clarify the following:
· the information he got, verbally, was that a professor from another institution (not from UNICAMP) had the tape;
· he sent the information to a discussion group email list;
· many people from this list were interested in the subject and requested more details;
· he again contacted the person who first gave him the information and the person denied having the tape;
· the student immediately sent out a note clarifying what happened to the people from his email list.
The original message, however, was distributed all over the world, often with many distortions, including a falsified by-line article from the student. He affirms that a hacker attacked his domain. Several E-mails have been sent on his behalf and those dating from 15.09.2001 should be ignored.
Among the distortions is the fact that UNICAMP would be analyzing the tape, which is absolutely false. The administration considers this alert definitive and will be careful to avoid new rumors.
- END -
Re: What the US media doesn't show on their Live Telecast !
se7en
09/18/01 at 21:34:22
News

False CNN Story retracted


2001-09-16
This story did not originate at PTTV and has since been retracted.
This post originated on the IMC newswire and was shared on the Paper Tiger
Collective list. From there it may have been forwarded to some of you. The
story did not originate from Paper Tiger, it was just something we were
looking into - and we neither confirmed or denied it at the time. We
apologize if you received the story as a forwarded message from someone on
our list and thought it to be true. In times like this, misinformation
spreads like a virus and we must all be careful of the information we
disseminate (can someone please tell FOX TV that).

sincerely,

Michael

retraction and original message below
---------------------

From:

Dear all,

Last September 13, I've sent an email to a social theory list in which I
provided some information about the falsity of the images of Palestinian
celebration for the terrorism in USA, information given to me by a teacher. I
spent the last day looking for that teacher, and, unfortunately, when I found
her, she DENIED having access to such images.

She said that she was sure she had seen the images back in 1991, but SHE
CAN'T PROVE. She was not willing to provide further information, DENYING what
she had said before to a full class of students.

I sincerely apologize for this uncertain information; unfortunately I can't
prove the information contained in my last post; IT'S ONLY A CONJECTURE, THAT
THOSE IMAGES OF PALESTINIANS CELEBRATING IS FALSE. I bought the idea myself,
and reproduced it for you because of the importance of it, in the case it was
to be confirmed.

Whatever news I get I'll pass to you.

Best regards

Marcio A. V. Carvalho State University of Campinas - Brazil


---------------


Far Gone In 30 Seconds: CNN Sentences Palestine To Death
jannah
09/25/01 at 23:18:13
Far Gone In 30 Seconds: CNN Sentences Palestine To Death

Matt Taibbi - e-mail taibbi@exile.ru

http://www.exile.ru/125/press.php

I dont know how long 30 seconds of videotape is. A
foot? Two feet? It cant be much. And yet thats all
it took for CNN, in one of the most outrageously
irresponsible editorial decisions of our time, to
sentence an entire nation to death.

We all saw the pictures. About an hour after the
bombing, CNN using videotape purchased from the two
largest news video production houses, APTN and
Reuters broadcast scenes of Palestinians, mainly
children, celebrating the attack on America.

The montage lasts exactly 30 seconds. There are five
scenes in the sequence. They are, as follows:

1) A shot of a white station-wagon taxi pulling away
from a storefront. The taxi pulls away to reveal a
group of Palestinians in the Arab section of Jerusalem
standing in front of the store. Though the taxi driver
appears to be smiling, no one else is celebrating in
the picture. The shot lasts about six and a half
seconds.

2) The longest shot of the sequence. It features a
group of children, two of whom take turns appearing
directly in front of the camera, apparently shouting
Allah Akhbar! and waving the Palestinian flag. The
second child has a distinctly irrational, intoxicated
gleam in his eye. This sequence lasts just over ten
seconds.

3) The third shot, the shortest, shows a Palestinian
man extending a plate with a pastry to an unseen
person. There is a smile on his face. If this shot
were broadcast at any time other than in the immediate
aftermath of the attacks, it would be appear
absolutely meaningless. But in the context, it and in
particular the vaguely satisfied smile of the cafe
worker comes across as fraught with meaning. This
shot lasts about as long as it takes the man to walk
some six feet to deliver the pastry about four
seconds.

4) The second-longest shot. A matronly woman in
glasses and a shawl, seemingly in her fifties, is
beaming and pumping her two upraised hands in
celebration. All around her, children are jumping up
and down and cheering. The shot lasts about seven
seconds.

5) The last shot. A white van containing three men in
the passenger seat is honking its horn and moving
through the street. All around the van, children are
cheering. One jumps on the hood of the van, then jumps
off.



