Slashdot Mirror
Rumsfeld Requests 24-hour Propaganda Machine
jasonditz writes "The BBC is reporting that US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is unhappy with the existing propaganda systems in place and insists that the US must create a 'more effective, 24-hour propaganda machine' or risk losing the battle for the minds of Muslims. In an era where we've already got government-created and funded media outlets and the Pentagon bribing Iraqi journalists to run favorable war stories, not to mention other departments paying journalists to endorse their positions, it begs the question, how much more can they possibly do?"
Go look it up and learn something new.
No No No! The word "think" is doubleplus ungood and is not part of the Newspeak Dictionary 5th Edition. The correct statement is "All knowledge from MiniTrue is doubleplus good."
I am officially gone from
In 2004, the US government launched Alhurra, a 24-hour propaganda news network that was created to counter Aljazeera.
Maybe Rumsfeld didn't get the memo, but that's not surprising considering that he doesn't even use e-mail.
Did you actually read what Rummy is proposing?
From the end of TFA:That sounds really freakin' nerdy to me.
They're talking about creating a radio, tv and print framework in whatever country he has a problem with.
It's relatively easy for the U.S. to blast propaganda into Cuba, since they aren't that far away, but it is a completely different story when you're trying to push information into countries like Iran or Syria.
Think about the technical side of deploying his 'framework'. I bet that would be News for Nerds
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
This is because aljazeera.com is the website for alJazeera magazine. It is not affiliated with the Middle Eastern news network Aljazeera whose website is aljazeera.net.
From aljazeera.com:
"About Aljazeera.com
Aljazeera Publishing owns and operates Aljazeera.com, bringing you the world today. Aljazeera Publishing is an independent media organisation established for more than 12 years delivering news and analysis to readers all over the world. Aljazeera.com has a particular focus on events and issues in the Middle East covering major developments presenting facts as they happen.
Important note: Aljazeera Publishing and Aljazeera.com are not associated with the controversial Arabic Satellite Channel known as Jazeera Space Channel TV station whose website is Aljazeera.net."
Embarrasing, I know.
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
Saddam was secular. He did not enforce Islamic law (Sharia).A third time. Under Saddam, women could work. Under the new government, this is not always allowed.You might want to take a look at the fundamentalist Taliban and their implementation of Sharia.
Seriously, do some research. It's not like it's that difficult.
As a person coming from a country struggling to control Muslim fundamentalists, you're spot on.
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
How about actually reporting ALL the news that's going on there.
Not just the bad things.
The American people have such a screwed up idea of what that whole country is like... You'd think that ever square inch of that place was ready to explode, rather than what's happening in a relatively small area where Saddam loyalists and jihadists (who came over the border) are right now.
DISCLAIMER: I'm a student in study of religion. You are wrong.
The dhimmi status has, by some, been extended to basically include all theists. However, the dhimmi status is subjective, based on fatwas (which often contradict each other), and any Muslim is free to accept or not accept a fatwa regardless of which Imam or Ayatollah made it. So some Muslims accept pretty much any religion/worldview, while some Shia Muslims think all Sunni Muslims should die, and vice versa.
So what does this really mean? At the moment, Islam kills about 1% of the number of victims of starvation, or 4% of the number of AIDS deaths.* (9/11 was an exception - only approximately nine times the number of WTC victims starved on the same day.) Not fun, but it is not like the full billion of Muslims alive are up in arms. Most just ignore the order to kill infidels much in the same way as most christians ignore the rule that slave trade is okay.
What does this tell us? What religions say and what religious people do is a very, very big difference. Look at Russian Orthodoxy, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Martinism - they are as different from each other as practical religions can possibly be, and they all swear by the same book. Islam is just as diverse! The radicals just get all the press. Get this in perspective: worldwide, roughly 200,000 people have protested the Muhammad caricatures - that makes less than 0.02% of Muslims. Roughly 30 people have died in the protests. Over this couple of weeks, more people have probably been hit by lightning. Islamic radicalism is an absolute non-event put under a huge magnifying lens because Bush keeps throwing hundreds of billions of $ at it.
* Per day, 27,000 people die from starvation, 7000 from AIDS (Source: WHO). 300 (direct) victims of Islam is my own estimate, and the majority should be from suicides and botched abortions, not war.
Or could it be that nerds have actually learned to care about politics, even though you haven't? If the political stories weren't news to nerds, they wouldn't generate pageviews. And any look thru the extremely high numbers of posts in response shows that the people discussing the stories are nerds.
--
make install -not war
The Law of Group Polarization
CASS R. SUNSTEIN
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id =199668
Not only are you completely off-base on the Dhimmi issue, the fact is that muslims already have nukes. Ever heard of Pakistan? The Indian and Pakistani nukes are doing a wonderful job of deterrence, and are probably the only thing that's kept those two countries from all out war on many occasions.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Aside from every major Islamic organization condemning terrorism and violence, what more do you want? Sheikh Hamza Yusuf said, "Terrorists are mass murderers, not martyrs" but I guess he wasn't deemed newsworthy. Sheikh Qaradawi, a popular TV preacher, has always been against Al-Qaeda and even said it was legitimate for Muslims to join the US in attacking the Taliban.
If you search online, you'll find photos of Muslims in anti-terror rallies. Here's two Palestinian women at a 9/11 memorial, and another of some of the Palestinian students who all observed 5 minutes of silence to remember 9/11 victims. Bangladesh anti-terrorism rally and sympathy for 9/11 victims. Palestinians held a rally against suicide bombing, but I can't find coverage in english press.
What about the mass demonstrations in Indonesia against terrorism? Heck, they had a rally calling for the execution of the Bali bombers. Indonesian Muslims were so outraged at the terrorists that they tried to storm the prison to lynch the terrorists.
Go and visit any local mosque, and they will tell you how much they are opposed to terrorism of all forms. Heck, the mosque by my house keeps sending me emails condemning the latest violence, when I know it's obvious. Still, I can understand how jittery everyone is, since a few mosques have been burned down over the last few years, and someone smashed our window.
The US did not create Al Queda. Afghanistan was invaded and as usual, there was a resistence. The Carter administration wanted to feed the resistence enough to bleeed the Soviets dry but not win. Reagan upped the support so they would actually win. There were elements from all over the muslim world in that resistance and I'm proud that my tax dollars went to fund a liberation movement like that.
Some of the people who later went on to form Al Queda did take part in that movement to free Afghanistan but it would be more accurate to blame the US for the Soviet Gulag because we sent aid to the USSR in WW II than accuse the US of creating Al Queda.
That being said, there's plenty of documentary evidence of a differential between what is preached in western tongues and what is preached in arabic. Unlike the Protocols (a czarist secret police forgery), you can buy transcripts and tapes of these things directly from the muslim groups. The nature of these sorts of accusations is generally not "those muslims secretly plot" but that "Sheikh X, that the Bush administration claims is moderate, sayd XYZ in arabic in a speech in Cairo". In other words, if you have the linguistic skills, you can double check the claims and be famous for exposing lies if these claims were indeed false.
You think its indisputable? Fair enough. I think it's arguable that the united States has the 22nd most free and open media community (circus) in the world. Here's a link to a journalist's association that have an interest in these matters:
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715