Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts

Friday, June 10, 2011

Chinese Fishing Boats, Vietnamese Live Fire Drill: Why I Care

Historically, China has been the home of a great civilization. For most of America's history, though, China was a place where leaders had trouble with their subjects, famines, and foreign occupation. Then Chairman Mao had a shot (literally, in some cases) at making China another 'workers paradise.'1

Mao and his successors were about as successful, in my opinion, as anybody else at making a system that looks good on paper work in the real world.

More recently, China's leaders have apparently decided that catching up with countries that use market-oriented economies is more important than ideological purity. That, I think, is good news. Particularly for folks living in China.

What doesn't seem to have changed so much is a parochial set of assumptions about China and foreigners.2 In my opinion.

Which brings me to something I read in the news this morning:

Vietnam, China, Fishing Boats, and Live Ammo

Chinese leaders are under the impression that they own the South China Sea, as far south as Brunei. That doesn't include a narrow line of water on the western shores of the Philippines, or a somewhat wider strip off the Vietnamese shore.

Most of the rest of the world - including the United States - recognize national economic boundaries as a strip of ocean 200 nautical miles wide. That boundary was set by the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Maybe you heard that the running dog capitalist oppressors hadn't ratified UNCLOS. Ratified, no: recognize, yes.3

Vietnam seems to think it's okay to operate within its UNCLOS boundaries.

Which brings me to something I read this morning:
"Vietnam plans live-fire drill amid South China Sea row"
BBC News (June 10, 2011)

"Vietnam has said it will hold live-fire exercises in the South China Sea amid escalating tensions with China over disputed waters.

"Vietnam warned vessels to stay out of the area off its central coast when it conducts the drills on Monday.

"It follows a verbal clash with China over sovereignty in the area.

"China reacted angrily after Vietnam said a Chinese fishing boat rammed cables from an oil exploration vessel inside its exclusive economic zone.

"Beijing said Chinese fishing boats were chased away by armed Vietnamese ships in the incident on Thursday...."
From that point on, the BBC News piece gives detail about what may be a sort of 'he said/she said' snit on an international scale. China claims that one of their poor, helpless fishing boats was cruelly dragged for an hour by the uncaring Vietnamese. Not in quite those terms - but I gather that China's claiming to be the victim here.

They may be right.

Or, maybe not.

I don't know.

I'm no greater fan of Vietnam's current leadership, than I am of China's. Although Vietnam's bosses also seem to have realized that their old-school economic policies simply weren't working.4 And that's another topic.

Vietnam and China in a Snit: So What?

The South China Sea isn't quite as far away from Minnesota as you can get from Minnesota, and still be on Earth - but it's close. In the 'good old days,' I might never have heard of the altercation between Vietnam and China.

This isn't the 'good old days.' And even then it might have made a difference to folks here in central North America. Particularly if the folks running China and Vietnam decide to let what happened grow into a shooting war.

I don't know how likely an armed confrontation is - but I am pretty sure that China's leadership has decided to get China back to the top of the heap in world affairs.

I don't have a problem with China returning to the prosperity and cultural achievements of its past - with upgrades. From my point of view, that means more markets for American producers - and maybe more tourists in Minnesota's lake country.

What I am concerned about is the possibility that China's leaders may not quite realize what century they're at - and that quite a few folks now think it's impolite to march an army into somebody else's territory and say that you've 'liberated' it.

There are some who think getting a little empire to call your own is still okay, of course. And that's yet another topic.5

Related posts:
In the news:
1 "China," CIA World Factbook (last updated May 26, 2011)

2 I've discussed what China seems to believe, before:
3 "United States non-ratification of the UNCLOS," Wikipedia (last modified 24 May 2011)

Note:
"...Although the United States now recognizes the UNCLOS as a codification of customary international law, it has not yet ratified it...."
(United States non-ratification of the UNCLOS," Wikipedia) [emphasis mine]
4 "Vietnam," CIA World Factbook (last updated June 7, 2011)

5 Yankee imperialism, real or imagined, still seems to be anathema in American academia. There seems to be a little sympathy for the 'right sort' wanting little empires to call their own, though:
Maps:

Pacific Ocean

(Pacific, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

South China Sea, disputed boundaries

(BBC News, UNCLOS, CIA, used w/o permission)

China

(China, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

I added the approximate South China Sea UNCLOS boundary to the CIA World Factbook map.

United States - UNCLOS

(United States, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

For comparison, I added the approximate UNCLOS boundary to this map of the United States. America is in the happy position of having two of the planet's largest oceans on its two major coasts. The east and west coasts both face other nations: but they're thousands of miles away.

United States - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) boundary

(ary 05, 2010 - Arguments About the Arctic Heat Up As the Ice Melts, UC Santa Barbara Geography / News & Events / Department News, used w/o permission)

This map is an illustration of another sort of politico-economic boundary involving the United States. It's part of a standard-issue piece on the 'global warming gonna kill us all' theme - but I think the map is a useful illustration for comparing American boundary issues and China's.

Additional background:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, June 6, 2011

China to Google: 'Shut Up Or We'll Hurt You'

Why would anybody want to do business with China?

For the same reason that applies anywhere else: to make a profit. China is a huge country: in terms of geography, population, and now economics.1

Huge Market, Huge Problems

I think a publicly-owned international company might have trouble explaining to its stockholders why it wasn't trying to get a piece of the Chinese market for whatever goods or services it offered.

