[Nettime-bold] MSNBC.com report on bin Laden tape

[honor <honor@va.com.au>]

hi all,

thought some nettimers may find this interesting.

best

honor



From: "jOhn pace" <earthplod@hotmail.com>
To: fibreculture@lists.myspinach.org


><http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15176>http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15176
>
><snip>
>
>Powell used the existence of this tape, and the words he claimed bin Laden 
>had said on it, to further tie Saddam Hussein to international terrorism. 
>He claimed bin Laden was clearly establishing a connection between himself 
>and Hussein on the tape, beyond all question. "This nexus between 
>terrorists and states that are developing weapons of mass destruction," 
>said Powell, "can no longer be looked away from and ignored."
>
>The actual tape, played and translated live on every major cable news 
>channel, told a very different story. Osama bin Laden swore vengeance 
>against America if Iraq was attacked, and demanded that the Muslim world 
>stand in solidarity with the Muslim people of Iraq. In very clear words, 
>Osama bin Laden told the people of Iraq to rise up against both American 
>aggression and against "socialist" Saddam Hussein. If the translations 
>that were provided were reliable, there is no ambiguity in bin Laden's 
>words on the matter. So much, it seems, for Powell's case that Hussein and 
>bin Laden are working together.
>
>And this is where it gets interesting.
>
>An MSNBC.com report on the bin Laden tape carried the following sentence: 
>"At the same time, the message also called on Iraqis to rise up and oust 
>Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who is a secular leader." This clearly 
>confirms the clarity of mind Osama bin Laden displayed in regard to Saddam 
>Hussein, and conforms to the recorded message heard by millions and 
>millions of people around the world.
>
>Less than twenty minutes after this report appeared on MSNBC, that 
>sentence was deleted from the report. A few intrepid Internet news 
>junkies, including myself, preserved what is called a 'screen-grab' of the 
>original article before it was scrubbed. The version of the article 
>currently in existence has replaced the text above with this far more 
>benign text: "The taped statement reflected Saddam, a secular leader, but 
>made it clear that Saddam was not the immediate target." A similar story 
>line, bereft of the portions describing bin Laden's wish that Hussein be 
>killed, has appeared in virtually every mainstream news media report on 
>the matter.
>
>The manner in which this story unfolded brings forth a number of serious 
>questions.
>
>First of all, questions must be asked regarding Colin Powell's motives in 
>this. The recording heard by the world diverged significantly from the 
>spin Powell put on it before the Budget Committee. Osama bin Laden did not 
>state an alliance with Saddam Hussein, but with the Muslim civilians in 
>Iraq who will bear the bloody brunt of any American attack. In fact, bin 
>Laden told the Iraqi people to rise up against Hussein. This is not the 
>way allies deal with each other.
>
>Why would Powell go to such lengths to stretch the glaringly obvious truth 
>in this matter? He is already suffering from a deficit of credibility in 
>the aftermath of the plagiarism scandal that is currently rocking Tony 
>Blair's administration. Powell stood before the UN last week and praised a 
>British intelligence dossier that contained cut-and-pasted pages and pages 
>of an essay, with all spelling and grammatical errors intact, written by a 
>postgraduate student from California. The data was years out of date, 
>flat-out contradictory in several key areas, used without the student's 
>awareness, and yet was offered as an up-to-the-minute assessment of Iraqi 
>weapons capabilities.
>
>This, in combination with Powell's obviously skewed interpretation of 
>Tuesday's bin Laden recording, forces us to call into question every 
>single word he and the Bush administration have said on the matter. The 
>question of whether Saddam Hussein has ties to al Qaeda terrorism and 
>Osama bin Laden can be put to bed now, it seems, alongside the tatters and 
>shreds of honor and dignity formerly enjoyed by the Secretary of State.
>
>More ominously, why would a news network like MSNBC so obviously haul 
>water for the failed allegations of the Bush administration? Events happen 
>in seconds on the internet, but merely scrubbing uncomfortable sentences 
>from articles cannot stop the tens of thousands of readers who are wise 
>enough now to save the evidence before it evaporates in a cloud of silicon.
>
>These deletions display a manifest breach of faith on behalf of MSNBC, and 
>call to mind issues surrounding the conflict of interest that are inherent 
>in the ownership of this network. MSNBC, along with NBC and CNBC, are 
>owned by the corporate giant General Electric. GE is one of the largest 
>defense contractors on the face of the earth, and will, bluntly, be paid a 
>king's ransom in the event of a war. Following this line of questioning 
>leads to some dark corners, indeed. How often is the data being 
>manipulated by the corporate-owned media? Are we to rely solely on the 
>nimble fingers of keyboarded citizens to get to the heart of the matter?
>
>A report appearing later on Tuesday on MSNBC.com served to refute the 
>claims of collusion between bin Laden and Hussein. "Although Powell sought 
>to characterize the tape as a concrete link between al-Qaida and the Iraqi 
>government," the MSNBC.com report read, "White House officials 
>acknowledged later to NBC News that it did not. Powell did not know it had 
>not been broadcast when he spoke to the committee and was 'a little on the 
>front of his skis,' a government source said." These lines were buried 
>deep within the report.
>
>By Wednesday morning, this text had been completely removed from the article.
>
><snip>
>
>William Rivers Pitt is the author of two books – "War On Iraq" (with Scott 
>Ritter), and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available in May 2003 
>from Pluto Press. He teaches high school in Boston, Mass.
>
>Scott Lowery contributed research to this report.


   _______________.play
<honor@va.com.au>           <http://www.radioqualia.net>
+44 (0)20 76841859

_______________.work
<honor.harger@tate.org.uk>  <http://www.tate.org.uk/audiovideo/>
ph: +44 (0)20 74015066

"perhaps attention acts on information the same way gravity acts on mass: 
attraction begets attraction and a positive feedback loop is formed" 
http://electricsheep.org/


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold