CNN Slimes Our Troops
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2005
One of the most common complaints I hear from our troops is that
the media rarely report on the military's good deeds.
A simple column I wrote last month lauding the humanitarian
efforts of our men and women in the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike
Group, for example, resulted in an avalanche of mail from military members
and their families expressing astonishment and relief over a bit of positive
press.

"I cannot tell you how much that it meant to myself as well as
several of my shipmates to be praised," wrote Mariano Gonzales, a member of
Strike Fighter Squadron 151 aboard the Lincoln. "Sometimes it seems that in
today's world, it is just not fashionable for someone in a position to
influence public opinion to admit that the U.S. military's role in the world
involves more than just war and bloodshed."
Well, with folks like powerful CNN executive Eason Jordan in
charge - a man who clearly has issues with the U.S. military - it's no
wonder our troops so often feel smeared and slimed.
For the past week, Internet weblogs ("blogs") around the world
have been buzzing about outrageous comments regarding American soldiers
reportedly made by Jordan, the head of CNN's news division, at a World
Economic Forum gathering in Davos, Switzerland. (My reporting on the
controversy, with extensive links to other bloggers, is at
www.michellemalkin.com.) According to several eyewitnesses, Jordan asserted
on Jan. 27 that American military personnel had deliberately targeted and
killed journalists in Iraq. (Jordan has since disputed the characterization
of his remarks.)
Why wasn't this headline news?
Forum organizers have stonewalled citizen attempts to gain
access to a videotape or transcript of the Davos meeting. But American
businessman Rony Abovitz, who attended the panel Jordan participated in,
reported immediately after the forum that "Jordan asserted that he knew of
12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops in Iraq, but they
had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which
seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-U.S. crowd) and cause
great strain on others."
Another panel attendee, historian Justin Vaisse, wrote on his
blog that Jordan "didn't mince words in declaring that the intentions of
journalists in Iraq were never perceived as neutral and were made deliberate
targets by 'both sides.'"
On Monday, journalist and presidential adviser David Gergen, who
moderated the panel, told me that Jordan indeed asserted that journalists in
Iraq had been targeted by military "on both sides." Gergen said Jordan tried
to backtrack, but then went on to speculate about a few incidents involving
journalists killed in the Middle East - a discussion Gergen cut off because
"the military and the government weren't there to defend themselves."
Panel member Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., also told me that
Jordan asserted that there was deliberate targeting of journalists by the
U.S. military and that Jordan "left open the question" of whether there were
individual cases in which American troops targeted journalists.
Finally, panel attendee Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., issued a
statement in response to my inquiry that he "was outraged by the comments.
Senator Dodd is tremendously proud of the sacrifice and service of our
American military personnel."
Jordan's defenders say he was "misunderstood" and deserves the
"benefit of the doubt." But the man's record is one of incurable
anti-American pandering.
Jordan's the man who admitted last spring that CNN withheld news
out of Baghdad to maintain access to Saddam Hussein's regime. He was quoted
last fall telling a Portuguese forum that he believed journalists had been
arrested and tortured by American forces (a charge he maintains today). In
the fall of 2002, he reportedly accused the Israeli military of deliberately
targeting CNN personnel "on numerous occasions." He was in the middle of the
infamous Tailwind scandal, in which CNN was forced to retract a Peter Arnett
report that the American military used sarin gas against its own troops in
Laos. And in 1999, Jordan declared: "We are a global network, and we take
global interest[s] first, not U.S. interests first."
Now, who is more deserving of the benefit of the doubt? Eason
Jordan or our men and women on the battlefield?
I support the troops.
COPYRIGHT 2005 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Editor's Note: Read Michelle Malkin's columns in NewsMax magazine - Click Here!