As news comes in of a series of explosions, the obvious needs to be said. Terrorism, the mass murder of people in order to directly damage societies and indirectly disrupt those societies via reactions of fear, represents the application of one of the worst aspects of humanity. Terrorists and fascists work symbiotically, hand in glove, to change societies into twisted shells of their former selves.
At this time, we know of 40 people killed in London on a bus and in the London Underground, although there may be more. I am listening to NPR coverage and checking CNN. As soon as it learned that two were dead, NPR put on its “sensitive music” (oboes and pianoes in minor keys playing in a slow tempo), and the current anchor says “we will continue to cover this breaking news during the morning.” The stock market in New York is set to plummet by hundreds of points in reaction to the news.
Also in the news, although nowhere the front page of CNN or the New York Times, and not mentioned at all on NPR — only on the wire services — we know of 13 people killed in a set of bombings in Iraq, although there may be more. There has been a bombing killing civilians on this scale, or larger, every day in Iraq, with more than a handful of bombings over the past month that each took more than 30 lives. Stock markets don’t plummet by hundreds of points in reaction to this news.
Today’s London attack has received breaking coverage in the news on radio, TV and the major internet news sites. Today’s Iraq attack, and the others like it, do not receive breaking coverage.
Why is that? Is it that the people of London are “good white ones” who speak our language, while the people of Iraq are “nasty swarthy ones” who speak an unfamiliar tongue? Do we see ourselves in London’s victims more than we see ourselves in Iraq’s victims, and does that therefore freak us out more? Is the life of a Londoner more worthy of note than an the life of Iraqi? If it’s not these things, then what?
You might say (as Mark does in the first comment here) that the continuity of the Iraq bombings leads to the reduced coverage. But even the first big ones didn’t make breaking, continuing, top-line news like the London bombing. And you can also find stories about (apparently, as of this time) more people getting killed in a terrorist bombing in Nepal. 38 were killed there on June 7, but the coverage here was paltry. Sure, it’s a faraway country, but so is Britain. Britain has white, English-speaking people who have a great deal of intercourse with Americans. Nepal doesn’t.
The difference in coverage is due to different circumstances and participants. I’m not saying that the attacks in Iraq do not warrant news coverage, it’s just that the attacks in London are, well, NEW. England has not had terrorist attacks in a while and Iraq has them every day. The attackers in London (and this is simply my opinion with no facts yet) were probably terrorists acting in response to the G8 summit in Scotland. This is a completely different group of individuals than the terrorists who are acting in Iraq.
The news media can only report so much on attacks in Iraq before people start tuning them out. It’s like any news situation. We don’t pay attention to the common things even though they may be very tragic, such as the daily death toll in the US due to car crashes; but if 1 person is attacked by a shark, we all watch.
Yeah, the Brits noted “200 alQuaeda” wandering around yesterday.. big surprise today!
Is CNN mentioning that Scotland Yard and the Israeli embassy knew it was gonna happen?
I’m off to pop some corn and grab more news feeds. Wheeee.
The difference is the bombings in Iraq are being done by their own people who want the US, London and everyone else there to get the hell out of their country. (I don’t get the racist remark..the good white ones..what does that mean) The reason it won’t make our headlines is because the idiot in charge of the chaos over there, who also happens to be in charge over here doesn’t want us to know about it. The less said about his “War” the better. However, when London or Madrid have bombings it is headlines, to prove that the idiot in charge is right to do what he his doing. He is stamping out terroism isn’t he? The “War on Terroism must continue…Yea..tell that to the families of the victims in London. Tell that to the families of the men and women, boys and girls who are dying in Iraq. The war in Iraq and the bombings have not been headline news for quite some time. As of June 30th 1,743 US Military personnel have died in Iraq. Headlines? No. The war on terroism…WE ARE LOSING on the homefronts..now that’s news.
This stupid war is not working. Just getting more people to DIE!
To clarify, the “racist part” was meant to depict one possible motivation in the media for the divergent coverage, not meant to depict what I think is real.
There is more fear factor with ‘terror in Britain’ than ‘terror in Nepal’ and ‘terror in Iraq’ is old hat.
Warning: “Crazy talk” ahead:
Now, please pay attention to the CURRENTLY happening media cover that will soon retract (if it hasn’t yet!) the fact that Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu stayed in his hotel room because he was warned of the London attacks. I’m willing to put money on the fact Israel will suddenly retract all ‘prior knowledge’. Let’s watch… (i don’t have live TV, so my news is delayed.)
