Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Rumsfeld Requests 24-hour Propaganda Machine

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the brainwashing-not-out-of-the-question dept.

1327

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?"

cancel ×

1327 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I would think it is obvious.. (5, Funny)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757018)

They need to install mind probes in the brain of every one of us. As well as receiving suggestive messages they also act as a tracking device. People will accept it because they get 2% off gasoline when they fill up and there's a shorter line at the airport for people who have been chipped.

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (2, Insightful)

November 1, 2005 (927710) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757038)

Do you think Hezbollah or Hammas gives 100% accurate information and that the U.S. is just a lie machine seeking to destroy everyone's freedom?

Tell me - would you rather have the Bush administration in power or the Ayatollah?

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757064)

"Tell me - would you rather have the Bush administration in power or the Ayatollah?"

How does this hypothetical choice you pulled out of your ass have anything to do with anything?

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (1, Troll)

BrainInAJar (584756) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757176)

I dunno, seems we'd be more free under the ayatolah sometimes... he wouldn't have the technology to track us like that

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (3, Insightful)

drivekiller (926247) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757057)

If Rumsfield wants to improve the image of the United States, he and the rest of the Bush administration should simply resign.

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (-1, Offtopic)

macdaddy357 (582412) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757229)

Looks like the Bushbots have mod points, and are moderating instead of responding. Going the hell away and never rearing their ugly heads again really is all Rummy and the like could do.

Re:I would think it is obvious.. (1)

Firehed (942385) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757230)

And this is why geeks will end up dominating. They never leave the house, so there's no need for gas or shorter airplane lines. They get their tans from daylight-color light bulbs and lack of showering after an all-night code-a-thon. Survival of the Fittest at it's very best, even if in a rather atypical sense.

Slashdot? (2, Insightful)

Seoulstriker (748895) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757019)

Why exactly is this on Slashdot? Doesn't necessarily fit the "news for nerds" mantra...

Re:Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757077)

Because /. is the 24-hour propaganda machine he's looking for.

Re:Slashdot? (1, Interesting)

Richard Allen (213475) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757088)

I'm sure I'll peak back once in a while, but this site has become worthless. I used to come here because I could read things here sometimes a year before it hit the mainstream media ... but between the slow-to-be-released stories, the duplicate posts, and the apparent move towards anti-America stories - it's time to remove Slashdot from my "Favorites".
This isn't posted to inflame. Just telling it how it is. Editors need to take note. From talking to friends, I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. As another voice gets modded down ... the site will continue to lose it's appeal.
Read my posting history. I'm not a troll. I'm a dissatisfied customer.

Re:Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757113)

Waah. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

Re:Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757148)

I'll join him, troll. Voicing opinion isn't crying. Maybe you like that this place is going downhill.

Re:Slashdot? (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757164)

Anti-American stories? Huh? Like what? If you're disturbed by stories like talk of 24 hour propaganda, illegal domestic spying, and the American government spreading demonstably untrue stories. You should be. If you don't like what the government is doing. Change the government.

You've made a mistake... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757225)

Anti-Americanism != reporting the revolting things perpetrated by the US military and/or government in the name of the US.

Re:Slashdot? (1, Informative)

DoraLives (622001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757098)

Why exactly is this on Slashdot?

Because the dumb sonofabitches think that by blowing even more smoke, they can more perfectly control the thoughts of the (obviously) completely ignorant and obedient masses, the better to further their own selfish ends.

In so doing, they're attempting to invoke technological means to stifle free speech and control people's thoughts. Last time I checked, technology and free speech are both fairly mainstream items for Slashdot, and once I've donned my shiny new tinfoil hat, the thought control part kinda fits the bill, too.

Why? Why Not? (1)

eyeb1 (522766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757107)

it's your future .. 1984 is all about the technical future .. not to mention generational amnesia

got it yet ..

Re:Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757109)

Perhaps they were thinking that this fits under the "Stuff that matters." part of the slogan ...

Re:Slashdot? (3, Insightful)

TrappedByMyself (861094) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757140)

Doesn't necessarily fit the "news for nerds" mantra...

Because "news for nerds" is really "advertising dollars for Slashdot's parent company", and this article is a clickfest goldmine.
The article is really about Rumsfeld being, gasp, honest about one of the fronts of the war. About how al-Qaeda is very media savy. Kneejerks will misinterpret this as Donald "Big Brother" Rumsfeld trying to control their minds.

Maybe Mr Rumsfeld should talk to the editors at Slashdot. The seem to have a good grip on this community already.

Re:Slashdot? (1)

odinsgrudge (945399) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757152)

Why exactly is this on Slashdot? Doesn't necessarily fit the "news for nerds" mantra...
Well, it does fit the "politics for nerds" part.

Re:Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757177)

I guess the check from the DNC just cleared.

Re:Slashdot? (4, Insightful)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757247)

Why not? Who says nerds aren't interested in politics?

Three words: (5, Funny)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757020)

Don't use cartoons.

No, use Flash! :D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757121)

Re:No, use Flash! :D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757215)

Holy cow...can we googlebomb "Mohammed" or "Islam" to point to that site? What a glorious and oh so truthful message it sends.

Re:Three words: (4, Insightful)

tempestdata (457317) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757151)

Well .. I dont think muslims have a problem with all cartoons. Just cartoons that make fun of religious figures they respect.

This is off topic.. but... I'm hoping some people will read this and help them 'understand' the behavious of those rioters.

I know you were just joking around, (or maybe the right word is 'think') but to me (a muslim) the cartoons of prophet mohammad were mildly amusing. Especially the one that said "STOP! we have run out of virgins!". But I see the reaction by other muslims to be more cultural than religious.

Its hard for a westerner to understand. But think of a religious figure such as a prophet as a father figure.
In the west, its okay to say things like "I hate my father." or "My father is a S#%^@#" ... In the east, this is just not culturally acceptable.
In the west, its okay to make fun of Jesus. Here is one I heard while living here in the west - "Q: Never ask yourself What would jesus do? Answer: Coz He'd Get crucified and DIE!" I am willing to bet that any practicing christian who reads this might be amused, but would more likely find it unfunny. Some would find it offensive. This is in a culture that is quite tolerant about making fun of people who are in a position of respect.

Now, if me.. a brown muslim guy, were to go the the American heartland and crack similar jokes at peter's expense. I would eventually run into a christian red neck would think I deserve a punch.

Think of those rioting muslims, as the lowest level of muslims. They are the brown trash. They are the economically poor, religiously fanatic, aggressive, cocky mob. They are being constantly told that the west is targetting muslims, and then they are seeing jokes made about a person they respect. What do they do? They riot. Bloody idiots.

The majority of muslims over the world, simply frowned at the prophet being made fun off. Very much as they would frown if you insulted or made fun of their parents. It is a cultural thing.

Some like me, realized that the west didn't mean to offend me, and we take it in our stride, giggle, smile and point out 'hey buddy.. that was a bit insensitive"

Another thing I want to point out.. that the word "Muslim" is about as descriptive as "Christian". There are as many kinds of muslim as there are kinds of christian. Baptist, Born Again, protestant, presbeterian, orthodox, catholic, etc. There are many differences between each of them.. Most of the terrorism, and a lot of the rioting is being caused by a particularly extremist sect that is deeply entrenched in Saudia Arabia, and was the backbone of the Taliban. Wahabism. It was founded by an Islamic scholar Abdul Wahab. I am not a wahabi. :)

There is only one thing I have to say to that (4, Insightful)

tempestdata (457317) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757027)

I think that it is double plus good!

Re:There is only one thing I have to say to that (3, Informative)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757220)

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."

We ARE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757030)

We control all that you see and hear.....*chime*

We control all that you see and hear.....*chime*

We control all that you see and hear.....*chime*

Wiat a sec.... This isn't Soviet Russia

God bless Aljazeera (5, Funny)

lixee (863589) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757035)

Thanks god for the BBc, AlJazeera, Slashdot and other less biased media.

Let me get this straight... (2, Insightful)

JonBuck (112195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757036)

Story submitter is complaining about US propaganda and then links to an article on Al Jazeera?

Yeah, that's an unbiased source.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757069)

Actually, just because Al Jazeera focuses on Middle Eastern news (gee, imagine that!), does not mean that they aren't a reasonable news source. Of course, your not understanding that only shows what your biases are.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1, Insightful)

ndansmith (582590) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757073)

I would hazard to guess that your negative view of Al Jazeera comes from American media bias.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

iangreen (793707) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757074)

Yeah, we should get something more 'fair and balanced'.... And now I'm waiting because I type too fast for slashdot... sigh!

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757093)

What's wrong with Al-Jazeera? They're criticized by both the West and Middle Eastern countries. Seems to me they must be doing something right.

Re:Let me get this straight... (4, Insightful)

hungrygrue (872970) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757139)

If the story is accurate, and if it is not being reported by US news outlets, then yes. If you have been conditioned to think that Al Jazeera is to be automatically dismissed as a propaganda outlet, then the bias in our media outlets has done its job very well. Seek information, seek differeing views, read and listen to views from as wide of a variety of sources as possible - even if they are views that you do not agree with. Getting your news or information from a handful of sources, or worse yet choosing to get your news only from sources that hold a bias with which you personally agree will leave you ill-informed and in a poor position to make informed decisions and to form informed opinions. Personally, I fall far to the left, yet I realize that if I were to only listen to, say Air America, I would be no better informed than those who only watch Fox News.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757162)

There was an AP wire story of this that popped up on Newsvine a few days ago. I'm not sure how many other news outlets have run the article or reported on it themselves, though. I do admit that this is only the second time I've seen it, so it's obviously not getting a whole lot of play in the mainstream media.

Re:Let me get this straight... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757239)

Personally, I fall far to the left, yet I realize that if I were to only listen to, say Air America, I would be no better informed than those who only watch Fox News.

Air America is comedy, not news. I would hope you don't get your news solely from a comedy show.

At least Fox News, for all the bashing it takes, dares to present both sides of an issue.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757182)

Yes, lets watch Fox News instead.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

macdaddy357 (582412) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757201)

So, Rumsfeld and others in Bush's administration are buying propaganda, and they say it is for "getting the truth out"? The Soviet Union also called their propaganda "the truth". That is a direct translation of the word, "pravda".

Gleeful conspirators (0, Flamebait)

amightywind (691887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757217)

Story submitter is complaining about US propaganda and then links to an article on Al Jazeera?

You got that right. These are the same savages who gleefully conspire with the captors of Jill Carroll to play sadistic tapes of her begging for her life to a to a gloating Muslim audience. All in the name of Islam, hmm? I would cheer if the Air Force put them out of business permanently.

Re:Let me get this straight... (5, Insightful)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757226)

It might surprise you, but Al Jazeera *is* an unbiased news source. If you'll think back a few years, you might remember that it was generally lauded in the Western world prior to 2001 as an example of professional, unbiased journalism in the Arabic world; it was only when the propaganda machines were turned on that they suddenly became a "problem". Al Jazeera hasn't changed, though - it's just spin, and you seem to have fallen for it head over heels.

BTW, you also may (or may not) know that Al Jazeera is generally regarded as pretty pro-Western in the Arabic world. And while it's not a guarantee for unbiasedness, I'd much rather trust a news source that's hated by the propaganda machines and fascists on *both* sides, not one that's only hated by one side but loved by the other, because the former news source actually has a realistic chance of being reasonably unbiased.

The real question is... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757037)

How much more liberal and anti-america can /. get?

"Begs the Question" (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757039)

Go look it up and learn something new.

Misguided (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757040)

Surely we can come up with something better than this. Will extra servings of horseshit make up for our tragedy of a foreign policy?

Why Not? (1)

sycodon (149926) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757043)

Well, why not?

The terrorists have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Washington Post, and New York times advocating on their behalf. Oh...don't forget BBC, AP, and Al Jazeera.

Re:Why Not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757079)

Yeah, after all we need more organizations that "fair and balanced" LOL!

Heaven forfend... (1)

Tony (765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757213)

Yeah, they're wrong, and you are right. That makes a fuckload of sense.

Just Use Your Imagination... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757045)

"Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able to read or write. Besides they wear black, which is such a beastly colour. I'm so glad I'm a Beta."

~ Brave New World

It is not as bad as it could be...

flip-flop? (3, Interesting)

dotpavan (829804) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757052)

Separately, President Bush said the US should not be discouraged by setbacks in Iraq and must realise it is at war.

......

However, he also used his speech in Florida to claim progress in the war on al-Qaeda

So, who is flip-flop again?

