Bozell suggested vast majority of generals "disagree" with NBC that Iraq is in "civil war," but cited none who have specifically denied it
SUMMARY: On Hannity & Colmes, Brent Bozell criticized NBC News' decision to refer to the situation in Iraq as a "civil war," saying that there are "probably 100 generals" in Iraq "who would disagree" with that assessment. Bozell offered no specific examples of any high-ranking military officials who have said Iraq is not in the midst of a civil war.
On the November 27 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Media Research Center founder and president L. Brent Bozell III criticized as "entirely an editorial comment" the decision by NBC News to refer to violence in Iraq as a "civil war." He asserted that Matt Lauer, co-host of NBC's Today, had "said that he consulted with a lot of people, and then he put on one general who agreed with him." Bozell added that Lauer had ignored "probably 100 generals in the field in Iraq who would disagree" with NBC News' assessment of the situation there. Bozell offered no specific examples of any high-ranking military officials who have said Iraq is not in the midst of a civil war, though a Media Matters for America review* did find one such military leader.
Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, spokesman for the Multinational Force in Iraq. Caldwell told reporters on November 28 that a civil war was not under way "because the government is still functioning. ... We don't see an organization trying to overthrow it and assume control. ... We also see a security force that is responsive to the government." However, a number of retired generals have declared Iraq to be in a civil war, while numerous military officials, including commanders in Iraq, have warned for months that continued violence there could lead to civil war. Further, while active-duty officers cannot defy the commander-in-chief, whose press secretary has said Iraq is not involved in a civil war and who has himself declined to state that Iraq is involved in a civil war, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) said on the March 19 broadcast of ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos that U.S. military generals told him "privately" that there has been "a low-grade civil war going on in Iraq, certainly the last six months, maybe the last year."
On the November 27 broadcast of NBC's Today, discussing NBC News' decision to call the situation in Iraq a civil war, Lauer noted, "This took careful deliberation. We consulted with a lot of people." He then asked retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey: "Why did you weigh in on the side of calling this a civil war?" McCaffrey responded:
McCAFFREY: Well, Matt, to be honest, I've been calling it a civil war, low-grade conflict, for 18 months. Now it's on the verge of spinning out of control. We, clearly, without question, have massive levels of violence, thousands are being killed each month, and it's a struggle, without question, between two factions -- in this case Shia and Kurds -- who have separate political agendas.
In addition to McCaffrey, a number of other retired military officers have publicly said that a civil war is already under way in Iraq:
- Retired Maj. Gen. William L. Nash: "We're in a civil war now; it's just that not everybody's joined in. ... The failure to understand that the civil war is already taking place, just not necessarily at the maximum level, means that our counter measures are inadequate and therefore dangerous to our long-term interest." [ABC News, 03/05/06]
- Retired Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard Jr. and retired Brig. Gen. John H. Johns: "There already is a civil war, even if the Administration doesn't use that term. It is beside the point that one side doesn't wear uniforms, a common occurrence in today's warfare. With conservative estimates of 12,000 - 25,000 civilian deaths and many more thousands wounded since the fall of Baghdad, the high level of civil violence is indisputable." [Nuclear Age Peace Foundation article, 11/05]
- Retired Col. Jack Jacobs: "If that isn't a civil war in Iraq, then I don't know what else you would call it, and you'd be wrong if you called it anything else." [MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann, 11/27/06]
During a November 28 press conference, when asked whether Iraq was embroiled in a civil war, Bush responded that there was "sectarian violence" and that there was "all kinds of speculation about what may be or not happening." During his November 27 press gaggle, White House press secretary Tony Snow said that the administration does not classify the violence in Iraq as a civil war because "you have not yet had a situation also where you have two clearly defined and opposing groups vying not only for power, but for territory." Active members of the U.S. military are bound by numerous provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to not contradict the administration's position. However, several top commanders, while not publicly stating that the violence in Iraq constitutes a civil war, have warned for months that civil war would be likely unless the violence stopped:
- Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli: "We're trying to knock down sectarian violence and go after those folks, those death squads that have caused this new form of violence, that if left unchecked could lead to civil war." [The Washington Post, 09/16/06]
- Gen. John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. military operations in the Middle East: "The sectarian violence is probably as bad as I've seen it ... and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war." [Testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 08/03/06]
- Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "[W]e do have the possibility of [factional violence] devolving into civil war." [Testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 08/03/06]
- Gen. George Casey: "A countrywide, a threat of a countrywide civil war, I think that, I would say, that probably is the most significant threat right now." Casey told ABC News that, in his estimation, the violence in Iraq did not constitute a civil war at that time. [ABC News, 08/07/06]
From the November 27 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
HANNITY: NBC's Today show opened this morning with host Matt Lauer, declaring the network has decided to characterize the struggle in Iraq as a, quote unquote, "civil war." Lauer went on to state that NBC had consulted with a lot of people in determining this extreme change in terminology, also pointing out that the White House strongly objected to NBC News' stance.
