Monday, August 29

A WAR TO BE PROUD OF; AN MSM TO DISDAIN

I'm going to ask something special of you -- my regular readers and those of you who may be visiting for the first time. It's a request of you that's going to take a little more time out of your day than you may be used to in this age of sound-bytes, video-clips, instant-messaging, and Instapundit-pithiness. Indeed, I want you to spend some quiet time reading two columnists of widely divergent views: one, Christopher Hitchens, who I think is spot on, and the other, Michael Ryan, who I'm convinced has lost his marbles.

If you're not prepared to do so now, than kindly bookmark my site and come back to this post and these links at a time more suitable for some careful reading and contemplation. I'm suggesting to you that both columns are must reads: the former, by Hitchens, because it makes the case for the war in Iraq more cogently, more compellingly, than, sadly, anything the Bush Administration and our president have ever done; and, the latter, by Ryan, because it's symptomatic of the head-in-the-sand contention that the mainstream media has gone along willingly for the ride, a purposeful dupe of the Bush Administration, countenancing an unjust war in Iraq by failing to do their job. Hitchens is a thorough thinker; Ryan is a rank propagandist. Hitchens' kind of thinking and facts-based analyses get obscured all too often by the tidal wave of Ryanesque-style pandering to the Left and its anti-war, anti-America agenda.

But, I'll let you decide. But do read each column in its entirety, please!

Snippets from Hitchens' piece to pique your interest:

This state -- Saddam's ruined and tortured and collapsing Iraq -- had also met all the conditions under which a country may be deemed to have sacrificed its own legal sovereignty. To recapitulate: It had invaded its neighbors, committed genocide on its own soil, harbored and nurtured international thugs and killers, and flouted every provision of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

One might have thought, therefore, that Bush and Blair's decision to put an end at last to this intolerable state of affairs would be hailed, not just as a belated vindication of long-ignored U.N. resolutions but as some corrective to the decade of shame and inaction that had just passed in Bosnia and Rwanda. But such is not the case. An apparent consensus exists, among millions of people in Europe and America, that the whole operation for the demilitarization of Iraq, and the salvage of its traumatized society, was at best a false pretense and at worst an unprovoked aggression.

It is out of the question -- plainly and absolutely out of the question -- that we should surrender the keystone state of the Middle East to a rotten, murderous alliance between Baathists and bin Ladenists.
Snippets from Ryan's piece to test your credulity:

The news media are failing to acknowledge their own responsibility for the invasion of Iraq, even as they report with glee Cindy Sheehan's antiwar protest outside George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford.

But the news media ought to explain why they broke their moral covenant with the American people to provide complete, balanced, fair and accurate information about the charge to war.

The media could have found out what was really going on. Many individuals and groups tried to get journalists to look beyond the administration's exaggerated and false claims.

Most journalists failed to observe the tenets of an objective approach to journalism.

They failed because writers and editors were not skeptical of official sources; they did not evaluate evidence and alternative interpretations themselves, relying instead on the official sources' interpretations; and they were not creative in seeking information and opinion that did not support the administration's views.
I wonder how many Americans in the heartland have ever discerned a moral covenant that the elite, mainstream media has with them in providing "fair and accurate" information?

And I wonder how many Americans in the heartland, if polled, would agree that the MSM has been supportive of President Bush, our American armed forces, and the decision to go to war in Iraq, and to remain there until the job is completed?

SOURCES: "The Weekly Standard"; and, the "Houston Chronicle" (registration required).

HAT-TIPS: "Common Sense Junction"; "Ace of Spades HQ"; and, "Polipundit".