Re:flip-flop? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757185)

You think it's not possible to both have setbacks and make progress?

Re:flip-flop? (1)

Urusai (865560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757216)

It's only a flip-flop if it comes from a Democrat. From a Republican, it just means we are at war with Eastasia and have always been at war with Eastasia.

Begging the question (2, Insightful)

jgannon (687662) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757053)

For the last time, that's NOT what "begging the question" means. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-t he-question.html [nizkor.org]

Re:Begging the question (2, Insightful)

TimHunter (174406) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757178)

I propose that hereafter any story submitter that misuses the phrase "begging the question" never, ever be allowed to submit a story again. Ever.

Re:Begging the question (1)

Cracked Pottery (947450) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757186)

Thank you. Saves me the trouble.

Re:Begging the question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757192)

Do you mean it? is it really the last time you'll mention this? I hope so because most of us don't care.

So we're just not telling them the right stuff? (4, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757054)

Propaganda comes in 3 flavours:
White - factual.
Grey - some facts, some half-truths and a little bit of lying.
Black - all lies.

Just for the benefit of a doubt, I'm going to guess that he wants to focus on distributing more white propaganda.

That means that he seriously believes that the people opposing us would stop if they just heard how nice we are.

That boggles the mind.

MOD parent UP (1)

dotpavan (829804) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757132)

rightly said about propaganda.. but his aggressive nature of speech hints towards the grey and black areas.

That means that he seriously believes that the people opposing us would stop if they just heard how nice we are.

the bias has been planted deeply on both the sides. only the cream or intelligent crowd would become aware of the *actual* facts and think/decide wisely. rest of the herd would sway with what the media shows (depends on where you are, and what you see.

Same is with the India-Pak issue (kinda unneccasary to mention here, but related), where both the sides (media, govt.) try their best to project themselves as good, and get support from outside by getting their side of story.

Re:So we're just not telling them the right stuff? (1, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757145)

Hehehe.. You don't actually know how right you are do you? Islamic extremists and the neo-conservatives have more in common than they have in contrast. Both are for the supression of personal liberty for greater social cohesion. The only real difference between the two is their choice of religion and their choice of methods. The measurement of how effective a government is has changed in recent years from how well their protect our freedoms and how little they burden us with taxes to how well they maintain social order. High taxes and restrictive police action is ok if it reduces the number of riots in a term. Outright supression of speech is tolerated because it stops people, who may start a riot, from gathering.

Re:So we're just not telling them the right stuff? (1)

An. (Coward) (258552) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757154)

Propaganda comes in 3 flavours:
White - factual.
Grey - some facts, some half-truths and a little bit of lying.
Black - all lies.

Just for the benefit of a doubt, I'm going to guess that he wants to focus on distributing more white propaganda.

So, what, so they can keep saving the black stuff for the people back home?

Re:So we're just not telling them the right stuff? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757158)

Indeed.
Americans have come to believe their own stereotypes. They think that they are angels who are fair to the whole world and can do no wrong, and that other countries don't like them because supervillain-like men keep telling people to hate America.
If America really wants to "win the minds of Muslims", here's a four step program:

1- Help create a soverign Palastenian state,do not control it stealthily from the background
2- Withdraw your troops from Afghanistan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia
3- Don't prosecute and/or torture Muslims because of their choice of religion
4- Stop talking of how much better you are than other countries and stereotyping Muslims. Most Muslims actually chose their lifestyle and beleive in it. Not everyone is an oppressed woman, a person jealous of Western progress, or or a person who wants to escape to America on the first chance.

gimme some of that white stuff (3, Interesting)

Oldsmobile (930596) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757207)

That is exactly what Rumsfeld wants. White propaganda. I mean, the Pentagon defended the Iraqi story plant thing by saying "everything we say is true".

So another words, say me and a bunch of troops brake down your door at 2am, shoot your father, tear up the place and take you to a horrible prison for six months and later releace you. You learn that they were looking for terrorists and real sorry for your father and gave your children some rations before they left, then Rumsfeld could say:

"We are helping the Iraqi people by fighting terrorists and feeding the Iraqi children."

Nothing he said was untrue, but your father is dead, you were in prison for six months and someone came into your house and busted the place up.

