"Anti-Americanism is on the rise in Germany and there's no end in sight: Today the documentary "Jesus Camp" was broadcasted by the state owned television station "WDR". "Jesus Camp" shows how young American kids are indoctrinated by anti-democratic radical Evangelists to become members of "god's army" which, one day, will hopefully be led to victory by President Bush.
I can't believe that our tax money is wasted for spreading this kind of anti-American propaganda. When watching the documentary one could really get the impression that 80 million American Evangelists, including President Bush, are just waiting to turn their children into brainless war machines. To the sometimes ill-informed German public, however, it might not be entirely clear that not all Evangelists are anti-democratic religious fundamentalists as shown in the documentary.
Can you imagine what kind of fear this might induce in such a war-ridden country as Germany?"
Knowing how little contextual understanding of American society most Germans have and how willing to pounce at any evidence of American degeneracy and hyper-religiosity they generally are - in no small part because of the German media - one can only agree with the comment above. This will only exacerbate the German lack of understanding of the United States and perpetuate the stereotype that America is a land overflowing with brainwashed religious zealots.
Perhaps WDR could balance the program by pointing out that the United States tolerates and Constitutionally protects countless religions and belief-systems (including Scientology!) and has produced countless atheist intellectuals and questioners of established religion. But then that would not conform to the desired template. As they say in Germany: Das passt nicht ins Programm...
One of the most sinister media programs in Germany is one aimed at an audience too young to differentiate bias and think critically about the political messages directed at it. In this case we are talking here about "Lilipuz", a radio news program broadcast daily for children at 2:05 PM Berlin time and sponsored by WDR 5 (West German Broadcasting, Channel 5), a public radio channel funded by German taxpayers via the German government. Just a glance at the "Lilipuz" program's homepage is a lesson in and of itself:
Question for German Kids: "Why is Sex Called Sex? The Answer is on Heart Radio."
Certainly you can still remember the terrible pictures from the Iraq war. Led by the USA and England, several states attacked Iraq. They justified that primarily with the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and threatened others. Today we know, that that is not true. And why are we reporting about it today? Barbara Paeffgen:
"The Iraq War is indeed over. But there is still no peace. One repeatedly hears of attacks, kidnappings, injuries and deaths.
The land and its people are totally agitated and simply find no way to keep peace. And the American and English troops find themselves in the middle. They are supposed to ensure justice and order, however many Iraqis don't want them in their land."
In America the people are also slowly getting angry. Many want to pull the American troops out of Iraq. Why won't they do that?
"The American government under President George Bush doesn't know at all how it will get out of Iraq. It is totally at a loss. That is why President Bush is talking up the situation in Iraq (putting makeup on a pig).
The American Defense Minister Donald Rumsfeld doesn't even want to talk about insurgents anymore and wants that nothing more negative is written about the American military.
Critics hold that for the totally wrong direction because it does nothing to change the situation."
What critics are they talking about exactly? They obviously missed the fact that the vast majority of Iraq's states are, in fact, largely peaceful and stable and that the lack of peace is limited to the central Sunni sector of the nation. The broadcast also totally failed to mention any of the positive things happening in Iraq. What about the new roads, schools, businesses, newspapers, hospitals and power plants? What about the elections and constitution? What about the increasing prosperity in much of Iraq? What about the declining infant mortality rates? Is there some law against reporting on positive things happening in Iraq in the German media? It would certainly seem so...
And President Bush certainly did not sound as if he were "at a loss" with regard to the Iraq situation in his speech to the Naval Academy this week. Here are a few excerpts from the President's speech:
"As we fight the enemy in Iraq, every man and woman who volunteers to defend our nation deserves an unwavering commitment to the mission -- and a clear strategy for victory. A clear strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. (...)
To achieve victory over such enemies, we are pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq. Americans should have a clear understanding of this strategy -- how we look at the war, how we see the enemy, how we define victory, and what we're doing to achieve it. So today, we're releasing a document called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." This is an unclassified version of the strategy we've been pursuing in Iraq, and it is posted on the White House website -- whitehouse.gov. I urge all Americans to read it.
Some are calling for a deadline for withdrawal. Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere -- but I believe they're sincerely wrong. Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory. As Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman said recently, setting an artificial timetable would "discourage our troops because it seems to be heading for the door. It will encourage the terrorists, it will confuse the Iraqi people."
Senator Lieberman is right. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a message across the world that America is a weak and an unreliable ally. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies -- that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends. And setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would vindicate the terrorists' tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder -- and invite new attacks on America. To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your Commander-in-Chief. (Applause.)
