March 06, 2006

MSM Poll Provides Documentary Evidence on the Harm MSM is Doing

MSM has been trying to persuade Americans that a civil war in Iraq is imminent. Now they've done a poll to confirm that their disinformation campaign is working:

Majority of Americans Believe Iraq Civil War is Likely
Washington Post-ABC News Poll Finds Sharp Decline in Optimism About Iraq War

By Richard Morin

An overwhelming majority of the public believes fighting between Sunni and Shiite Muslims in Iraq will lead to civil war and half says the United States should begin withdrawing its forces from that violence-torn country, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.

But according to reports on the ground in Iraq, no civil war is imminent:

DUDE, WHERE'S MY CIVIL WAR?

By RALPH PETERS - In Iraq

March 5, 2006 -- BAGHDAD

I'M trying. I've been trying all week. The other day, I drove another 30 miles or so on the streets and alleys of Baghdad. I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it.

Maybe actually being on the ground in Iraq prevents me from seeing it. Perhaps the view's clearer from Manhattan. It could be that my background as an intelligence officer didn't give me the right skills.

And riding around with the U.S. Army, looking at things first-hand, is certainly a technique to which The New York Times wouldn't stoop in such an hour of crisis.

Let me tell you what I saw anyway. Rolling with the "instant Infantry" gunners of the 1st Platoon of Bravo Battery, 4-320 Field Artillery, I saw children and teenagers in a Shia slum jumping up and down and cheering our troops as they drove by. Cheering our troops.

All day - and it was a long day - we drove through Shia and Sunni neighborhoods. Everywhere, the reception was warm. No violence. None.

And no hostility toward our troops. Iraqis went out of their way to tell us we were welcome.

Instead of a civil war, something very different happened because of the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra. The fanatic attempt to stir up Sunni-vs.-Shia strife, and the subsequent spate of violent attacks, caused popular support for the U.S. presence to spike upward.

Mudville Gazette reports on a case in which the NY TIMES and the WASHINGTON POST wildly misreport the facts in what appears to be a blatant attempt at disinformation.

Instapundit observes:

The press had better hope we win this war, because if we don't, a lot of people will blame the media.

...Yes, I've gotten some email of the "you only want happy news" variety, which proves that those people didn't read the posts I indicated above. I just want the press to avoid false information that damages the war effort. Is that asking too much?

As Instapundit notes, it is not yet certain that there will be a good outcome in Iraq. But the press is misreporting news, and suppressing news, with the result that it is misinforming the public about Iraq.

Conclusion: Today's Washington Post-ABC News poll provides documentary evidence of the harm they are doing via their own campaign of publishing false information.

John Kerry Wants to Build Power of U.N.—But Never Wants to Build the Power of the U.S.

Kerry: America must bolster UN, 'end the empire of oil':

LONDONDERRY, Northern Ireland (AP) - Sen. John Kerry said Sunday that the United States must rebuild the power of the United Nations and help "end the empire of oil" to defeat terrorism.

Has Kerry ever said he wanted to "bolster the U.S."? It seems to me the meaning of everything he says is that he believes the U.S. can't be trusted, and that he wants to restrain and weaken the U.S. The next paragraphs of this article are a case in point:

Kerry, who lost to President Bush in the 2004 presidential election, avoided explicit criticism of the U.S. administration during a wide-ranging speech on the global dynamics of terrorism. But he said Bush's policy of imposing democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan risked looking like a crusade in Arab, Muslim eyes.

"If it is seen as the result of an army marching through Muslim lands, it will fail," Kerry told an audience at the University of Ulster in Londonderry, the second-largest city in Northern Ireland.

Instead of helping the U.S. by saying that what the U.S. is doing is not a "crusade," Kerry helps the terrorists by suggesting that what the U.S. is doing could be seen as a "crusade." He makes no effort to deny that that would be a way to correct way see it. Evidently Kerry feels his mission in political life is to weaken the U.S. He seems to believe that's what his constituents want. This goes with a recent post in which I asked, "Is it true that Dems don't trust America?"

In the same speech, he preposterously blames the U.S. for the backwardness of the mid-east:

Kerry said developing effective replacements for oil-based fuels also was key. The West's appetite for petroleum from the Middle East "has frustrated every impulse towards modernization of the region, while giving its regimes the resources to hold onto power. The international community of democratic nations cannot afford to continue funding both sides of the war on terror. We must end the empire of oil."

Isn't that something? By flooding the region with billions of dollars, by buying what the mid-east is selling, according to Kerry, the West has "frustrated every impulse towards modernization of the region." He blames American for the behavior of the region's Saddams (while of course famously voting against efforts by America to remove Saddam).

There appears to be no question that Kerry does not trust America and feels his mission in life is to weaken our country.

Inevitably, in attacking the U.S., Kerry helps our enemies.