On the other hand, doing business in China means deciding to put up with the sort of interest the country's leaders take in what their subjects say, do, and think. Or deciding that enough is enough, and pulling out.

If it's so bad, why don't we hear more about the Party's zeal for control and conformity?

I think Google's experience shows why so many international firms stay politely silent:
"Google has become a 'political tool' vilifying the Chinese government, an official Beijing newspaper said on Monday, warning that the U.S. Internet giant's statements about hacking attacks traced to China could hurt its business....

"...Last week, Google said it had broken up an effort to steal the passwords of hundreds of Google email account holders, including U.S. government officials, Chinese human rights advocates and journalists. It said the attacks appeared to come from China....

"...By saying that Chinese human rights activists were among the targets of the hacking, Google was 'deliberately pandering to negative Western perceptions of China, and strongly hinting that the hacking attacks were the work of the Chinese government,' the People's Daily overseas edition, a small offshoot of the main domestic paper, said in a front-page commentary....

"...'Google should not become overly embroiled in international political struggle, playing the role of a tool for political contention," the paper added.

" 'For when the international winds shift direction, it may become sacrificed to politics and will be spurned by the marketplace,' it said, without specifying how Google's business could be hurt....

"...In February, overseas Chinese websites, inspired by anti-authoritarian uprisings across the Arab world, called for protests across China, raising Beijing's alarm about dissent and prompting tightened censorship of the Internet.

"China already blocks major foreign social websites such as Facebook and Twitter."
(Reuters)

Related posts:
In the news:
1 China's gross domestic product, per person, is about $7,600 - not quite on a par with America's $47,200, or Saudi Arabia's $24,200, but well beyond Nicaragua's $3,000 per capita GDP. And China's per capita GDP is growing. 1 It isn't the economic disaster area of the Cold War world.
"Since the late 1970s China has moved from a closed, centrally planned system to a more market-oriented one that plays a major global role - in 2010 China became the world's largest exporter...."
(China, CIA World Factbook)
I think that's all good news. I want China to be wealthy, and for individuals in China to have large disposable incomes. I'll admit to having slightly selfish motives.

International trade existed before there were nations, which lets archaeologists study the economics of ancient cultures - and that's another topic. We're more obviously connected to each other now, I think - and "global economy" is more than a nifty phrase for politicos and journalists.

The way I see it, rich people can buy more stuff than poor people - and are more likely to have money they're willing to lend to entrepreneurs. China is a huge market today. If folks living there were as wealthy as your average Saudi citizen or American, some might decide to come to Minnesota for fishing or winter sports: which would help the economy here.

Sources: CIA World Factbook, China (updated on May 26, 2011), Nicaragua (updated on May 26, 2011), Saudi Arabia (updated on May 26, 2011), United States (updated May 26, 2011).
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Gaza Humanitarian Raid: The Other Shoe Drops

This is why I try not to jump to conclusions.

Particularly when the hue and cry is 'and it is the fault of the Jews.'

From today's news:
"AP INTERVIEW: Turkish aid group had terror ties
The Associated Press (June 2, 2010)

"The Turkish Islamic charity behind a flotilla of aid ships that was raided by Israeli forces on its way to Gaza had ties to terrorism networks, including a 1999 al-Qaida plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport, France's former top anti-terrorism judge said Wednesday.

"The Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, known by its Turkish acronym IHH, had "clear, long-standing ties to terrorism and Jihad," former investigating judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

"Bruguiere, who led the French judiciary's counterterrorism unit for nearly two decades before retiring in 2007, didn't indicate whether IHH now has terror ties, but said it did when he investigated it in the late 1990s.

" 'They were basically helping al-Qaida when (Osama) bin Laden started to want to target U.S. soil,' he said.

"Some members of an international terrorism cell known as the Fateh Kamel network then worked at the IHH, he said. Kamel, an Algerian-Canadian dual national, had ties to the nascent al-Qaida, Bruguiere said...."

'But They were On a Humanitarian Mission!

I don't think that Israel is always right. But I also don't think that saying something's 'humanitarian' makes it so.

I was appalled at the headlines, when it looked like big, bad Israel up and killed 10 nice humanitarian aide workers for no reason at all. I was also - a trifle cautious. 'The Jews' have been blamed for quite a few things over the generations. Sometimes a Jew really did do something bad. Sometimes, if someone is 'divisive' enough to start checking out the facts - we find a 'humanitarian' outfit with terrorist ties.

Folks who are convinced that The Jews poisoned the well, set sheep loose in the wheat, and blew up New York City's World Trade Center probably won't believe that AP article. The most likely explanation, for them, will be that it's part of a Jewish conspiracy.

Other folks may assume that the AP story is part of a plot by the lizard people.

Interesting news, though.

Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Yemen, Al Qaeda, Fort Hood, and All That

In my considered opinion, it would be nice if everybody were to be nice.

Reading a news report about quite a few people being killed isn't nice. It's not, I think, in this case, naughty: but it's sad, not nice.