Media Double Standards: Ignoring Lieberman while Lauding Murtha
And of course the German media has widely ignored the positive statements made by Senator Joe Lieberman (D) on Iraq while trumpeting the negative, defeatist statements of Representative John Murtha. This is because Lieberman's remarks violently contradict the prevailing ideology in German media and politics while Murtha's confirm them. The same is largely true of the American media. Murtha's statements have been headline news for days while Lieberman's statements on the successful progress in Iraq are largely sidestepped by the "mainstream" media. If German media had an ounce of credibility (which they don't) they would give just as much play to Lieberman's remarks (which they won't). In any case, here are some of the things the Senator from Connecticut wrote on Iraq:
"I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.
Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress. (...)
None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.
The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.
Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.
The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.
Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week."
Senator Lieberman clearly demonstrated a high degree of intellectual and moral courage in writing the above, especially considering how members of his own party are likely to react. The intellectually dishonest ideologues who run much of the German media are certain to largely ignore Lieberman's comments because they represent a threat and contradiction to everything they have been reporting to the German people on Iraq for the past three years.
Peace the Lilipuz Way
So how would "Lilipuz" have dealt with Iraq? Of course not attacking would have meant more of the same sort of "peace" that prevailed under Saddam Hussein for over two decades (but of course WDR doesn't want to inconvenience the children with that information because it doesn't fit into the anti-American, anti-England indoctrination program):
Saddam's Victims: "Peace" the Lilipuz Way
And just like their predecessors, elements of today's German state-run media recognize how important the hearts and minds of German youth really are. Americans, along with Brits and Israelis, can only view this sinister and shameless form of German media indoctrination with a sense of foreboding and dismay for the future. Perhaps the most upsetting aspect of all this is that the German government (and not some insignificant private entity) is sponsoring these profoundly biased programs.
As usual: raw, juicy anti-americanism on German tv. The real thing.
Today (Wednesday May 4, 2005): two regional public tv channels - both are nationally distributed via satellite - with millions of viewers each informed the German public about the evils of America.
WDR (Westdeutscher Rundfunk): "Why we fight - The good wars of the USA". 90 minutes prime time bashing of Bush, the U.S. government, the rest of America, Iraq policy, all of U.S. foreign policy, you name it. No surprise the flick won the "American Documentary Grand Jury Price" at the Sundance Festival 2005 (described here as an "I hate America lovefest"). Of course: loads of praise from left-wing media outlets (1, 2.)
If this documentary hadn't spoiled my evening, this definitely did:
NDR (Norddeutscher Rundfunk): "Patriotische Gefühle - Die Medienszene in den USA" (Patriotic Feelings - The Media Scene in the USA). Topics: Bush clan manipulates media; U.S. government pressures journalists into self-censorship; U.S. media uncritically supported Iraq war for patriotic reasons; USA a "police state"; in comparison to the U.S.: ethical foundation of journalism in Germany.
Sometimes I hope someone would wake me up and tell me it was just a bad dream.
But it isn't a bad dream. It's media reality in Germany in 2005.
Ihn zur Strecke zu bringen scheint für die 148 000 uniformierten Amerikaner im Irak wichtiger zu sein als die Sorge um ein geschundenes Volk, wichtiger auch als die nachträgliche Rechtfertigung für einen fragwürdigen Krieg, dessen offizieller Grund ein Konstrukt aus Lügen war, das krachend zusammenbrach. Aber Bush klopft sich nur den Staub aus dem Anzug und gibt sich einem Allmachtsgefühl hin, das ihn gegen jede Form der Selbstkritik immunisiert.
Kategorie: Chronische Bush-Hasser
Sieger: Uwe Schmitt, US-Korrespondent der "Welt"
George W. Bush scheint in Gefahr, seinen "9/11"-Bonus aufzuzehren ... Bush verfehlt die Stimmung im Volk ... Bushs unerschütterlicher Glaube an seine Rechtschaffenheit und Mission wirkt nun bisweilen auch auf Freunde starr, hochmütig, realitätsabweisend ... Dennoch fragen sich immer mehr Amerikaner, die inzwischen mehrheitlich unzufrieden mit Bushs Irak-Politik sind ... Der religiös begründete Eifer Bushs...
US-Soldaten und der amerikanische Geheimdienst ... verhaften zahlreiche Verdächtige, die möglicherweise zur Terrororganisation El Kaida gehören. Die Gefangenen sollen so viel wie möglich über El Kaida und Osama bin Laden verraten. Da die meisten das aber freiwillig nicht tun, werden sie schlecht behandelt, geschlagen und sogar gefoltert. Und: sie haben keine Möglichkeit, sich von einem Rechtsanwalt helfen zu lassen.
