[Article] Al-Jazeera tells the truth about war

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

davelerave

i'd say the website was taken down by a bunch of american geeks.At this stage i have developed an allergy to all the lies and propaganda of the allies ,it's very poor quality spin as well .when tony blair claimed that the 2 british soldiers were executed he was 'using' them for propaganda purposes

Shinji

Yes, I see the "execution" bull has backfired incredibly badly - the families of the two servicemen killed have turned on Blair very publicly and senior army officers have been forced to apologise on his behalf.

Blair will have lost a LOT of support in the military for trying to lie about the deaths of their comrades as a political ploy; and even those in Britain (and there are a lot of them) who are keen to be supportive of the army abroad even if they don't agree with the motives behind the war are going to be asking some serious questions.

If the executions were a lie; if the weapons of mass destruction were a lie; if the links with Al Quaeda were a lie; if the killing of Kuwaiti babies in incubators was a lie; if the widespread support of the Iraqi people for an invasion was a lie....

What ELSE have we been lied to about?



By the way, I note that Rumsfield had to issue a direct warning to Syria today; apparently a lot of Syrians have been crossing the border into Iraq in order to take part in the defence of the country, and they're also accused of sending in military supplies. The USA effectively told them that supporting Iraq would be seen as a hostile action and Syria would be "punished". It looks like the hopes that this war could be kept nice and localised in Iraq and Kuwait are falling apart.

froggy 2

Yes, I see the "execution" bull has backfired incredibly badly

Excuse me for asking a precision but, here, we are not following all and every information of that kind: do you mean that was a lie?
If so, you can say that
1) BLAIR is not a "gentlemen".
2) He is also very stupid.

By the way, I note that Rumsfield had to issue a direct warning to Syria today.

Irrelevant: Rumsfeld has warned and menaced almost three quarters of the planet to that point.

lili

it's not the first time blair is caught with lies.
by the way, he is a good orator.

Originally posted by Shinji
If the executions were a lie; if the weapons of mass destruction were a lie; if the links with Al Quaeda were a lie; if the killing of Kuwaiti babies in incubators was a lie; if the widespread support of the Iraqi people for an invasion was a lie....

What ELSE have we been lied to about?

I have to take issue with emotive language like that.
There are excelent reporters working out in Iraq, who no doubt, will clear all this up for us when this war is over.
At present those working in Baghdad are subject to monitoring by the Iraqi authorities.
What I understand, regarding Blair talking about the executions of British pow's is that he said this after the army had told, one of the dead pow's sisters that he had died doing his duty.

Why would Tony Blair deliberately lie here? in the certain knowledge, that if he was lying, his credibility was damaged.
His suspicions were based on circumstantial evidence :

Speaking later, the prime minister's official spokesman acknowledged there was not absolute proof they were executed but claimed that "every piece of information points towards the men having been executed in a brutal fashion".He said the bodies had been found some distance from their vehicles and their protective equipment and helmets were missing.

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2896415.stm )

It's more likely that he wasn't aware of the spin that the Army put on the matter to the family, and further likely that the Army weren't aware of their own ministry of Defence's view.
Thats understandable, given the work load and pressure, the man is under at the moment.

And as regards the lack of support of the Iraqi people for an invasion. Its impossible for any of us here to guage, whether theres no support, especially when today ordinary British troops are confirming to journalists the Iraqi militia fired on their own civilians... or are they lying as well??
It makes me wonder whats going on behind closed doors so to speak inside Basra.

This is the fog of War.
mm

bonkey

Originally posted by Man
This is the fog of War.

No - its an exercise in using the fog of war as a propagandist tool.

The "nice" explanation seems to be that through a breakdown in communications, two differing "spins" were put on the same story, both of which became public causing embarrassment.

Now, before either explanation was offered, the people kn charge knew that they did not have all the facts, but that something would have to be said. Rather than saying "we dont know all the facts, and will not jump to speculative conclusions", we got offered two "it appears / has all the likelihood of being" spins instead.

That is not FoW. They knew they didnt have the facts (which is FoW), and indeed may never have them, but chose to give it a spin or two first. If there hadnt been two conflicting spins, then there would have never been an issue over it.

I would be more inclined to call it failed propaganda.

jc

Originally posted by bonkey
I would be more inclined to call it failed propaganda.
jc

I wouldn't be that damning of it to be honest, i'd be more inclined to think , that the sensitive story was given to the family.
Tony, unaware of this, in a fast moving situation and bearing in mind, that unlike Bush , he hasn't been getting 8 hours sleep, gave it as he thought it.
That would be a mistake in the fog of war in my opinion.
mm