If some Iraqis came and busted up my house in the middle of the night and took me to prison, I know I'd have an IED with their name on it. Once I got out of prison that is.... ... unless I was involved in some kind of weird human pyramid shit while I was there and came back home packed in ice.

They can stop. (2, Interesting)

republican gourd (879711) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757061)

I think that the US Government is past the point of no return on the propaganda thing. It depends on two concepts: that the rest of the world trusts the good things that they hear about America, and that the rest of the world isn't smart enough to find out the truth themselves.

I'd wager a guess that most of the people who care enough to pay attention to the propaganda war have probably figured out its rigged. In fact, since this is so well known (Hell, the government is even *admitting* it these days?!), it can only be serving to darken and discolour any actual real positive information that may be out there.

What they really need to do is start using truth. There *are* still enough good things about the United States to be proud of. Unfortunately, our arrogance tends to obscure that. We're like the mean guy at the party that won't shut up.

What question does it beg? (1, Funny)

maynard (3337) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757072)

I'm kind of curious, because I didn't see any question in the write-up at all. Just a bunch of assertions. See: Begs The Question [wikipedia.org] ...

Re:What question does it beg? (1)

maynard (3337) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757087)

Oh shit. The question would appear to be: how much more can they possibly do? Haha. I just tripped over myself!

Duhhhhhhh

propaganda = truth = propaganda (1)

guynorton (149974) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757078)

"You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free"

Those with power can own the truth....this is what we call propaganda.

Be afraid, very afraid....

WARNING: Bad Journalism Alert! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757082)

Donald Rumsfield was never quoted to have said the word "propaganda", though the Slashdot description connotes this. It's nice to know the submitters and moderators look in the RIDICULOUSLY HUGE fine details.

Rumsfeld would do a lot better (4, Insightful)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757083)

By focusing on what the United States does, not what it says. When the United States occupies an Islamic nation on pretenses of WMD and Iraq/al-Qaeda connections that were (at best) wildly inaccurate, then allows that country to descend into anarchy and insurgency, kills tens of thousands of civilians in the processes, goes around roughing up people more or less at random and engaging in the same kinds of torture that the former dictator did... well, no shit you're gonna be unpopular. All the slick TV spots in the world ain't gonna change that.

On the other hand, when you're a force that's saving lives and making things better- as the U.S. military was in Indonesia- our popularity goes up. The problem isn't the perception of our foreign policy, the problem IS our foreign policy. The neocons need to get out of their little alternate universe of spin and start dealing in the real world, like the old-school Republicans of Bush H. W. Bush's administration.

As an American Muslim I completely agree... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757136)

As it stands, I have to post this as anonymous because I am realizing that the current witch hunt against Muslims is such that anything we say can be turned against us so hopefully the mods will forgive me.

As a Muslim and as an American I totally agree with you. Most people living in those countries just have to step outside to see the ravages of the United States foreign policy. If going outside isn't cutting it, they can always call a friend or relative in another country. Foreign policy must change to win the minds of Muslims not putting out more propaganda. Once the Bush Administration learns this, we'll be up for the next presidential election. At that time, I hope my fellow Americans see the last 8 years for what it was: a dismal failure. It's time to vote in new leadership or, at the very least, split the legislative and executive branches such that no one party controls both.

Re:As an American Muslim I completely agree... (4, Funny)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757199)

Hey! Those people have democracy now! Sure, they now live in a more restrictive military environment than they ever saw under Saddam, but it's a small price to pay right? Sure, it now appears that Muslim law will be enforced by the state and minorities and women will revert to their second class citizen status, but hey, they're free. Democracy cures all. You can't possibly be free living under a despot who restricts the majority's right to impose their will on the minority. Allah bless America for bringing Muslim law back to Iraq.

Re:As an American Muslim I completely agree... (1)

free space (13714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757231)

Um, sorry, but what do you mean "women are second class citizens?"
What do Muslim women lack in citizen rights that men have, in Islam?

Re:As an American Muslim I completely agree... (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757235)

How are you on this whole cartoon thing ?

Killing people about a drawing isn't exactly winning hearts and minds of people like me, who consider themselves tolerant and liberal.

I suspect that it is as likely that Western agitators are stirring up unrest as much as Muslim extremists.