Joining us now is president of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell, Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz. Brent, it seems that they -- they think that they're Walter Cronkite and they want to have an impact here, but they've never done this -- they've never given the American public the story about all the success in Iraq. It seems always to be lost in all of this.
BOZELL: Well, it does. It's entirely an editorial comment that Matt Lauer made today. It's in keeping with the policy of NBC News, however, which has been to do nothing but report the negative. Now, this guy was in Iraq -- now that I'm remembering this right now -- last year, where he went to interview the troops, trying over and over and over again to get them to tell him that there was a morale problem, and one by one told him that there wasn't a morale problem. This is an editorial comment, through and through. Look, he said that he consulted with a lot of people, and then he put on one general who agreed with him. He didn't put on all the generals, including probably 100 generals in the field in Iraq right now who would disagree with him.
* Search of Nexis News database for "Iraq" and "not w/5 civil war" and "Gen.", month of November.
I thought the republicans would learn from this past election and understand what the American people demand out of this President. Bozell confirms that this administration is lying outright and he actually has the guts to argue whether its a civil war or not? As for Hannity, well, its Hannity.
You should enjoy this...
NewsBusters Hysterically Denouncing Liberal Media Bias Media Traitors Rejoice in Democrat "Success" Posted by Bozo Bonkers on November 10, 2006 - 14:30.
Once again exposing their pro-terrorist, pro-radical homosexual agenda, the mainstream media continue to report that the Republican Party was defeated in last Tuesday's election.
This blatant distortion is obviously designed to convince the American people that the allegedly "victorious" Democrat candidates are now the legitimate majority in the House and Senate, simply because they obtained more votes than their GOP opponents.
Not surprisingly, the nattering nabobs of liberal East Coast journalism are completely ignoring the fact that most Republican incumbents actually won re-election -- totally belying liberal attempts to spin the election results as a repudiation of the GOP Congress.
What's more, in a gleeful embrace of Maoist style class warfare, liberal journalists are aiding and abetting the Democrat takeover plot by repeatedly referring to San Francisco radical feminist Nancy Pelosi as "Speaker Elect," and corrupt, senile mob boss Sen. Harry Reid as "the new Majority Leader"... [link to billmon.org]
This blatant distortion is obviously designed to convince the American people that the allegedly "victorious" Democrat candidates are now the legitimate majority in the House and Senate, simply because they obtained more votes than their GOP opponents. - from Sean C's post above referring to conservative blog post
Aww..what's wrong, righties, you don't like Democracy anymore? Yes, Democrats received more votes this time - overwhelmingly. Enough votes for Dems to even get around the Republican Diebold Debacle. Democracy in action. Sounds like a mandate to me.
Even with charges of Republican shenanigans, Dems still won.
And yes, just as the Republicans rubbed our noses in their 2004 victory, I plan to rub Republican noses in the DemocratIC victory on November 7 as much as possible.
CSL
Sean seemed to be prode that not all Republicans lost. But did you know that for the first time in history not one member of a party was defeated and this happens to be the Demo. party. JWS
The article I linked to was Msatire, as evidenced by the authorship being listed as "Bozo Bonkers" as opposed to "Brent Bozell". Get it?
Thanks, Sean. I love a good satire, especially when directed at one of the many bobbleheads.
"...they've never given the American public the story about all the success in Iraq. It seems always to be lost in all of this. " What success, Sean? This war is just dragging on and on, and the American people are sick of it. If there was all this "success" in Iraq, then we'd be hearing about our troops preparing to leave. The fact is Iraq is a disaster of our making and, sorry Sean, Bush's invasion will go down as one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in U.S. history.
Now that Nancy Pelosi has said she isn't making Alcee Hastings the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, hannity needs something new to poop his underoos about.
They present an argument (that Iraq is in civil war), then have one Democrat giving their point of view, and one Republican giving his point of view.
What happened to actual news reporting? Everything in "news" nowadays is opinion from the "two sides". What happened to one reality? Is every viewpoint seen as either "democratic" or "republican"?