Definitely supposed to be relating to the G8 summit more than the war in Iraq…
It wasn’t a biological or chemical attack, though. Nor large explosions, nor done in a way to kill a lot of people…
Overall, it seems to me like the people who did this either just wanted to cause a fuss and went out of their way to minimize the amount of death, or didn’t know how to carry this out.
Either way; it could have been a lot worse. Hopefully it’ll be dealt with in a way that DOESN’T include a lot more death and paranoia.
So we should just pick up and leave Iraq? That is logical. And what happens to the MAJORITY of Iraqi’s who supported us removing Saddaam? I am sure they would be “removed” as well, so to speak.
We absolutely cannot leaqve Iraq. Too much depends on the US stabilizing that country. And radical Muslims hated the US long before Bush. In fact, they hated Clinton’s globalization plans and hated us before Clinton.
Hey, I was right! *bow* Israeli embassy denies they picked up the phone when the Brits called!
Anyway, if I killed my spouse and the police came over and arrested me, then that’s ok.
But then they stayed, watched TV, trashed my house, killed my family, pissed on the bible and flushed the gerbil down the toilet…
Of course those nice officers should stay to ‘stabilize’ my house!
idiot
Dang it, Hoosie, nobody said we should just pick up and leave Iraq!
AngryAmerican noted that the Iraqis want us out of there, but nobody said we “should just pick up and leave.”
Pretty clever of you to mock us for saying something we never said. Goin’ for the straw man again, eh Hoosie? And you almost got away with it!
No, people here were just pointing out that every innocent life lost to a terrorist attack is equally tragic, and deserves equal mourning and attention in the press. Now what’s your problem with that, Hoosie?
You’re just bein’ a jackass.
Hoosier’s right. We should stay until all of the oil is “stabilized” out of Iraq. Then we can bail and let the Iraqis kill each other all they want, and nobody will care, like Sudan or the Congo. Good point, Hoosier.
Red,
If you think we went to Iraq for the oil, your drinking all the kool-aid that you can handle. I for one could care less about the oil. We should be drilling more here.
Britain and the US are THE only two countries to be actively fighting this war on terror. The rest of Europe, especially france and sadly my Germanrelatives, are too cowardly to. As pointed out time and time again, Saddaam has numerous links to terrorists.
“As pointed out time and time again, Saddaam has numerous links to terrorists.”
AUUGGGHHHH!!! *tears hair out, bangs head against wall*
…
Whew. Sorry, just had to get that out. >:(
No one else said it, then I will. Get us out NOW, tomorrow, pull them all home, let the Iraqies do what THEY will. Feed our hungry, build schools for our kids in Apppalachia and Pine Ridge and where ever it’s needed, Spend that money helping US. Just as an afterthought maybe if we do that our soldiers will quit dying for NOTHING.
“No one else said it…” But Stryder, I did say—oops, no I didn’t. But that’s what I meant by “AUUGGGHHHH!!!” :-\ Thanks for saying it in, y’know, actual words, LOL…
If you don’t think we went into Iraq for the oil, you’ve been drinking what the French refer to as “le cool aide du jour.”
cool aide du jour, 2000:
“Moi, le nation building? Jamais!
cool aide du jour, 2002-2003:
“weapons of mass destruction,” “mushroom cloud”
cool aide du jour 2004:
“spreading democracy” (nation building? oui!)
cool aide du jour 2005:
“never mind why we invaded in the first place. Stay the course”
When you look back over the ever-shifting justifications for this war, what conclusion do you draw? When you hear Paul Wolfowitz say just before the war that “Iraq can pay for its own reconstruction, and soon,” you know he’s talking about oil and openly admitting it’s a factor. Then later when you hear him say that they decided on weapons of mass destruction as a justification for political reasons. Then you read the Downing Street memo that talks about invasion plans “proceeding apace,” but “creating political conditions” to justify the invasion lagging behind…
Well, what does it all add up to? Iraqi invasion plans were made first, and they just made up the justifications as they went along. Which means, Einstein, that there were other justifications the whole time. Do the math. If you think oil isn’t a motivation in our strategic thinking about the Middle East, you are a naive fool.
There’s not enough oil left in the United States to choke a cormorant. With the 2,000,000,000 people of China and India starting to chug oil with the champions, opening up the last 10% of Alaska won’t do anything but piss off the caribou.
“Staying the course” on something that was a stupid idea in the first place? Moi? Cela? Non, merci!
hoosier, hoosier, hoosier! we should stay the course? what course? the course of engaging in an llegal war and the killing of thousands of innocents?
we should veer of course as quickly as possible! we should redeem our reputation and hold those responsible for these crimes to the flame of justice.
impeachment, now there’s a course correction.