Reading between the lines

You've always got to read between the lines. You've always got to think while you read and ask questions.

Lets take a look at an article in the Washington Post.
U.S. Role Deepens in Sadr City

It starts with

"A four-hour battle Tuesday between U.S. soldiers and Shiite militiamen left at least 28 Iraqis dead in the capital's Sadr City neighborhood, making it one of the bloodiest days in a month of sustained street fighting."

Then, after some other thoughts that the authors and editors felt needed to be emphasized, the standard scene setting stuff that announces Sadr as the other and dismisses any who might take his side, we get our next piece of information about the fighting.

"The battle Tuesday erupted as U.S. forces tried to evacuate a soldier injured by small-arms fire about 9:30 a.m., according to the U.S. military. During the evacuation, the troops were attacked with roadside bombs, as well as rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms fire from houses, storefronts, alleyways and rooftops, said Lt. Col. Steve Stover, a U.S. military spokesman."

Note, that when the US military says the battle began, there's already a wounded soldier needing evacuation, injured by small arms fire. What happened to lead to the soldier being wounded in the first place, and why isn't that a part of 'the battle'?

I don't know if they just do it to make the story hard to read, but the author and editors then jump to a non-related paragraph about overall casualties before continuing with. And even in the paragraph that contains this next bit, they again jump to non related information other bombings in Baghdad.

"In the Sadr City clash, the U.S. soldiers responded by firing rockets armed with high-explosive, 200-pound warheads, killing 28 fighters, Stover said."

In this piece, that's it. That's what the US military briefers wanted American citizens to know about this. In other words, not much. They can't hide the fact that a major four hour long firefight erupted in Baghdad. Four hours of weapons fire and 200 lb warheads of high explosive going off can't be hidden in the middle of a city of 5,000,000 people. But, they don't want to tell you much about it. They don't want to tell you what the soldiers were doing in Sadr City, about what the effects of exploding 200 lbs of high explosive in an area usually described as a densely populated slum. Air strikes aren't mentioned at all, even though the US military relies on them and I'd be very doubtful that they fought a serious four hour long firefight without them. And, everyone killed was a 'fighter', even though its doubtful you could set off 200 lbs of high explosive in a dense urban area and kill only 'fighters'.

In this case, the reporter didn't just echo the military briefing, although you'll probably find other news sources that just do that. This time you hear a little from the people who live there.

"But Sadr City residents gave a very different accounting of the fighting. They said at least 50 people were killed and 130 injured, many of them women and children.

Falah Hassan Shanshal, a Sadrist member of parliament, said at least five houses were demolished in the airstrike, killing 29 people and pinning entire families beneath piles of rubble. When a bulldozer came to clear the rubble, the driver was shot by a sniper, Shanshal said.

An Associated Press photograph showed a boy being pulled from the rubble. The AP reported that Ali Hussein, 2, died at the hospital."

I guess that Ali Hussein, age 2, is a 'fighter' by US military standards. Is it just because of his last name?

But the last sentence of that is what really struck me. As Americans, we know what those images look like. At the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, at the World Trade Center in New York, we know what the aftermath of that explosion looked like. We know about people trying to dig into the rubble to see if they can find survivors. We honor those people, usually firefighters in the US, who head quickly to the scene and try to save a few lives of people trapped, still alive, under tons of rubble.

What we haven't seen in the US is terrorists placing snipers around the site and shooting at the rescuers. But, read that last sentence closely, because that's what our military has done in Baghdad. The report states that a bulldozer driver, trying to dig out survivors from collapsed houses, was shot and killed by a sniper.

That's the thought the US military spokesman didn't want you to have with his sanitized information about how long the fight lasted and the weight of the explosives in the warhead. They don't want you to think of that image of horrified civilians trying to dig through rubble with their bare hands to try to rescue loved ones trapped beneath. They don't want you to think of the heroism of someone who gets a bulldozer to the scene to try aid those rescues, nor of the relief the paniced survivors must feel when the bulldozer arrived to move the rubble they had been desperately trying to move with their bare hands. They don't want you to think of the horror of when the snipers bullet hits and kills the person who's there to try to save lives, nor of the horror of the desperate people trying to save loved ones when they find that hope was just snatched away.

Sniper fire at people trying to rescue people who've been buried alive.

Where to Begin?

Where to begin? I guess just jump on the train an' start ridin'. :)

One thing I think I've learned is that when people I don't trust are attacking someone and telling me in loud voices not to listen to someone, I tend to go check them out. Maybe its an old trick I learned playing d-line in football. When someone is trying to push you in a certain direction, at the very least then dig in your heels and hold your ground. And the best thing to do is to go in exactly the opposite direction from where they are trying to push you. There's a reason they want you over there instead of you being over here.

Lately, its been the Rev. Jeremiah Wright who's in the 'news'. You see bits and pieces of what the man has said over many years chopped up and tossed at you. All with a tone of hatred. According to the corporate media, he's the man we are all supposed to hate right now. And certainly, we shouldn't be listening to what he says. We are clearly being told what to think.

Now, I don't know Rev. Wright. I've never spent more than a day or two in the Chicago area, and I don't think I've ever gotten near to meeting the man. But, my gut instinct when I see that I'm being told to hate the man is to go check him out.

What will I find? Who knows? Will I like the man, or will I find him awful? Again, who knows? Other than if you judge a man by his enemies, then I'd have to say he's already got a favorable mark in my book. He seems to have pissed off all the right people. :)

Lately, the Rev. Wright appeared on Bill Moyer's PBS show "Now". Here's a link to the video and the transcript.

Rev. Wright and Bill Moyers - Video
Rev. Wright and Bill Moyers - Transcript