War Isn't Nice

In the world I live in, Al Qaeda's arranging for thousands of people to get killed on September 11, 2001, wasn't nice either. That was naughty: even if they think God told them to, and their targets were what a college professor called "little Eichmanns". (April 3, 2009)

A psychiatrist murdering over a dozen people isn't very nice, either. Even if he felt tense at the time, and/or acted from deeply-felt religious beliefs. (November 5, 2009) I think that killing someone else for personal motives is naughty. Even if the personal motives involve deeply-felt religious beliefs: like "blacks, Jews, and Catholics are un-American." Or the now more-familiar "death to Israel! Death to the great Satan America!"

America Kills Civilians! That Line Never Seems to Get Old

On December 17, 2009, the "great Satan America" killed lots and lots of civilians all over the place near Mahsad, in southern Yemen. Or, attacked an Al Qaeda training camp. Or, attacked an Al Qaeda installation. Depends on who you listen to. I don't doubt that civilians were killed. Making sure that there will be civilian deaths in a military operation seems to be a well-worn page in the Islamic terrorists' playbook. (September 4, 2009)

Yemen doesn't show up in America's news as often as places like Iraq and Afghanistan, but it's been involved in the war on terror for some time. Remember the U.S.S. Cole?

It looks like over two dozen Al Qaeda members were killed - maybe, but not certainly, including Saad al-Fathani and Mohammad Ahmed Saleh al-Omir, local Al Qaeda leaders, and Imam Anwar al-Awlaki.

If "Awlaki" sounds familiar, it should.

The Fort Hood Connection

Imam Anwar al-Awlaki was born in Las Cruces, New Mexico, was the immam at the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque in Virginia. That's where, according to the FBI, Awlaki had a close relationship with two of the 9/11 hijackers. Anwar al-Awlaki left America in 2002 - apparently winding up in Yemen where he cheered on "insurgencies" in Iraq and Afghanistan, and was building a following through speeches, and online.

Until, quite likely, December 17.

Anwar al-Awlaki also, apparently, is connected with Major Nidal Malik Hasan. Major Hasan is the chap who [allegedly] murdered just over a dozen people at Fort Hood November 5, 2009. The last I heard, investigations into the Fort Hood shootings were still going on - but someone reported that the Major said something like "Allahu Akbar".

As I've written before, I don't think these years are Islam's shining hour in history.

Christianity's gone through something like this, on I think a smaller scale, back in the fifties and sixties. White supremacists, who said they were Christians defending Christian America from blacks, Jews, and people like me (I'm Catholic), were - in rather loud taste - burning crosses in those "good old days." That sort of thing leaves an impression - a very unpleasant one.

I don't think that the KKK and similar groups represent Christianity. I sincerely hope that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other Islamic terrorists are to Islam what the cross-burners were to Christianity: a small but impossible-to-ignore bunch of fanatics, following a perverse caricature of a major world religion.

Related posts: In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, September 14, 2009

Osama Bin Laden Speaks (probably): New Verse; Same Song

Hats off to Osama bin Laden.

Or whoever made the speech that's been attributed to bin Laden.

Demonstrating, perhaps, that he can learn from mistakes, Al Qaeda's leader didn't repeat Ayman al-Zawahri's remark that the president of the United States was a "house slave" or "house negro." (November 21, 2008) The remark was translated both ways.

That crack didn't go over too well, here in America. As I wrote at the time,
"...Woodstock is history, disco is dead, black members of congress make the news because of what they do, not what they look like, and America will very soon swear in its first black president...."
(November 21, 2008)
Not all of America's best and brightest (by their standards) have realized that this isn't the America of 1963: but that's another topic.

Other than that, Bin Laden's message is another verse of the same old song:
"...'To the American people, this is my message to you: a reminder of the reasons behind 9/11 and the wars and the repercussions that followed and the way to resolve it,' the message said.

" 'From the beginning, we have stated many times ... that the cause of our disagreement with you is your support of your allies, the Israelis, who are occupying our land in Palestine. Your stance along with some other grievances are what led us to carry out the events of 9/11.'..."
(CNN)
'And it is the fault of the [scapegoat]' is a common refrain for people who are dissatisfied with reality, and either can't or won't recognize their own deficiencies. When I was growing up, 'it is the fault of the commies' came from one direction, while 'it is the fault of capitalists' came from another. If people who blamed capitalists liked long phrases, they'd say something like 'military-industrial complex.' And, they still do.

Which, again, is another topic.

"House negro" wasn't in the speech, but the idea is still there.
" The message claims that the Obama administration is under the influence of the Republican White House it replaced, pointing out that the president kept Robert Gates as defense secretary -- a holdover from the Bush administration.

" 'Prolong the wars as much as you like. By God, we will never compromise on it (Palestine), ever,' the message continued...."
(CNN)
"...we will never compromise" - that might be well to remember. Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups most likely won't be willing to compromise: on the plight of the poor, poor Palestinians; or much of anything else.

That's an important point to remember.

Even if a magnanimous Caliph of Winnipeg decided to let people wear trousers during winter months (maybe after paying an 'infidel tax'), I don't think that life under what Al Qaeda seems to have in mind would be any more pleasant than Afghanistan under the Taliban.

Of course, it isn't just about trousers: there's the centuries-long development of freedom and individual rights that I think many people in the West would miss. Even the 'sophisticated' ones, who loath and despise America in general and the American military in particular for defending those rights.