I had always considered historic Islam a peaceful system, respecting science and education but that seems to have been subverted.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7591BA01-A2 DB-4269-93A2-CB1D73295B22.htm [aljazeera.net]

"No more than 10,000 books were translated into Arabic over the entire millennium"

The Taliban's disdain for culture and women turns my stomach and if such powers took hold in my country I think I would be prepared to take up arms to defence our freedoms.

Keeping respect for such people and maintaining my tolerance is becoming increasingly difficult.

I'm not trying to troll you or be flamebait but open a dialog with someone with somethign to contribute.

Re:Rumsfeld would do a lot better (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757210)

The neocons need to get out of their little alternate universe of spin and start dealing in the real world, like the old-school Republicans of Bush H. W. Bush's administration.

I just wanted to point out that a lot of the neocons were working for Bush Sr. However, he knew enough to keep them on their leash and not let them run wild with their little pet theories. This restraint is what led them to form the PNAC and find someone gullible enough to serve as a puppet while they pulled the strings in the background.

Re:Rumsfeld would do a lot better (-1, Flamebait)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757212)

The problem isn't the perception of our foreign policy, the problem IS our foreign policy.

BULLSHIT!. Just like your sig, your spinless.

The problem is the Islamic community. Always has been. Hell, even the french have threatened to use Nuclear weapons against Iran. That should tell you something.

Of course, with you, it's always blame America first isn't it. Any Slashdot regular knows what you really stand for. You passifist pussy.

Ya, mod me down. But I will never back away from the truth. Your slashdot history can back that up.

effective propaganda (5, Insightful)

Mutatis Mutandis (921530) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757085)

The history of government propaganda is long and diverse, and includes successes as well as failures. Effective propaganda does not need to be evil. During WWII, Allied propagandists printed newspapers for Axis soldiers, and they were much appreciated by their recipients for being rather more reliable than the official German news sources.

Rule 1 of effective propaganda is telling the truth. At least most of the time. There is nothing that really beats that, when it comes to convincing people.

hmmm (1)

orbit86 (932209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757086)

well they should invade a country that has NOTHING to do with Al Qaeda, repeat video clip saying Iraq is bad, it is a evil doer and lie to the American People saying what they are doing is right....remind you of something? Americans don't feel or believe they are still fighting a war for 9\11 reasons or the enemy Al Qaeda..

already done (2, Funny)

sulli (195030) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757090)

Re:already done (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757211)

Yes, anything that does so much as report what the right's opinion is, even when presented side by side with the left's opinion, is obviously a right wing propaganda machine.

DOWN WITH ALL FREE SPEECH PRESS FREEDOMS THAT DO NOT AGREE WITH THE LEFT!!!!! ALL OTHER VOICES MUST BE SILENCED!

Has it occured to them... (5, Insightful)

JayBlalock (635935) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757091)

...that maybe - just MAYBE - if, rather than spending billions of dollars on propaganda to convince the Muslims that we're nice to them, we instead took those billions of dollars to ACTUALLY be nice to them, something might be accomplished?

You want to know why people listen to Bin Ladan and his ilk? Because there are a lot of poor, miserable, hungry people over there whose lives suck, and he (and Zarquai and all the rest) are managing to successfully convince them to blame an innocent third party. Ok, not ENTIRELY innocent *cough*assassinations*cough* but still, the theocrats and fascists sitting in power are FAR more to blame than the US.

And when people are hungry enough, and desperate enough, and you tell them, "THAT guy! HE'S to blame!" They'll believe you.

Especially if That Guy has never done a damn thing they've ever seen to help them.

Re:Has it occured to them... (2, Interesting)

Distinguished Hero (618385) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757143)

Well, this post certainly raises a question: if the US was nice to Muslims, how would we know? Out of the billions of actions carried out by the US, I'm sure some of them could be construed as such (State Department not defending cartoons -- instead saying they are deplorable, huge amounts of aid being funneled to to Middle East, etc.) , but they don't appear in the news. If it doesn't bleed, it does not seem to lead, as they say.

Re:Has it occured to them... (1)

JayBlalock (635935) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757252)

Oh, we DO spend a lot in "minor" humanitarian aid. Sending food and meds and such. And that's a good thing. But then we go and invade a country and kill a whole lot of innocent people, and then say "but look at all the food we give you!" It just doesn't fly.