My very first thought, when I saw those scenes, was
that the shots were fakes. I had a very strong
suspicion that the footage was old. This was not
paranoia. It was a logical inference, based upon the
circumstances surrounding the airing of the sequence.

As it turns out, the pictures were real. Despite
rumors to the contrary that have been flying around
the internet, these celebrations really did occur, and
they really were captured by Western news agencies.

But the reasons reporters like myself were forced to
independently confirm that fact (I went so far as to
call the APTN bureau in Jerusalem, and contact the
press watchdog agency FAIR, which had also inquired
about the footage) were the same reasons that made
this sequence so shockingly irresponsible. If CNN had
not so far overstepped its bounds in running this
sequence in the manner that it did, there would have
been no reason to suspect the footages authenticity.
If they had even in been in the ballpark of
journalistic ethics, there couldnt have been any
questions at all.

The television news business carries with it a set of
ethical problems that are a world apart from the
concerns of print journalists. Because they are so
routinely ignored, few people particularly people
whose only relation to TV news is as a consumer are
even aware of them. They mainly involve problems of
attribution and context. Very often, theyre exactly
the opposite of the problems one encounters in print
journalism.

Anyone who has worked as a print journalist knows he
has certain advantages over the television reporter. A
print journalist can walk around in the middle of a
news event and not be observed. Because hes not
operating a camera or concentrating on the logistical
problem of getting someone to go on the air, he
usually has much more time to simply watch and digest
what is happening in front of him. A print journalist
can recall something from memory, whereas in
television, memory is useless.

More importantly, a print journalist always knows he
can construct his narrative after the fact. He does
not have to be concerned with the purely mechanical
problems of story construction while he is covering
the story. A print journalist does not lose his story
if, for instance, he does not catch a defendant
walking out of a courtroom. But a TV journalist
covering a trial has to catch people going in and out
of various buildings, walking their dogs, stepping out
of planes all utterly meaningless events to the print
journalist, but of critical importance to the TV
journalist, who needs these moments to establish the
outline of his story.

One last thing. Print journalists in some ways have
much more room to lie. When a print reporter publishes
a man-on-the-street interview, only God will actually
know if that interview ever happened. There is no way
to track down the those kinds of sources in print. But
on television, you have to get a picture, and a
picture is difficult to fake, particularly since it
requires a conspiracy of many (the reporter, his
cameraman, his producer, his editors) to make it
happen.

On the other hand...

On the other hand, the very absence of a lengthy
narrative instantly absolves the TV reporter of a
great many ethical responsibilities. A print reporter
has to work very hard to produce an effect. The most
powerful print stories are almost always based on hard
information, or specific quotes. But television, as
the images last week proved, can change the course of
history with a single picture. And unlike print,
television does not have to explain its context in
order to be effective not truthful or just, mind you,
but effective, in stimulating a response.

In the case of the pictures last week, CNN had a
responsibility particularly given the extreme gravity
of the situation to provide an exact context for the
footage it was showing. The man handing over the piece
of pie why was he smiling? Who was he handing the pie
to? The implication was obvious: this Palestinian was
so happy about the bombings, he was giving pie away to
strangers.

But how do we know that? Assuming it was true, CNN
needed, at the bare minimum, to say so explicitly:
Our reporter on the scene observed this man, Saleem
X, handing a piece of pie to a stranger for free. X
said he was glad America was bombed, and that
everything was on the house today.

But there was nothing. All we were told, by CNN, was
that these were pictures of Palestinians celebrating
the attacks.

This kind of presentation makes it impossible for any
individual, much less an entire nation, to defend
himself against the media. The caf owner has no
deniability. He never spoke to the journalist. Indeed,
there wasnt one there, just a cameraman. The
cameraman, on the other hand, has total deniability.
No one knows his name or will ever know it (APTN
refused to release the cameramans name, and refused
all requests to interview him), and, whats more, he
wasnt responsible for how his pictures were used. CNN
is similarly isolated from responsibility: it didnt
take the pictures, and the only information it needed
from its video service was that these were pictures of
Palestinians celebrating the attack on America. Thats
all it needed: one sentence worth of information about
the story.

Therefore you get, in the end, a picture that in the
context speaks literally volumes, and which may have
actually finally engendered American hatred toward
Palestinians, which rests on a single sentence worth
of information.

But this is all standard television practice. None of
what Ive described so far departs very much from the
ordinary. What was extraordinary about the CNN
transmission were three things: the lack of a time
peg, the lack of balance, and the lack of editorial
restraint.