Menschenrechtsorganisationen wie amnesty international finden es furchtbar, dass die Regierung der USA selber entscheidet, wann sie die Menschenrechte einhält und wann nicht. Denn so, wie die USA die gefangenen angeblichen El Kaida-Mitglieder behandeln, verstoßen sie gegen das Völkerrecht. Auch wenn sie sagen, dass sie nur weitere Terroranschläge verhindern wollen.
Kategorie: Voreingenommene Experten
Sieger: Jürgen Todenhöfer, "Experte für Entwicklungs- und Rüstungskontrollpolitik"
...die Kriminalität (im Irak) hat ein nie gekanntes Ausmaß erreicht ... Die Verbitterung der Menschen steigt ... Von einer Musterdemokratie nach westlichem Vorbild ist der Irak weit entfernt ... Die amerikanische Regierung hat mit dem Krieg gegen den Irak einen desaströsen Fehler begangen ... Man kann den Rechtsstaat nicht mit rechtswidrigen Mitteln, die Menschenrechte nicht mit menschenverachtenden Methoden und die Demokratie nicht mit undemokratischen Mitteln und Täuschung der Menschen einführen. ... Wir müssen das Böse bekämpfen. Aber das Böse liegt nicht nur im Nahen oder Fernen Osten. Es liegt auch im Westen, es liegt in uns selbst."
Sieger: AP für die unterschiedliche Auswahl von Zitaten in der amerikanischen und der deutschen Version der gleichen Meldung
Überschrift der US-Version der AP-Meldung: "Americans React to Bush Speech"
Überschrift der deutschen Version der AP-Meldung: "Hurra-Rede statt Substanz"
(Beobachter) verwiesen dabei auf den früheren US-Präsidenten Lyndon B. Johnson, der bei einer spektakulären Reise die Truppen im Vietnam besuchte, dann bei der Wahl 1968 jedoch klar seinem Herausforderer Richard Nixon unterlag.
Tatsache: Lyndon B. Johnson ist 1968 nicht einmal zu den Präsidentschaftswahlen angetreten, nachdem er seine Nicht-Kandidatur bereits Anfang dieses Jahres bekannt gegeben hatte.
Sieger: Wolfgang Thierse (SPD), Präsident des Deutschen Bundestages
Ich denke an die Millionen von Menschen in Bagdad, die Opfer von Bomben und Raketen werden. (21. März 2003)
Sieger: SPIEGEL - Interview mit US-Senatorin Hillary Clinton
Frau Senatorin, die Vorstellung von Amerika, die Sie in Ihrem Buch entwerfen, ist das genaue Gegenteil von dem Land, für das George W. Bush steht. Heißt das, wir brauchen die Hoffnung auf ein freundlicheres, rücksichtsvolleres und kooperativeres Amerika nicht aufzugeben?... Als Ihr Mann und Sie das Weiße Haus verließen, hatte sich die Wirtschaftspolitik als sehr erfolgreich erwiesen. .. Der erste Satz in Ihrem Buch lautet: "Ich wurde nicht als First Lady oder Senatorin geboren." Sind Sie vielleicht geboren worden, um Präsidentin zu werden?
Wir sprechen allen Preisträgern unsere herzlichen Glückwünsche aus!
Grenzenlose Illusionen: Der Nahost-"Experte" Volker Perthes kritisiert die USA und Israel, weil sie nicht Abbas, den gescheiterten palästinensischen Ministerpräsidenten, unterstützten. In einem Interview mit WDR5 (Radio) stellte er fest:
"Man hat ja, die USA zusammen mit den Europäern, die sogenannte Road Map zum Frieden im Frühjahr dieses Jahres auf den Weg gebracht. Man hat mit sehr viel Druck auf Arafat dafür gesorgt, dass ein Ministerpräsident, Herr Abbas, eingesetzt worden ist. Aber dann hat er eben weder aus den USA noch aus Israel die Unterstützung bekommen, die er gebraucht ätte."
Also: Arafat berief Abbas, und dann scheiterte Abbas wegen fehlender Unterstützung durch die USA und Israel. Großartige Geschichte!
Tatsache ist doch, daß Arafat seine Macht zur Terrorisierung Israels nicht schmälern lassen wollte. Das ist auch der Grund, warum es so schwierig ist, einen Abbas-Nachfolger zu finden.
