May 09, 2009
Why are we not hearing wall to wall coverage on a war in which the sworn enemies of Western Civilization are marching closer to control over a country that has nuclear weapons.
Contained in practically every direct correspondence either obtained or freely given concerning and related to the Taliban, within the realm of Islamic extremism, are numerous references to destroying first Israel, then Western Europe, then the United States of America. During a debate with Salman Rushdie, Christopher Hitchens cited many examples to back the point that it would be accurate to state that the only group of people who seek to gain nuclear arms for immediate use are indeed these same extremists. This is a point that I agree with.
Pakistan has an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The Taliban is currently fighting it's way to the capital City of Pakistan, Islamabad. An article that appeared on the BBC news website puts the situation in fairly plain terms by stating that the country is in fact 'Fighting for survival'.
The knee jerk response from this current war or military assault taking place has been a partisan one, as could be expected. Yet the media's reaction is interesting. The war is not being covered that much. The partisan hack in me wants to begin speaking of how "If Bush was in office this predicament would be deemed to be the end of mankind, receiving constant coverage on television".
Yet the human being in me can't get past the idea that the entire infotainment industry isn't covering a story that could have devastating effects on all our lives. While you can't really live in a state of fear or panic at all times... Would it really hurt just to hear some straight reporting about the situation? Just a few numbers and dates? "This many Taliban fighters moved into this area on this date" type of info?
I feel like the handling of this situation is in a pretty poor set of hands.... The problem, as always, lies in a very gray area of just who's hands we are talking about. Numerous debates abound concerning this point, but I really do not care about it. Whether it was Bush, Obama, Clinton, Carter or Reagan the situation remains the same. Left or Right of the aisle doesn't really matter here, dead is dead.
I would imagine and hope that there is a competent team of people working on this in Washington... This is the point where a responsible media comes into play and I can't escape the feeling that the phraseology "responsible media" is slightly out of fashion within the halls of any corporation that sells information for ratings dollars. Indeed, whether it's a "free" press or a press that works to increase revenue via sensationalism, is there any outlet currently in existence that can cover this without ideology taking over at some point?
I really don't think so.
Yet the fact remains.... Currently there are Muslim extremists fighting their way to the Capital of a country that controls weapons that could cause massive destruction if detonated. They have spoken of a desire to use these weapons. This same group of People have vowed to kill the people that live here with impudence.
I find this situation to be worthy of a rather serious in depth investigation, leading to a reporting of raw data.