As for the assertion that Barack Obama's neck is under the heel of Massa Bush: nonsense. I don't agree with President Obama in many points. But I do think that he's an intelligent, highly articulate man. And I think that he is quite interested, for a mixture of reasons, in having an America around four years from now, for his second term.

On that, we're on the same page. It's very improbable that I'll vote for Obama in the next presidential elections: but I certainly want an America around to hold them.

'Bring the Troops Home?' Not Gonna Happen

Some time ago, I wrote about how nice it would be for all American soldiers to be home with their families. (July 27, 2007) My family knows a family whose father spent a very long time in Iraq - and one of my brothers-in-law will be over there as a (civilian) firefighter for some time. It's rough on the families. I'd much rather have everybody home.

But it's not gonna happen. Like it or not, America is a large, powerful country - and the only one in the world with both the ability and the will to form coalitions against tyranny. We've been conditioned to regard that as "corny," at best. But it's true.

America can 'go it alone:'
  • With over two dozen other nations
    • Operating under a United Nations mandate
  • Remove a brutal dictator
  • Enable local and regional leaders to root out murderous fanatics in their country
  • Stick around for the years - decades - it will take for the country to get back on its feet
America could, hypothetically, pull its military out of every other country; stop exporting products and services; stop importing products and services; pretend that the rest of the world wasn't there.

Not gonna happen. America depends on trade with other countries - like it or not - and we all depend on a large, stable country being around to provide the sort of willing leadership it takes to deal with an imperfect world.

Which isn't the same as "occupying" other countries. If having American soldiers stationed in another country is "occupying" the country - or "oppressing" it, then America has been occupying Germany and Japan for over sixty years. Professor Churchill and some other serious thinkers may see the situation that way: but I doubt that the Japanese and German governments do.

Related posts: In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, July 19, 2009

China Shot 12: Don't Worry, They're "Mobsters"

So much depends on who you listen to, or read: On CNN, it's Uyghur rioters. Reuters calls the the people in western China Uighurs. The official Chinese news says that their security people killed 12 "mobsters:" and doesn't say whether they're of the (majority) Han, or (minority in the rest of China) Uighur variety.

Not to worry, though. China Daily reports that China's leaders are handling the situation just fine:
"The Chinese government and the Communist Party of China (CPC) handled the July 5 riot in the Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region 'decisively and properly', said a senior CPC official on Friday in Beijing.

" 'The CPC and the government has always advocated social stability, the socialist legal system, and national unity, as well as the interests of the people,' said He Guoqiang, a member of the Standing Committee of the CPC Central Committee Political Bureau, according to Xinhua...." (China Daily)
"Social stability." "National unity." "Interests of the people." All that sounds good. Twelve bodies on the ground, not so good.

It's not the same players on the opposition side, but this situation reminds me a little of the Tiananmen Square confrontations, back when. And that time when national unity was achieved the hard way, in the War Between the States, here in North America.

Related posts: In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, July 10, 2009

Uighur Riot? Revolt? Foreign Separatists? Depends on What You Read

CNN and Radio Free Europe spell it "Uyghur," Reuters, asiaone news and FOXNews use "Uighur," both are efforts to present the name of an ethnic group in the Latin alphabet. I'm using the "Uighur" spelling for now.

Trouble involving Uighurs is nothing new.
"...China's western holdings include Uighur Muslims, a Turkic people who would just as soon not be part of China's regime. Chinese authorities were quiet about killing unruly Uighurs until 9/11 and the 'war on terror' gave them an excuse for their anti-Muslim actions...." (September 4, 2007)
China's government seems to be aware of how trouble in its western territory might affect its image. Foreign reporters have been ordered out of the areas. Out of concern for the safety of the foreigners, officially. (asiaone news)

From the Beijing's point of view, it's already a bit late for that.
"...Chinese authorities say 156 people were killed and more than 1,000 others injured on Sunday after Uighurs took to the street in protest.

"Authorities blamed Uighurs for 'rioting', although exiled Uighur leaders say security forces used disproportionate force in their clampdown and that hundreds of Uighurs may have died...."(asiaone news)
There may be an element of truth in the official version: that the incidents are essentially Uighurs "rioting". Two Uighurs died in a "massive brawl" late last month, between Uighur and Han workers at a toy factor in southern China's Guangdong province. People, including Uighurs, have been moving there, looking for work. (CNN)

China: Executions, Persuasion and Education

It's fairly clear, from news that's getting out, that China's national government is anxious to restore order and a measure of tranquility to its western territories. A Communist Party leader, speaking in Xinjiang Uigur Autonomous Region's capital city, Urumqi, made it clear that he was quite serious about stopping the violence.
"...More than 1,400 suspects have been detained, according to Chinese officials, who have vowed to deal harshly with those involved in Sunday's riot.

" 'For those who brutally killed the other people in the riot, the government will execute them,' Urumqi's Communist Party leader, Li Zhi, said Wednesday.

"China's chief police officer, Meng Jianzhu, said the main instigators 'should be punished with the utmost severity,' while others who were 'provoked' to take part in the riots 'should be given persuasion and education,' according to Xinhua...." (CNN)
Meng Jianzhu's remarks about "persuasion and education" are reported in a July 8, 2009, Xinhua article. There's an excerpt at the bottom of this post.1

Meng Jianzu's assurance that those who were following the lead of others will be "given persuasion and education" would not comfort me, if those to be 'educated' were friends and family. There seems to be a certain lack of transparency and accountability in China's system of government, which allows speculation that the "education" will go well beyond what a western government might call "rehabilitation."

