Police State Redefined

I really need to stop reading some of these idiots’ blogs. Honestly, they come up with some scary-ass shit, if you ask me. The most recent scary thing to come out of a somewhat intelligent blog post was, "A free-press cannot be maintained in a state of war."

I'll isolate it and bold it for effect too

A free-press cannot be maintained in a state of war.

(This was quoted from Rusty Shackleford)

Naturally, one can imagine that this is in response to CBS and their airing of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse photographs, as well as the Nick Berg beheading.

Before I go any further, I want to clear up a couple of points that I have made on both events. Therefore, you can ponder Rusty's above quote (which is not part of a larger sentence) as I wax remembrance.

Regarding the CBS release of the abuse photographs, as well as the photographs themselves, I have been, and still am, a bit callous towards the victims of the abuse as well as the release of the photographs. I believe that the Iraqis have done worse to Americans in their country by light-year leaps and bounds. The Americans, in this time of high stress, needed some outlet so they didn't go Section 8 on us, and, even if it was sanctioned by higher levels, all of our abuse pales in comparison to what Americans have been subjected to on the Iraqi street, as well as in terrorist captivity, so in my opinion, the abuse is nothing to get all hot and bothered over.

Regarding the Nick Berg video, I am having a split response. The first is if I believe myself and my own eyes and logical sense, that the video is fake and given by the government, but since that is a completely different argument, I will avoid retelling the details which are further explored yesterday. The other is if I believe the government as well as the media in that this really is a death, that Nick Berg was actually beheaded by terrorists (specifically Al Zarqawi), and that everything was the way its been portrayed in the media, after viewing the video I am a bit shocked and appalled. It also has that split purpose of telling me that yes, the terrorists are nastier and crueler than we could ever imagine or hope to be and "I shouldn't be offended by the abuse photographs," AND that we should unite as one in this war against terrorism. WHOA, flashback.

Which brings us back to:

A free-press cannot be maintained in a state of war.

On an unrelated journal, I have been posting comments as Anonymous (for various unrelated reasons), and have even laid claim to the name Anonymous (side note: maybe I'll make it a schtick), which is also a sort of snide statement to their desire for anonymity in the About Us section. I decided to maximize the effect of both their words as well as their mission statement. But, I'm getting sidetracked. On this blog from various writers, one writer wrote on Wednesday about the relationship between CBS and the Nick Berg video. It was along the same mistaken lines as Rustys blog, only even worse because Rusty at least admits that the terrorists needed no reason to kill Nick Berg, and this writer said CBS provided the latest excuse for them to kill, titling the post "CBS: Blood on Their Hands."

What this writer chooses to ignore is that the Iraqi street already knew about the abuse by hearing first hand stories from released prisoners, as well as seeing the effects of the abuse on the released prisoner's bodies. I'm going to venture to say that while the photographs are shocking, they probably don't compare to seeing the first hand bodily effects on the prisoners. This abuse was so well known that a mere 10 days after CBS' release of the photographs, Yahoo did a story on an art exhibit which featured no less than 3 alabaster statues depicting abuse victims which were strikingly similar to that of the photographs, as well as a quote saying "the photos came as no surprise."

So, then why is everybody blaming CBS and the purpose of a free press for increasing the awareness of the Iraqi public? All it did was confirm what American officials were investigating, and it informed the American public. I think that’s the problem though. Rusty seems to think that we are back in the 1930s, WWII era, where war was a patriotic glorified activity. Our war movies were so honorable and John Wayne stylized, the news told of all the good things that the war was accomplishing, and everybody was in on the bandwagon. It rather reminds me of the old-time newsreels that South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut satirized so well with the "Did I say death camps? I mean happy camps."

So, what is the purpose of having a free press if we cannot use it in the best of times and the worst of times? Why should all of our media constantly tell us and the rest of the world that we, as America, are the best country ever? Isn't the purpose of a free press not only to tell us of our advances and successes in the various arenas (arena of science, politics, economics, etc) but also to tell us when our government is doing wrong? Shouldn't we know that we are struggling in Iraq and essentially losing this battle?

Rusty has a semi-point though. He says that we need to minimize the split of Americans during times of war because a divided country is easier to battle than a united one. But, just as the majority lays fault to the Germans for voting in the Nazi party and not overthrowing them when the Nazis were doing horrible things to the Jews, Americans will be held accountable for the atrocities being done in their name overseas in Iraq. If a free press isn't going to tell us, as Americans, what our country is doing for us in our name simply so it can have a more unified front, I don't want to be a part of it. I don't care if the free press is actually out for money, so long as it is doing a good job of keeping us informed with relevant and pertinent news.

Part of the problem that both Rusty and the editors of the afore-mentioned blog are having is that the press is being too liberal (yes, it’s that conservative paranoia again) and only reporting on anti-American or pro-Islamic stories, calling that liberal propaganda. However, any patriotic, pro-American, demonizing Islam reports are A-OK. Case in point: while I have respect for that football guy (whose name will never be mentioned on my blog until I name every single one of the Americans who have died in Iraq), his story was complete and other patriotic propaganda. If it were any other soldier, the mainstream press would have just numbered the dead and moved on, but as soon as some celebrity dies, it’s a symbol of our fucking patriotism. And, this is good news according to these people. Perhaps, I'm being a bit cynical here, but that's honestly how I view it. It's government manipulation.

Nevertheless, my point is (I can hear any reader who has made it this far breathing a sigh of relief) a free press should be reporting on America's fallibilities and mistakes during times of peace and war. America should have a war that has a purpose to not so blindingly split the opinion over whether we should be in it or not. America should not have to worry about splitting the opinion on its world politics. America should not have to worry about its activities being released to the American public, or the international public for that matter. The press should not have to worry that America's mistakes will be a blight on America. In addition, given that things happen which negate all of the above idealistic statements, a free press has the duty and obligation to inform its citizens, with or without spin, in times of peace and in times of war, of everything their country is doing in their name. Without this, we have the press and the government changing stories, releasing disinformation (which happens even with the free press), changing history, and being able to do abhorable things in the name of freedom and America, and we become more and more a police state with no real sense of the world at hand.

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

As a side note, I notice that not one of the blogs has a reference to Rumsfeld giving money as compensation to the victims, nor to the stupidity of doing this. Especially since, if I were a victim of abuse, I would deflect to the other side, and probably give them money to help get rid of my attackers. But, that's just my opinion.