- BitsBlog - https://bitsblog.com -

The Effect of Facts on Anti-Iraq-War Arguments

The Jawa Report: [1]

The US military released footage from a UAV showing al-Qaeda in Iraq taking a man from a trunk and murdering him. The CNN reporters call the footage, “shocking” and “spectacular” After mentioning the discovery of five severed heads they this shows that Iraqis take the brunt of the violence in Iraq.

Here. [2]

WTF? What if the MSM had shown people the real truth of what these people do from the start? On a much wider scale than sites like Jawa can provide.

If people had seen what happened to Menchaca and Tucker [3]. If they had seen what happened to Daniel Pearl, Paul Johnson [4] and other civilian hostages. If they had seen what happened to countless Iraqis, shot and chopped and murdered mercilessly. Maybe they would have recognized the pure evil of it and fought. There would be no more of that moral equivalency crap.

I’m not convinced.

Look, if such arguments against our involvement in Iraq were being driven by fact to begin with, some exposure to the facts you point up might actually have had the effect you suggest. As it is, such arguments cannot be defeated by mere facts, because facts never had anything to do with those arguments in the first place. Trust me, the left and the press (Redundant, I know) would have managed a way to place blame on the US for it all.
Don’t misunderstand me; I agree, they should have been shown, often. That such things ahve NOT been shown regularly and often, I place in the same basket as calling for a halt to showing the WTC attack, years ago. Typical slanted press. I just don’t think that showing such would have the effect you think it would.