But that's getting into topics like penal philosophies and mind control: which are beyond the focus of this blog.

China and Uighurs: 'It's the Fault of Foreigners'

Judging from his public statement, state councilor and public security minister Meng Jianzhu must be very good at his job. He already knows who is to blame for the violence involving Uighurs.

Foreigners are to blame.

Or, more precisely, "overseas separatists".
"...Meng said that adequate evidence proved that the riot was masterminded and remotely controlled by overseas separatists and it was a serious struggle to maintain national unity against separatism...." (Xinhua)
Presumably Uighurs living in China have had the urge for independence 'persuaded' and 'educated' out of them by now.

I think I understand how important what China's national leaders might call national unity is to them. Without places like Tibet/Xizang province and Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, their domain would be smaller.

Many nations have dealt with threats to national unity. For example, almost a hundred and fifty years ago, under somewhat different circumstances, the dominant northeastern states in America crushed a revolution in the American southeast. In the case of the War Between the States, it took the South about a century - and a new set of national policies - to recover economically.

I hope that Uighurs (or Uyghurs) have a better experience.

Related posts: In the news: Background:
1 I think it's safe to say that what appears in Xinhua's English online edition are views which have been approved, directly or indirectly, by China's national leaders.

"Xinhua reports the news to readers in China and to the world. It also functions as part of a broader information apparatus for China's leaders. The agency 'receives, translates, condenses, and provides analysis of news gathered from all over the world and presents it daily to China's readers...'...." (GlobalSecurity.org)
"Chinese police chief urges hardline crackdown on thugs in Xinjiang riot"
Xinhua (July 8, 2009)

"China's top police officer on Wednesday urged no leniency in the punishment of thugs who took part in the Urumqi riot.

"Meng Jianzhu, state councilor and public security minister, made the remarks when visiting local residents injured by the rioters and family members of those victims in Urumqi, capital of northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.

"In the July 5 riot at least 156 people died and more than 1,000 were injured.

"Leading rioters should be punished with the utmost severity and those taking part in the riot, who were provoked and cheated by separatists, should be given persuasion and education, Meng said.

"Commissioned by the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the State Council, Meng also visited local police officers and members of the Armed Police personnel and mourned for the victims.

"Meng said that adequate evidence proved that the riot was masterminded and remotely controlled by overseas separatists and it was a serious struggle to maintain national unity against separatism...." (Xinhua)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Neda Agha Soltan's Death was 'Staged' - Officially

Well, that didn't take long.

Monday, Iran's president Ahmadinejad announced that there would be an investigation into Neda Agha Soltan's death.

Today, two days later, Iranian police have the answer:
"Iran's Police Chief says the mysterious death of Neda Aqa-Soltan, who became a symbol of post-election street rallies in Iran, was a 'prearranged scenario'...." (Press TV)
There it is: neat, tidy, and about as good as the ayatollahs could expect.

We're also supposed to believe that Neda's murder - or, rather, all the fuss over it - is the fault of western media.
"...Esmaeil Ahmadi-Moqadam, commander of the Iranian Police, said Wednesday that the unfortunate incident --which has been hyped and dramatized by Western media outlets--, was in fact a 'premeditated act of murder'.

"The Iranian police chief said Arash Hejazi, a doctor who claims he tried to save Neda's life in her final moments, has fanned the flames of the western media hype...." (Press TV)
This really isn't anything new. Iran's leadership has been saying that terrorists and/or the CIA - anybody except their own enforcers - killed Neda Agha Soltan.

I think Press TV represents one form of traditional journalism: state-run, with an editorial policy determined by the country's rulers. The official news story I quoted from is from the English-language version of Press TV's website, and presents Neda's death in as favorable a light as possible, I'd say, in the circumstances.

Another sort of anything-but-traditional journalism is what what an op-ed piece called "Twitter journalism." (examiner.com) The author raised a legitimate point: that rumors can spread very rapidly on the Internet, and that some journalists are reporting 'tweets' on Twitter as news - without verifying the information. The op-ed concludes:
"...As a writer, it troubles me to see news sources reporting Twitter news before it has been authenticated. In our world of 24-hour information, having the freshest news seems like it's becoming more important than having the most accurate news." (examiner.com)
I'm all for accuracy: but there's more involved in traditional journalism. Any item of news has to be observed or researched, and written: and then passed to at least one editor for evaluation.

If the news is, in the editor's opinion, sufficiently interesting and important to the readers, the editor will consider whether there's room in the paper. At a minimum, there will be a decision as to whether there are both time and resources enough to push the story into publication.

Editors are human. If the story conforms to what they expect or want to be so, they'll be inclined to believe it. If it doesn't, and the editor is very professional, the reporter may be required to do more research and verification. At worst, an editor will simply assume that stories which conform to his or her preconceptions are true, and those which don't, aren't.

Something like that may have happened last year, when The New York Times published a story about a letter sent by the Mayor of Paris. I'd have wanted to verify the letter, before assuming that the Mayor of Paris, France, was quite so interested in New York State politics. But, I don't work for The New York Times.