So etwas läuft nur in Deutschland...
There's no limit to the illusions: German Middle East "expert" Volker Perthes criticizes the US and Israel for not supporting Abbas, the failed Palestinian Prime Minister. In an interview with left-wing German radio station WDR he states:
"The USA together with the Europeans began to get the so-called Road Map to peace on its way. They saw to it, with a lot of pressure on Arafat, that a Prime Minister, Mr. Abbas, was installed. But then he did not become the support he needed either from the USA or from Israel."
So: Arafat installed Abbas, and then Abbas fell apart because of lack of support by the US and Israel. Great story!
Fact is, Arafat didn't want to give up his power to terrorize Israel. And that's the reason why it's so difficult to find a successor to Abbas.
Deutsche Version am Ende des Beitrags / German version at end of post
Certainly the most disgusting form of anti-Americanism in the German media is the manipulation of children. At the same time, it is the most promising method for the successful establishment of a lasting anti-Americanism in Germany.
The radio program "LILIPUZ," which is transmitted daily at 2:05 P.M. on WDR 5, brought a program on March 14, 2003 that presented the children listening with a close-up and completely one-sided view of the rottenness of the USA:
"USA violates human rights
The USA is still searching for those responsible for the terror attacks of the 11th of September. ... Up to now the USA has arrested many people because they believe that they belong to this (Al-Qaeda) organization. People who are dedicated to human rights are criticizing the way the USA is handling these prisoners ... US soldiers and the American intelligence service ... arrested numerous suspects who likely belonged to the Al-Qaeda terror organization. The prisoners should tell as much as they can about Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. But since most of them won't do it voluntarily, they are mistreated, beaten and even tortured. And: they have no chance to consult with an attorney.
Human rights organizations like Amnesty International find it terrible that the US government decides on its own when human rights should be upheld and when not. The way the USA is currently treating the alleged Al-Qaeda members is a violation of international law. Even if they say, that they only want to prevent further terrorist attacks."
The following sticks in children's' minds: the USA is torturing and beating prisoners. That's a violation of the law, but the Americans don't care about it.
On the 24th of March an "expert" on international law is quoted:
"Again today many people took to the streets to protest the Iraq War. And many national leaders of numerous countries think that it is wrong that the USA attacked Iraq. They think: The USA through this action violated the rules that almost all states have agreed upon with one another - so-called international law. Dietrich Murswiek is a professor of state and international law at the University Freiburg. I asked him: And did the USA really fail to follow these rules? "No, the USA violated them. America is not under attack at the moment. Saddam Hussein may be an evil dictator who has committed bad crimes and who also violated a number of Security Council resolutions, but that alone does not suffice to justify a war. The second justification for war is also not at hand. There is no authorization from the Security Council for the United States."
Of course the program completely fails to include the opinions of other experts on international law who viewed the Iraq War as justified.
On April 7, 2003, LILIPUZ suggests to the children that the USA wanted to push through its own interests without consideration for the rest of the world.:
"It appears as if the Americans also want to determine how things go after the war by themselves. Most European politicians see it differently. They think the United Nations should provide for democracy and oversee the rebuilding of Iraq. Because they speak for nearly all the nations of the world - the USA will probably try to push through just their own interests."
On April 11, 2003 LILIPUZ tells the children of "chaos" in Iraq, that it - following the logic of the program - did not exist under Saddam's "government."
"Chaos in Iraq
Chaos rules in Iraq. The old government is gone, but a new one does not yet exist. That means: At the moment no one is there to tell the people of Iraq what they are allowed to do and what is forbidden. That is why the people are simply doing what they want. They loot the offices of businesses or buildings of the previous Iraqi government and take everything with them that they can find: Chairs, televisions, refrigerators. The people even rob hospitals and steal ambulances or cases of medicine.
The Americans must see to it that order prevails in Iraq."
What "order" does LILIPUZ really want to see restored? The order of mass-graves and the terror regime of Saddam Hussein?
In Germany the Nazis and most recently the SED (former ruling Communist party in East Germany) thought it right to use media manipulation of children for the purpose of indoctrinating them with propaganda. The WDR places itself, with its one-sided, biased and manipulative reporting on its children's radio program in the same ugly tradition.
The WDR is a publicly owned organization, which, according to its information about itself seeks to "promote international understanding." A radio commission watches over the program to make sure it is following established rules and norms.
The director of WDR is Fritz Pleitgen, who was the America-correspondent at the ARD and reported - mostly negative things - from the USA.
We will continue to keep a close eye on the anti-American manipulation of children by the German media.