Why can't the "news" do an actual analysis, as Media Matters has done here? Why not present that these generals say it's in a civil war, and these generals or White House officials say it's not? Why not present the factual evidence of how many have died, whether or not the violence has increased or decreased, what the people actually in Iraq are saying, etc.?
I know I'm just repeating an argument most people have with the mainstream media and their journalistic laziness, but this entire piece just struck me as the perfect example of what's wrong with the modern media.
You are so right. "News" today is just "he said/she said" opinionating. There are blogs and websites that show more factual evidence for events and trends than the "news" do. Mostly it's just a journalist interviewing other journalist (and occasionally a "pundit").
A good newscast would have done what you suggest - define what a civil war is, find as much information to either prove or disprove that Iraq meets this definition, and then present that. Not let two propagandists with vested interests in their side "winning" sit there and spout their opinions on it.
The mainstream news shows are about the level of National Enquirer when it comes to quality of the reporting.
...and I think the reason why cable news ratings are not increasing despite more people having access to the channels than ever before is because of this very fact (that they no longer even report factual information, only give opinions, then argue over those opinions).
More and more people I know are turning to the internet for their news.
If the most trusted man in our country in his time, Walter Cronkite, reported that Iraq has erupted into a Civil War ....... And reported on GWB the way he reported Nixon's crimes ..... And denounced The Iraq War the way he denounced The Vietnam War, guess what would happen.
The powerful new right wing media would start a War On Walter. All hell would break loose at Fox News and all their right wing pundits, (So called reporters) would be going crazy.
Any reporter who reports the honest truth, or reality will be reduced to the label: "Liberal Media Bias" and will be discredited. The Generals are mostly muted by having GWB as their boss.
There is one CNN reporter who is reality driven. He is on the ground in Iraq. I can't think of his name just now but I'm sure you know who I'm talking about. He calls it Civil War.
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday that Iraq's violence meets the standard of civil war and that if he were heading the State Department now, he might recommend that the administration use that term.
When Cronkite quit, US tv news went totally soulless. I could see the pure ultranationalism and celebrity-worship in the new breed, the Rathers and Wallaces, men who would never question government policies, always kissing up to the producer, too eager for the session with the make-up artists.
It's all infotainment and government propaganda now. FOX is staffed by the Repub think tanks, NBC is run by a war contractor, Time/Warner uses CNN to sell it's movies. All use racism as a selling point. None of them question the government...ever. It's pure mindwash.
Memo
To: All General Officiers
From: POTUS
Subject: Terminology
You are hereby commanded to publically disagree that the sectarian violence in Iraq constitutes a civil war.
that there was so much good during our Civil War, if we can call it a Civil War. Death, family killing family...but the GOOD stuff should have taken precedence. Why not, anything is better than death.
Sean, you Hannitized the country. The stink is gone.....THANK YOU
I thought Doctor Zaiuss over here was all about making sure nobody said anything naughty on TV.
He's gonna give himself an embolism if he tries to think about too many subjects at once, what with adding his need to be the enforcer of media orthodoxy making sure that the networks ever state any fact that contravenes the gospel according to the GOP to his already tiresome role of crusader for decency.
His beard is beginning to turn from red to gray. Plus he had a heart attack four years ago when he was only 47 years old. With all the stress of his hero George Bush being called out in the mid-terms for the liar that he is by the American people, I'm surprised Brent hasn't gone the way of Big Punisher.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
can it possibly be a civil war? No one is wearing mutton chops or eating hardtack. And where the hell are the muskets?
There's only 300 some in the entire Army. Is Bozell saying a third of them are in-theater? Good God, man! One well-placed RPG and the enemy can virtually decapitate our forces.
We must get out NOW!!!
Hmm...so, when police recruiting centers have been bombed, were the perpetrators trying to overthrow only the police?
Caldwell said, "We also see a security force that is responsive to the government." The problem is that the statement needs some qualification. I.e., according to the National Security Advisor, Maliki "is frustrated over his limited ability to command Iraqi forces." (emphasis added) [link to www.nytimes.com]
4 retired top brass saying "Civil War". 4 active duty top brass saying, "not at this time, but could become ........." Which to believe? Right now, to me, it looks like two groups of idiots, each killing as many as they can, with maybe a third group, kind of in the background, playing both sides against each other. Get over the horizon, let the warring factions kill each other and then take on the weaken victor!!!
What's your point?
Is it a civil war or not?
Since the US government was functioning during OUR Civil Wars, does that mean ours was NOT a civil war? Or was that whole "Confederacy seceding from the union to form their own country and government" thing we had just "sectarian strife" ?!?!? These people and their skewed terms and myopic version of history are enough to make ME want to secede from the union.