The letter was a fake. (December 22, 2008)

Yes: "Twitter journalism" can spread rumors as if they were facts. But I'd rather live in a world where incidents can be reported, in near-real-time, by people who aren't established gentlemen of the press in the American northeast, or west coast.

As far as verification is concerned: I think traditional journalism has a place in that regard.

I also think that "Twitter journalism" has a place, broadcasting facts that the traditional press isn't particularly motivated to publish.
"In journalism, there has always been a tension between getting it first and getting it right." Ellen Goodman, American Journalist (1941-) (The Quotations Page)
Related posts: News and views:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 29, 2009

Ahmadinejad and Neda's Death: There's Going to be an 'Investigation'

I don't approve of the way the ayatollahs have been running Iran for the last three decades, but I think they're making the best of a bad - for them - situation, with the death of Neda Agha Soltan.

Instead of denying that she ever existed, or that she was dead, they're 'hunting for her killer.' Not in so many words, of course:
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday called the death of Neda Agha-Soltan 'suspicious' and urged the country's authorities to identify those responsible for it, Iran's semi-official Fars news agency reported Monday...."

"...But Iran has been pushing back against eyewitness reports that she was shot by pro-government Basij militiamen perched on a rooftop near a demonstration.

"Ahmadinejad told the head of Iran's judiciary, Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi, to probe the incident and make the results of his investigations public, Fars reported Monday, nine days after Agha-Soltan was killed.

" 'The massive propaganda of the foreign media, as well as other evidence, proves the interference of the enemies of the Iranian nation who want to take political advantage and darken the pure face of the Islamic republic, he said in a letter to Shahroudi, according to the news agency...." (CNN)
The "massive propaganda of the foreign media" helped, I'm sure. But that video being viewed and spread around the world didn't help, either, from the ayatollahs' point of view.

As for darkening "the pure face of the Islamic Republic," I'd say the ayatollahs and their enforcers have been doing a fine job of that, themselves: although that probably wasn't what they had in mind.

'Usual Suspect Syndrome' Ahead?

I used (and possibly coined) the phrase "usual suspect syndrome" on the eve of President Obama's inauguration celebrations. 'Usual suspect syndrome' is having "... a collection of 'usual suspects' - people or organizations that are The Bad Guys. Any connection with them, no matter how slight or irrelevant, makes a person or organization one The Bad Guys, too." (January 19, 2009)

What sort of person or organization is on the 'usual suspects' list depends on the list-maker's preferred perception of reality. Organizations and groups of people often include Hamas, the CIA, foreigners, or right-wing extremists.

Judging from what Iran's state press is doing I think it's clear that, if they ever considered it, the ayatollahs have given up on making Neda a non-person who never existed: of denying her existence and/or her death.

With that video loose on the Internet, and the people who knew Neda being known themselves - along with their recollections of Neda Agha Soltan - simple denial wouldn't work. Making Neda's family, friends, and acquaintances disappear would have made the matter worse: they're known, and their disappearances would have been noted.

The ayatollahs have not given evidence that they're stupid. Demagogues using a particularly violent brand of Islam to instill hatred of their enemies, yes. Stupid, no.

I think it's quite possible that at least one person who says he's from a group that the ayatollahs don't like will confess. And, probably say that some combination of the great Satan America, Israel, and Britain made him do it.

And, after a trial, will be quickly executed. Which is probably better than the alternative he was offered.

Related posts: In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Protesting Election Fraud is "Waging War Against God" - Ayatollah Khatami

We got a good look at one flavor of Islam this week, when Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami said that, since the Supreme Leader likes the way the election came out, disagreeing with him is waging war on God. Not in so many words, but that's the gist of it.

Considering how the ayatollah says that western media 'lies' about what's going on in Iran, it's odd that his remarkable message is getting comparatively little press attention. I suppose that Michael Jackson's death, and yet another American governor in trouble (extramarital hanky-panky this time), together with a possible history-making revolution in progress, didn't leave much room.

The story is getting out, though:
"Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami, a hardline member of Iran's Council of Experts, who led Friday prayers in Tehran today, said in his second sermon that based on the Islamic punishment for moharebeh [waging war against God], the imam and leader of an Islamic society can fight 'rioters' [election protesters] until their destruction, because Islam has suggested the severest punishment for those who engage in moharebeh.

"According to the Labour news agency, ILNA, Khatami said that the 'leaders of rioters' in [recent] protests 'feed at the trough of America and Israel,' and called on Iran's Judiciary to deal with them 'decisively and mercilessly,' so that others learn a lesson from their fate.

"Under Iran's Islamic law, punishment for people convicted as mohareb is execution...." (WashingtonTV)
Ayatollah Khatami doesn't approve of:
  • European, American and English media
    • Neda Aqa Soltan died "at the hands of rioters and instigators", even though "Mr. [Barack] Obama sheds crocodile tears" for her and the West "caused an uproar" about her
      (WashingtonTV)
  • UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon

Ayatollah Khatami's Message to the World: Look at Those Jews Over There, and Great Satan America's Gitmo

It's getting to be something of a routine in Iran. When things aren't going well, direct attention to those hated Jews, and the great Satan America. I'll give Ayatollah Khatami credit, first for directing verbal fire at several targets:
"...Blasting UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon’s recent expression of concern and his call for Iran's government to respect the internationally recognized rights of protesters, Khatami alluded to the extended conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip last year and criticized American conduct in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Addressing Ban, he said: 'Wretched man! 400 children died in Gaza, you felt no worries; 100 helpless women died in Gaza, you felt no worries; Americans kill people in Afghanistan and Iraq, you feel no worries; you are worried now?' he said.