The time issue was the one that made me suspect the
pictures were faked. Given the situation, it seemed
imperative that CNN establish on camera that the
pictures were directly connected to the attacks in New
York. Forget about a narrative attribution the proof
here needed to be on the air.

The easiest way to do this would have been through an
on-camera interview. Approach any one of the people in
the picture and shout a single sentence a them: Are
you celebrating the attack on America? A yes would
have been enough, though a follow-up would have been
better. Anything else is the television equivalent of
an unnamed source, an assertion without proof.

You can use unnamed sources in print. Its an accepted
practice, used most often as a way of supporting
attributed fact-gathering. But you can not use unnamed
sources to send a whole country to war against a
particular nation. And thats what CNN did.

Another thing CNN could have done to peg the time
would have been to film Palestinians cheering as they
watched television reports of the attack. I cant
imagine that this would have been too hard. Every
television in the city must have been on. Its quite
possible that they tried and failed to catch anyone
celebrating. If thats the case, I think the world had
a right to know, had a right to see pictures of people
not celebrating. It doesnt even matter that well
never know now (with APTN and CNN issuing flat no
comments about the shooting done that day in
Jerusalem and Nabluz). The world needed to know that
day. The peculiar nature of TV journalism makes it
essential not to screw up at the moment, because it is
impossible to undo the damage of doing a bad job once
its been done.

The irony here is that it would have been very easy to
get a time-pegged shot of Palestinians reacting
rationally and sensitively to the attack. Id guess
that the vast majority of Palestinians would have been
willing to go on the record saying that they
sympathized with the victims. That would have been
true even for the great number of Palestinians who
believe they have excellent reasons to hate the United
States. There was a candlelight vigil in East
Jerusalem on the night of the attacks; Yassir Arafat
gave blood; schoolchildren around the country took
part in moments of silence in reaction to the attacks.
And a large part of the nations public figures spoke
sensibly and generously about the American victims.

CNNs decision not to show these reasoned responses
underscores the anti-intellectual nature of television
news and its ability to influence people in an
anti-intellectual direction. A sudden outburst of
emotion simply makes for better and more powerful
television than a reasoned response. Conflict looks
better on television than peace. The focus on this
side of humanity (particularly when covering foreign
peoples, who are more easily dehumanized) produces in
viewers the habit of believing that emotional
responses are more valid than reasoned ones.

The long-term effect of this kind of coverage was
illustrated dramatically on the day of the attacks.
Throughout the day, CNN restricted its visual
reporting to a remarkably small number of video
sequences. The number of images, in fact, was so small
that I suspected and still suspect that there was
some kind of government control, or at least a
consensus between the government and the company, over
which material would be transmitted. The actual attack
on the World Trade Center was played over and over
again, of course. There was footage of the Pentagon on
fire, footage of the crash site in Pennsylvania,
footage of the mysterious plane flying over
Washington, footage of warplanes flying over New York,
and significantly, these pictures of Palestinians
celebrating in Jerusalem and Nablus. All of these
pictures all extremely dramatic and/or inflammatory
were interspersed with a steady stream of interviews
with government and ex-government representatives,
most of them Republican.

Amazingly, throughout the course of the entire
broadcast of the first day, there was scarcely a hint
of a reaction from an ordinary person, American or
foreign. The commentary was restricted almost entirely
to inflammatory images, warmongering questioning and
commentary from television reporters, and right-wing
government or ex-government spokespeople. In the first
eight hours after the attack, there were only two
people with even the vaguest associations with the
Democratic party interviewed, Madeline Albright and
William Cohen. And these two, it goes without saying,
were hardly from the dovish side of the loyal
opposition.

After showing the pictures of the Palestinian
children, CNN commentators (in particular the
unbelievably loathsome Jill Dougherty) would
invariably begin asking their interview subjects what
our military response was likely to be, how extreme it
needed to be, and whether we had failed to be vigilant
enough in the past in dealing with the terrorist
threat. The stations obvious agenda was to rally its
viewers around the very crudest response to the news:
violence, and celebration of violence, needed to be
met with more and more violence and a political
clampdown.

The most dramatic result of the stations manipulation
of the Palestine images came during an interview with
former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger. During
part of the interview the station maintained a
split-screen effect which showed the porcine
ex-bureaucrat in one small box, while images from the
days shocking events rolled on in a sort of endless
montage in the other. The celebrating Palestine
children were shown during one sequence. Soon
afterward, Eagleburger dropped a bombshell comment. He
was not referring specifically to the celebrating
children, but his and the stations implication was
clear:

There is only one way to begin to deal with people
like this, he said, and that is you have to kill
some of them, even if they are not immediately
directly involved in this thing.