Re:Has it occured to them... (5, Insightful)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757146)

You mean like all the credit the United States got for aiding Muslims in Afghanistan in the 1980s, Bosnia from 1994-now, Kosovo from 1999-now, the defense of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, the liberation of Kuwait...

Yea, the United States has spent tens of billions to help and be nice to Muslims and it got the US nothing.

Afghanistan (5, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757174)

When we helped arm and train the Afghan Muslims (including Saudi Muslims like bin Ladin) to fight the Soviet Union, we promised to help them rebuild their country after. Instead, we left Afghanistan to their warlords, and eventually the Taliban.

We did not aid them in rebuilding their country. Once they accomplished our common aim (displacing the soviets), we left them to their own poorly-funded devices.

Yeah. Not keeping promises is part of what got us into this mess.

Re:Has it occured to them... (1, Informative)

JayBlalock (635935) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757234)

WHhhaaaatttt? Ok, as (I would hazard to guess) your hero would say, put the pipe down.

Let's look at those:

Afghanistan in the 1980s? That was THE TALIBAN! The evil theocracy that turned their nation into one of the most repressive hellholes on earth, who we had to turn around and oust just to fix our own mistake. You're counting that as helping them? Soviet Russia was a PARADISE compared to what the Taliban set up.

And Kosovo? You know why we got into Kosovo, right? It was because of Clinton's idiotic decision to do some bombing in Iraq in the middle of Ramadan. This rather pissed the Muslims off. So to placate them, he got us into the middle of a war which has been raging for decades, and pretty much arbitrarily picked a side to call the "good guys" even though, once you study the history of it, you see that there was no such thing. And in the process, we actively bombed cities from the air and killed untold numbers of innocents. (precision bombing my ass... we hit so many schools it's hard to believe it wasn't deliberate... and many believe it WAS.)

And you cite the "defense" of Saudi Arabia? Number 1 - FROM WHO? Number 2 - the Saudis are one of the most powerful groups in the middle east, and number 3 - THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! If we wanted to overthrow a repressive regime that was keeping its people in squallor and misery, the House of Saud would be one of the best targets I can think of. Instead, since their our oil buddy-buddies, we look the other way while they bleed their population dry.

And Kuwait? Yes, liberating Kuwait wasn't a bad thing. Except, seeing as how it's one of the more technologically advanced nations in the area, it's not part of OBL's target audience. Plus, counterbalancing that is GHWB's complete screwing over of Iraqis in the wake of that war. We WERE going to march to Baghdad during that war, and prepared huge numbers of tribal leaders and dissidents to wage civil war. Except we pulled out at the last minute, left them high and dry, and allowed Saddam to exact his revenge on them with impunity.

Quite frankly, fact that you even cite some of those suggests you have no knowledge whatsoever of the area, or the geopolitics involved.

Oh, but Bosnia wasn't bad, I'll give you that one.

So, in short, if that is your idea of "help" then perhaps we'd do better to leave them alone entirely.

Here's an idea for rummy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757100)

Why not make this propoganda machine come with running water, electricity, and phones. I bet you could get quite a captive audience that way. Worked for Saddam.

Should they do more in the first place? (2, Insightful)

deragon (112986) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757130)

It begs the question, how much more SHOULD they do? Should we, western society, have to do propaganda to win the hearts of Muslims? Or should we simply rely on saying the truth, including the ugly side?

I would like to see a 24/7 channel established which would be objective. Propaganda channels can only go so far, because people eventually realise that the picture shown by them is too rosy, and when this happens, the channels loose all credibility. I do understand the need to have a western channel in Iraq, because I suspect that Iraqi channels might not be objective either. I know that in Canada our national television channels are not always objectives. So if I cannot trust my own country channels, I guess I cannot trust those of Iraq.

But for a 24/7 channel to be objective, it should be established by an international organisation and have muslisms on its board and production staff. Editorials from both camps should be allowed. Of course, who is to say that it will be totally objective? But it would be a start.

The US doesn't need propaganda. (4, Insightful)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757147)

What the US needs is to act with caution and responsability and be a good world citizen. Stop using torture and avoid collateral damage in foreign countries. Demand the same things from both friends and foes (like, why let Israel have illegal nuclear weapons but bash Iran wich has none nor the ability to develop them).

et rid of the need to alter the reality and the problem is solved.