"He called the UN 'arrogant power' and asked other nations to seek a 'real United Nations.'

"Khatami then reminded American officials of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and said: 'You dare talk of human rights with all your human rights violations?'..." (WashingtonTV)
I'll also give Khatami credit for apparently keeping up with what the more 'sophisticated' Americans feel about the great Satan America, and all those 'terribly mistreated' prisoners at Gitmo. I don't see how catering to the prisoners' idea of proper Islamic food and providing them with Qurans constitutes mistreatment, but then I'm not 'sophisticated' by some standards.

As for the oppression of Gaza by the Jews: people who believe that, believe it.1

Neda: The Ayatollahs Seem to have Picked a Story, and They're sticking with it

The ayatollah also told Iran's Muslims that Neda was killed by 'protesters:' and offered proof. "That Aqa-Soltan's last moments were recorded on video in an 'alleyway' shows her murder was 'pre-planned' by protesters he said...." You can't argue with logic like that.

I've seen the video of her death. Tehran must have really big alleyways, or the ayatollah is counting on his followers to be people who:
  • Never saw the video
  • Are adept at doublethink
  • Don't want to be the next person shot by
    • 'rioters'
    • 'protesters'
    • 'instigators'
  • Some combination of the above

Iran's Supreme Leader, God, and an Opportunity for Reflection

As for Ayatollah's claim that protesting a decision by the Supreme Leader is waging war against God: some Muslims may believe it. I think - and hope - that many may take this as an opportunity to think very hard about just what is Islam, and what is a patchwork of cultural values and personal preferences.

Related posts: News and views:
1I don't doubt that people in Palestinian territory aren't enjoying a high standard of living. If I lived in a county run by an American equivalent of Hamas (think the KKK of the sixties), where significant numbers of my neighbors were in the habit of firing missiles at people in the next town and dressing their kids in suicide vests to go blow up at a 7-Eleven, I might have troubles, too.

After a while, those hypothetical people in the next town might decide to do something about the attacks. After which, of course, my town's leaders would cry out about the inhumanity of those people over there.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, June 26, 2009

CIA Shot Neda: Old Story, New Names

I was wondering how long this would take.
"The United States may have been behind the killing of Neda Agha-Soltan, the 26-year-old Iranian woman whose fatal videotaped shooting Saturday made her a symbol of opposition to the June 12 presidential election results, the country's ambassador to Mexico said Thursday.

" 'This death of Neda is very suspicious,' Ambassador Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri said. 'My question is, how is it that this Miss Neda is shot from behind, got shot in front of several cameras, and is shot in an area where no significant demonstration was behind held?'

"He suggested that the CIA or another intelligence service may have been responsible.

" 'Well, if the CIA wants to kill some people and attribute that to the government elements, then choosing women is an appropriate choice, because the death of a woman draws more sympathy,' Ghadiri said...." (CNN)
Like the 'terrorists killed Neda Agha Soltan story, this is plausible - if for a more limited audience.

Quite a number of people in America are convinced that the FBI killed President Kennedy and that the CIA blew up New York City's World Trade Center. Lack of evidence can be used as proof. Paraphrasing something I wrote earlier: 'There's no evidence that the CIA secretly shot Neda - You see?! That proves it! They won't let The Truth be published!!' (January 14, 2009)

I don't see the CIA as being like James Bond's MI6, with quite a lot of SPECTRE mixed in: but I don't think that George Bush and the British royal family are space alien shape-shifting lizard people either. Which, for some, makes me a dupe or part of the conspiracy. That, I can live with.

As for the Ghadiri's "...choosing women is an appropriate choice, because the death of a woman draws more sympathy,'..." It's quite true: Neda wouldn't be on monitor screens around the world if she was fifty-something man. Probably.

This helps explain why the killing of Neda is such a thorn in the side of the ayatollahs: but that doesn't mean that the CIA did it.

I think it's at least as likely that the company that was going to deliver Neda's piano had broken the instrument, and had her killed to cover up their mistake.

Related Posts: In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Iran: 'Terrorists' Killed Neda Agha Soltan - Officially

Looks to me like the death of Neda Aghah-Soltan is a thorn in the side of the ayatollahs. The official line now is that she actually exists, that she was killed, and that it's the fault of "terrorists."

Actually, it's a plausible story: probably the best that Iran's government could do, under the circumstances.
"Iran said the gunman who killed Neda Agha-Soltan may have mistaken her for the sister of an Iranian 'terrorist,' the Islamic Republic News Agency reported Wednesday.

"In death, Neda Agha-Soltan has emerged as a powerful symbol of opposition to the Iranian government.

"Iran blamed the death of the woman known to the world simply as Neda squarely on 'those groups who want to create division in the nation,' saying they planned the woman's killing 'to accuse the Islamic republic of ruthlessly dealing with the opposition,' according to IRNA, Iran's state-run news agency.

