Re: IP: U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal

[William Reichenbach <annapi@cts.com>]

Notice the Double Speak in the LA Times article below?

    What is taking place in Bosnia is Exactly the same thing
(Censorship) as the writer of the article is expressing concern about.
It is exactly the same conduct that the two NWO Stooges Metzl and Rep
Royce so enthusiastically endorse. It is only a question of whose ox is
being gored.

William


"Indeed, the United States and its allies are conducting a somewhat
similar
operation in Bosnia. Two months ago, NATO troops seized and effectively
shut
down a station run by hard-line Bosnian Serb forces after the station
broadcast inflammatory attacks on NATO forces trying to keep the peace
there.

But it's a long step to go from these situations to the creation of a
permanent, formal unit run by the United Nations and scouring the world
in
search of radio broadcasts to jam. "


believer@telepath.com wrote:

> >From the Los Angeles Times:
>
> Wednesday, December 3, 1997
>
>   INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK
>   U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal
>   By JIM MANN
>
> WASHINGTON--In foreign policy, sometimes the noblest of intentions
> leads to
> lousy ideas.
>
> That's certainly the case with the recent curious proposal for a
> special
> United Nations "jam squad"--a special U.N. team that could be
> hurriedly
> dispatched to crisis points around the world carrying equipment to
> jam, or
> block, harmful radio and TV broadcasts.
>
> Writing in the current issue of "Foreign Affairs" magazine, Jamie M.
> Metzl,
> a former United Nations human rights officer, proposes the creation of
> what
> would officially be called an "independent information intervention
> unit" at
> the U.N.
>
> Its goal, he writes, would be "countering dangerous messages that
> incite
> people to violence." A U.N. unit could monitor local news media to see
> where
> crises might erupt, air its own messages of peace and, where
> necessary,
> prevent other radio or TV broadcasts from being heard.
>
> The idea for the U.N. jam squad originated in the genocidal horrors of
>
> Rwanda. In 1994, the country's main radio station, the
> Radio-Television
> Libre des Milles Collines, then controlled by Hutu extremists, began
> broadcasting hate messages targeting members of the rival tribe, the
> Tutsis,
> and moderate Hutus.
>
> The Rwanda station even broadcast lists of enemies to be hunted down.
> "Take
> your spears, clubs, guns, swords, stones, everything, sharpen them,
> jack
> them, those enemies, those cockroaches," the station urged listeners.
> The
> result was one of the world's worst blood baths, in which more than
> 500,000
> unarmed Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered.
>
> This was, certainly, as compelling a case for jamming as you can get.
> And
> Metzl has one cogent argument on behalf of his proposal: When there's
> an
> ethnic conflict in a place like Rwanda, sending in a United Nations
> jamming
> team would be considerably easier and less costly than sending in
> troops.
>
> "I think it's a worthy idea," says Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Fullerton),
>
> chairman of the House International Relations subcommittee on Africa.
> "I'm
> sure we would try to go out and jam [in Rwanda] if those circumstances
> came
> up again."
>
> Indeed, the United States and its allies are conducting a somewhat
> similar
> operation in Bosnia. Two months ago, NATO troops seized and
> effectively shut
> down a station run by hard-line Bosnian Serb forces after the station
> broadcast inflammatory attacks on NATO forces trying to keep the peace
> there.
>
> But it's a long step to go from these situations to the creation of a
> permanent, formal unit run by the United Nations and scouring the
> world in
> search of radio broadcasts to jam.
>
> Who would determine exactly what kinds of radio programs should be
> blocked
> and which programs could be aired? What would ensure that the jamming
> decisions were not motivated by politics? Wouldn't the creation of
> such a
> United Nations operation strengthen the hand of governments that want
> to jam
> radio transmissions for much less noble reasons?
>
> "This opens up a Pandora's box, really," says Richard Richter, the
> director
> of Radio Free Asia, the federally funded station that broadcasts into
> Asian
> countries with repressive governments. "You'd have China claiming that
> we
> [American broadcasts] should be jammed by the United Nations."
>
> Ultimately, a U.N. jamming squad would give official sanction to
> restrictions on the free flow of information. Metzl's article has a
> response
> to this problem, but it's a weak one.
>
> "During the Cold War, when the United States faced a Soviet adversary
> intent
> on jamming the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe . . . , it made
> sense
> for the United States to promote an absolute standard for the free
> flow of
> information," he wrote. "Now, a more nuanced view should be possible."
>
> But that's precisely backward: The free flow of information wasn't
> merely a
> temporary means to winning the Cold War, but one of the goals of the
> endeavor.
>
> Although the problem of hate-filled radio broadcasts is a serious one,
> there
> are ways of dealing with it that don't involve creating some huge,
> supranational censorship unit.
>
> One alternative is simply to provide other, competing radio
> broadcasts. In
> Rwanda, for example, the United Nations set up its own radio stations,
> both
> in the capital of Kigali and in radio camps.
>
> Royce's subcommittee has been exploring the possibility of creating a
> Radio
> Free Africa, similar to Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia and Radio
> Marti,
> which broadcasts to Cuba.
>
> There are serious questions about whether such a new organization is
> necessary, when VOA, the official U.S. government station, already
> broadcasts intensively into Africa. But the underlying idea makes
> sense: to
> transmit better, more accurate information to Africa, rather than
> focusing
> on jamming or censorship.
>
> There are other ways of combating hate radio too. Those who directly
> incite
> violence over the airwaves can be brought to justice. At the moment, a
>
> war-crimes tribunal, set up under U.N. auspices, is prosecuting those
> responsible for the massacres in Rwanda. Among the suspects in custody
> are
> some of those responsible for the Milles Collines radio broadcasts.
>
> But a worldwide, U.N.-run jamming team? As a Hollywood script, maybe
> the
> idea has possibilities. As foreign policy, it's a loser.
>
>  Jim Mann's column appears in this space every Wednesday.
>
>  Copyright Los Angeles Times
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, email:
>      majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com
> with the message:
>      subscribe ignition-point email@address
> or
>      unsubscribe ignition-point email@address
> **********************************************
> http://www.telepath.com/believer
> **********************************************