Rumsfeld's words (2, Insightful)

rustbear (852420) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757160)

It must modernise its methods to win the minds of Muslims in the "war on terror", as "enemies had skilfully adapted" to the media age, [Rumsfeld] said.

Is this the same Rumsfeld that doesn't use email [msn.com] ?

Very Bad idea (4, Interesting)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757175)

Once regular sources of information have become tainted with disinformation, people will turn away to what they feel are more "trustworthy" outlets.

If you destroy TV, radio, newspapers and even the internet with lies, people in need of the truth will turn back to the pulpit, to obtain comfort and security from the man who spits bile at infidels, women and modernity, and who tells them that masturbation is wrong and menstruation is unclean and that we're all tainted by some sin that someone who never even existed committed.

I live in a country that was like this not too long ago. I'd rather not have to go back to it, or see anyone else forced to either.

Just the opposite (4, Interesting)

davmoo (63521) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757179)

Its been my experience in talking to friends who are not US citizens and do not live here that the quickest way to get them to distrust any information source is for them to find out it is backed officially by the US government.

An even more sad fact is that speaking for myself as a US citizen and a US resident, that also makes me distrust the information source too. And I have found that to be true regardless of which party is in power.

Logic Nazis... (0, Redundant)

Ibanez (37490) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757181)

*patiently waits for logic nazis to explain how it RAISES the question, not BEGS it.*

Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757184)

Maybe they can release some good videos of us killing some Insurgents and flood the internet with them like the insurgents do when they blow up humvees.

how much more can they possibly do? (1, Troll)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757187)

well, unless the democrats get control of the senate and impeach our dictator, then it looks like another 3 years worth of damage

how much more can they possibly do? (1)

cgenman (325138) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757189)

"how much more can they possibly do?"

Clearly with the war effort going as well as it has been, and with the troops under the wing of such a glorious leader, it is time to turn our attentions to better teaching the people of the Middle East how to fulfill the promise of democracy and freedom for all.

Yes, a 24 hour US government news agency in the middle east is exactly what we need to raise our profile there. And not just satellite tv, but newspapers, people on street corners talking into cell phones, police officers with funny looking badges visiting schools, secret service agents with vans making people disappear in the middle of the night... Forget I said that last one.

Yes, it is a glorious, democratic future awaiting the middle east, and we just have to show them how. And who better to do it than Haliburton, America's #1 trusted news source? Haliburton, when you need it done right, without the pansy left.

("psst. Can I get my five bucks now? [penny-arcade.com] ")

We fucked up (1, Troll)

Stalyn (662) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757194)

We should have never went into Iraq. It was a pretty stupid decision. All we did was legitimize the growing Shiite theocracy. How many American lives were lost for what? Iraq and Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism and the government we will have installed there will have nothing to do with democracy. That's if it lasts longer than 5 years. I'm not saying the Muslim world isn't ready for a democracy but it's going to be a democracy that is starkly different than what we had in mind. Also how friendly will these governments be towards the USA? The administration keeps stating that we must stay in Iraq for the long haul but in reality how long before the government there kicks us out?

Re:We fucked up (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757240)

Iraq and Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism

Think Again. [husseinandterror.com]

Fire Rumsfeld (2, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757195)

Rumsfeld should try the new strategy of doing something right, then telling the truth to independent reporters. Then "the good news" will "be believed".

blow mecca (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14757224)

why not blow mecca and send sanax for the depressed muslims?
if the mecca and islam is "the real" religion, then the mecca will be intact and mecca will never be distroyed.

Hmm... (1)

screensaver400 (652819) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757228)

Who says that unbribed news stories aren't biased to start with? Perhaps bribing results in more fair stories being published.

Ummm, they already have one - no, really (4, Informative)

RzUpAnmsCwrds (262647) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757249)

In 2004, the US government launched Alhurra [wikipedia.org] , 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 [msn.com] .

Obvious... (1)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14757250)

In order to keep a sense of unexpectability on slashdot, for which I suspect the Orwell quotes will soon appear. Allow me to present... A Disney quote!.

-- If you can dream it, you can do it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>