Only in the United States, a country which sentences
minor criminals to death, would such journalism even
be thinkable.

And that wasnt even the worst part.

Television has almost no probative value. Unlike
reading, which requires people to assemble images and
associations in their minds, television trains people
to become completely passive consumers of information.
Youre not supposed to look beyond the picture.
Therefore you get this amazing phenomenon of an image
without explanation. People are seen doing and saying
things that appear to make no sense at all. The result
can be more inflammatory than an outright lie and
thats what happened in this case.

During the entire first day of coverage, CNN never
once broached the question of what might have aroused
Arab anger toward the United States. The station
speculated endlessly that Osama bin Laden was the
culprit, but it never once bothered to ask what might
have been bin Ladens motive. The same held true for
the shots of the celebrating Palestinians. No reason
was offered. Instead, the station simply asked for
Americans to rely on their own preconceived notions of
Islam to form the motive for their behavior. The
groundwork for that appeal has been steadily laid over
the course of the last three decades since about the
time of the formation of O.P.E.C., incidentally.

In general, American coverage of Islam tends to focus
on two or three key themes that are offered as
explanation for Arab hostility to America. The first
is the poverty of Islamic countries; Muslims are
inevitably portrayed as murderously envious of
American affluence. The ency is almost always blind
and irrational. To quote the New York Times analysis
from September 16, Muslim extremists profess a hatred
for the values cherished in the West as freedom,
tolerance, prosperity, religious pluralism and
universal suffrage. The second is religious
fanaticism, as expressed in the endless America seen
as Great Satan pieces. Muslims do not fear death
because they believe in an afterlife; Muslims are all
inspired to jihad by commandment from above; Muslims
are willing to kill anyone, guilty or innocent, to
recapture the homelands and rid the world of infidel,
i.e. American values.

The third theme is anti-Semitism. Muslims are shown
throwing rocks at Israeli soldiers for no apparent
reason. The rock-throwing towelhead photo was one of
the great cliches of 20th-century journalism. The
reason they were throwing rocks, we were always told,
is that theyre crazed anti-Semites. And we know who
else was an anti-Semite.

But Palestinians have a very simple reason to hate
Americans. Americans are supporting the occupation of
their country by Israel. Israeli armed forces, the
same people who are bulldozing neighborhoods and
shooting into crowds, use American weapons even
American missiles. The United States is basically a
colonial aggressor to most Palestinians, some 360,000
of which are living as refugees in Lebanon.

But all of this got left out, making the situation
much worse than it ever was.

The whole thing reminds me of this scheme I used to
use to get free McNuggets at McDonalds. It worked
like this:

You go to McDonalds with your friend. You convince
him to buy a big 20-pack of McNuggets. Then, as soon
as he sits down, you send him back up to the front of
the restaurant to get napkins, or ketchup, or
whatever. While hes gone, you flip open the McNuggets
box and swipe five or six Nuggets. Then you replace
the lid on the box. He comes back, opens the box, and
thinks he only got fourteen nuggets, when he paid for
twenty. Go complain to the manager, you say.
Thinking hes really been ripped off, your friend then
goes up to the manager and, with all the gall of a
wronged person, angrily demands his six McNuggets. His
act is usually so believable that he gets what he
wants. It works every time just make sure you dont
tell him until youre in the car on the way home.

American coverage of the Middle East works the same
way. You cover an Arab-Israeli conflict for years,
following a certain storyline. Along the way, you lie
to your viewers about whats really happening, setting
them up to think that Americas position in the Middle
East is reasonable. Then something like the bombing
happens, and you show Palestinians dancing in the
streets. Americans then, quite naturally, go
completely crazy with rage and demand total
retaliation. The lie is in the missing McNuggets. If
Americans knew that CNN had stolen them before, they
wouldnt be rushing to the manager for justice now.

Probably no single film clip in recent history has had
as much of an impact as the Palestine clip. Summing it
up one way was Ehud Sprinzak, an Israeli expert on
terrorism, who was quoted in Reuters, referring to the
clip:

From the perspective of Jews, it is the most
important public relations act ever committed in our
favor.

Put it another way: in the 48 hours after the clip
ran, Israelis shot and killed 13 Palestinians in the
Jenin area of the West Bank.

Thirty seconds was all that took. Forget about anyone
ever being reasonable when this is the way our leading
journalists work.


Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.
The rest © Jannah.Org