Even if you wanna quibble over the language and deny that there is a civil war, for Hannity to suggest that NBC and the "liberal media" refuse to report the "Good News" is a knock down, drag out, belly buster. Some wing nut out there please tell me that Hannity is trying his hand at comedy by saying that there is good news not being reported. What good news would that be by the way? Maybe Letter man could do a top ten "Good News Items from Iraq Not Reported by NBC News"
#10 Next Season CBS to bring production of major television series to Iraq: Survivor -The Al anbar Provice Edition
#9. Woodworkers in Iraq flourishing since fall of Saddam. Wooden coffins now bigger seller than Saddam tortue chairs.
#8. Cell phone service in Baghdad now has least drop calls in the world after all buildings higher than three stories have been leveld.
#7 Halliburton makes Guiness book of World Records as the Green Zone now tops record for most concrete barriers per square inch.
#6. Baghdad's IEDs for cash exchange program a success despite the fact that 200 of the recently turned in bombs are unaccounted for.
#5. Hanging gardens of Babylon are close to being rediscovered following series of IED bomb blasts in Sadr City.
#4. Right Wingers win War on Christmas --allows all available US troops to cycle through Iraq instead.
#3. Iraqi Army now able to stand up for ten minutes before being shot.
#2. Cryptographers prepare for new round of Map and globe manufacturing frenzy in anticpiation of Biden Parition PLan.
And ...
#1. Iraq Civil War declaration means No More Brittney Spears and Kevin Federline Talk at the Water Cooler in Sadr City.
Who in the hell is "Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz?" Fox effectively brings everything they do into question. I am not sure they know how they come off.
Who in the hell is "Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz?" One thing, Fox surely presents a fair and balance point of view. It's not a civil war, so what is it? Do you sense autopilot? I do.
Who the hell is "Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz?" When reporting what events affect this war, how can there be so many different opinions about what to call what we see with our own eyes? If you ask me, this special commentary form of journalism has become more than it should.
Who the hell is "Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz?" When news becomes what you create it to be, journalism crosses over the line of effective journalism and becomes a form of propaganda. Fox's attempt to create the story, the argument about the story, and how well known is the persons making the argument is creation going wild. How much creation do you need in a medium that should be to report what you see?
Who the hell is "Democratic strategist Laura Schwartz?" As obvious as the facts point to Iraq being in a civil war, Fox will in proportion loose the confidence of its blindly lead viewers. Enough is enough.
Joseph
She's a former Special Assistant to the President in the Clinton adminstration, that's who.
Bozell has been playing games for years. The mainstream media does not act as Bozell insists. See my blog entry that exposes the ugly games Bozell plays.
Brent Bozell is one of the biggest mouths that scream about a supposedly "liberal media" On Scarborough Country of May 16 Bozell and Scarborough continue the suppression of the fact that the Army has said that soldiers have committed homicides. and gave the false impression that it didn't happen! (note mainstream media has basically not reported the story or severely under-reported it.)
Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, spokesman for the Multinational Force in Iraq. Caldwell told reporters on November 28 that a civil war was not under way "because the government is still functioning. ... We don't see an organization trying to overthrow it and assume control. ... We also see a security force that is responsive to the government."
The situation is surprisingly similar to what took place during the Lebanese civil war. A functioning government existed during the 15 years of civil strife, nobody said it worked well but it was there. Maybe this general needs to a history lesson in middleeast politics.
"Aww..what's wrong, righties, you don't like Democracy anymore? Yes, Democrats received more votes this time - overwhelmingly. "- Commonsenseliberal
Thank God the Lefties got enough votes this time. I wasn't looking forward to their temper tantrums, lawsuits, tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories and general meltdown if the republicans won by a slim margin.
The difference between Liberals and Conservatives is this: When Conservatives lose, they take it like men. When Lefties lose, they come absolutely unhinged (remember "Crazy Al" Gore?) The idiot Leftist in Mexico, Lopez Obrador, is another prime example of "Lefties Gone Wild."
When Conservatives lose, they take it like men. ******************************************************
Not all Conservatives take like men. I am sure Foley will contest to that.
Bush lost and he hardly took it like a man. He called Fox news and initiated and spin plan. He then called Gore and cried like a baby he had won the election. It's really funny how conservatives frame and spin facts issues and realities they encounter.
The sad thing about this is they have not learned the voters are tired of the misconception games they play; even more, the silly name calling they resort to when they attempt to out point people of real character.
And the good things about us Democrats is: We say take my comments just how you like.
Joseph