"The report said the investigation into her death is ongoing, 'but according to the evidence so far, it could be said that she was killed by mistake. The marksmen had mistaken her for the sister of one of the Monafeghin who had been executed in the province of Mazandaran some time ago.'..." (CNN)
Monafeghin seems to be another name for the People's Mujahedin Organization of Iran, or PMOI, a leftist group dating 1963, which supported the the 1979 takeover of the American embassy in Tehran. They're no friends of the Islamic Republic, though. Their mix of Marxism, feminism, and Islamism isn't even close to being on the same page as the ayatollahs. (CNN, GlobalSecurity.org, FAS)

As bad guys, they're far from being a bad choice for the Islamic Republic of Iran. They've been attacking Iran from Iraqi territory. As such, my guess is that the ayatollahs are hoping to display Neda Agha Soltan's killing as some sort of western plot.

The 'terrorist' story may work to deflect outrage from the ayatollahs. It's dramatic, and doesn't require that people believe that Neda Agha Soltan never existed, that the video they've seen isn't real, or that she didn't really die.
  • "...Iran blamed the death of the woman known to the world simply as Neda squarely on 'those groups who want to create division in the nation,' saying they planned the woman's killing 'to accuse the Islamic republic of ruthlessly dealing with the opposition,'..."
  • "...the investigation into her death is ongoing, 'but according to the evidence so far, it could be said that she was killed by mistake. The marksmen had mistaken her for the sister of one of the Monafeghin who had been executed in the province of Mazandaran some time ago.'..."
  • "...IRNA reported Wednesday that the killer, or killers, may have 'thought that they were targeting one of the government opposition people and that is why they immediately distributed the video of the aftermath of the killing through the official and unofficial media in order to reach their murderous objectives against the Iranian government and revolution.'
    (CNN) [emphasis mine]
Giving credit where credit is due, the ayatollahs seem to be making the best of a bad situation.

Considering the rest of what's been leaking out, I don't believe the 'terrorist' story: but from a propagandist's point of view the tale is well-crafted.

Related posts: In the news: Background:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Young Iraqi Teens as Suicide Bombers: Getting More Bang for the Buck

If you're in agreement with the woman who crashed a vigil for Private Long, the soldier killed at an Arkansas recruiting center, you can ignore this post.

She's the one who said, "If you do research, about The New York Times and the Fox News they're owned by who? Jews! They're liars! They're liars!..."

Iraqi Insurgents Getting More Bang for the Buck

Suicide vests cost money. And, even if they're donated by the daftly devout, an insurgent group will have a limited supply of the things.

So, it makes economic sense to get the most value possible out of them.

Insurgents in Iraq seem to be doing that.

On the other hand, The New York Times carefully points out that, although the American and Iraqi military have reported instances where they were attacked by someone in their early teens:
"...In many attacks, it remains unclear exactly what took place, with residents giving accounts that diverge from official American or Iraqi explanations...." (NYT)
The New York Times also reported:
"...In Hilla, south of Baghdad, residents said American forces shot and seriously wounded a 6-year-old girl on Saturday after a bomb went off near their patrol.

"American military officials denied the report...." (NYT)
I'm assuming, for the moment, that "residents" in Iraq, who may have been the ones who wound the kid up and pointed him or her toward the soldiers, may not be the most reliable sources of information. I'm also assuming that officers of the American armed forces give accurate information more often than not. Abu Ghraib and Professor Churchill notwithstanding.

Looking at the situation in Iraq with a biased, Eurocentric value system, it might seem that using kids around the age of 14 - or 6 - to attack soldiers isn't very nice. One of the things I learned in college is that Americans shouldn't apply their values to people in other cultures.

So, looking at what the insurgents seem to be doing objectively, I can see that having someone who may have been 14 be the star in a suicide car bombing (AP), and having kids lob grenades in the general direction of American or Iraqi troops makes perfect sense.

There's a chance that soldiers may be hurt or killed. If the attack is carried out at a time and place where (real) residents of the area are going about their business, there's a better chance that some of them will be hurt or killed.

And, if the affair is a suicide attack, there's a near-certainty of at least one fatality.

Never Underestimate the Propaganda Value of a Tragically Dead Teen

Even if no American soldiers are killed, the people who used young Ali or Fatima as a cat's-paw get top-notch material for propaganda. Something along the lines of "American soldiers gun down innocent Iraqi teen." The rest of the story practically writes itself.

If people living in the area are hurt or killed, that's even better. They can become victims of America's war of aggression, too.

Am I being too cynical about the motives and methods of the Iraqi insurgents? Perhaps. Or, maybe I'm an unwitting dupe of the Jews and/or those shape-shifting space alien lizard people.1 I don't think so, though.

More-or-less-related posts: For yet more somewhat-related posts, key the word 'propaganda' (no quotes) in the search box near the top left corner of this blog's page.

In the news: Related posts, on censorship, propaganda, and freedom of speech.
1 Interestingly, I've yet to hear or read the assertion that the Jews are David Icke's shape-shifting space alien lizard people. I suppose that's a bit much for even the most avid conspiracy theorist to swallow.

On an unrelated note: "Swallow" reminded me of The Visitors' eating habits, in the 1983 V miniseries. Perhaps some people will swallow anything.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Blogroll

Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.