The Iraq myth

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/opinion/2005/October/opinion_October39.xml§ion=opinion&col=

IN THE weeks and months preceding the Iraq war in March 2003, various US officials informed the already baffled public that the war would be marred with tactical misinformation for the sole purpose of derailing Iraq’s war stratagems and ultimately protecting the lives of American soldiers.

This ushered in the return of infamous embedded journalism, which unsurprisingly derailed whatever little integrity both the government and the corporate media still possessed.

Upon their arrival and subsequent takeover of the Baghdad airport, shortly after the onset of military operations, US forces set up a radio station targeting the greater Baghdad era, with the sole purpose of disseminating half-truths, even outright lies to contribute to the psychological warfare already underway in various parts of the country. snip

While many are familiar with the deadly ‘incidents’ that led to the death and wounding of scores of journalists in Iraq, few are aware of the take-over and meticulous restructuring of Iraqi television by US experts with the help of friendly Arab media. In a very short time, Iraqi television ceased exalting ousted Saddam Hussein, and commenced exalting the US occupation and their faithful partners.

This impressive propaganda network was relatively but temporarily hampered by a few obstinate media outlets, which were swiftly silenced, either through intimidation or by being completely thrown out of the country, ironically accused by American and Iraqi officials as being purveyors of propaganda.

[rodeodance]

1. the 'good guys bad guys' comes from Jr/WH/Repugs.

......It’s such a shame that so few in the US media (excluding online media and some alternative radio) manage to break away from the above construct, which bears little or no resemblance to the truth; that those even wishing to disapprove of the administration’s policy in Iraq, often do so while accepting the above assertions as the parameters of their critique.

To argue that Saddam’s brutality applied to any group or individual that dared challenge his reign, whether Sunni or Shia; that the resistance in Iraq is for the most part a determined response to an illegitimate war and occupation; to challenge the authenticity of the claim specifying one group as majority and another as minority; to question the entire edifice of claims that classify the current political establishment in Iraq as democratic in the first place, or to argue that the relationship between the US military administration and the Iraqi government is not that of equals; to do any of that is to risk being dismissed as a nuisance. To be taken seriously, one must adhere to conformity, however flawed, and renounce common sense, however evident.

It is still mind-boggling how the complex Iraq narrative can be oversimplified as ‘bad guys vs. good guys’. It’s even more perplexing how the discourse is often modified to make yesterday’s villains today’s welcomed friends and allies.

The falsification campaign to help fashion a fitting and self-serving narrative of Iraq, its past and present continues unabated. It will carry on as long as people continue to unknowingly seek misinformation and half-truths from the corporate media and government. Only by challenging this narrative, can a wider and more realistic understanding of the war, its complexities and its true objectives be attained. Only then, can the public reclaim its rightful role in challenging the US administration’s discourse, wasteful wars and iniquitous propaganda.

[DemonFighterLives]

2. It's just like forcing Undergrounders to listen to Rush

No wonder they hate us for our freedom. You can't take over a country and attempt to fill their heads with sh*t and expect them to like it. You can't force democracy on someone who has their own plans, whatever they may be. It just makes us look stupid to have stupid leaders like rummy and dubby.