Sanchez Blasts Media, But Media Only Highlight His Criticism of Bush

Photo of Brent Baker.

The news media “eagerly reported” comments from General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top commander in Iraq, “calling the war in Iraq a quote 'nightmare with no end in sight,'” FNC's Brit Hume noted Monday night before pointing out how “there has been considerably less reporting of his harsh criticism of the press in the same speech.” Indeed, in his Friday address to a group of journalists, Sanchez regretted how “tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats for America because of the tremendous power and impact of the media” and scathingly asserted that reporters “are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.” Sanchez also charged: “For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own pre-conceived notions, biases and agendas.”

Not surprisingly, that deprecatory view of the media did not interest journalists over the weekend. The NBC Nightly News, for instance, ran a full story Friday night on Sanchez's comments critical of Bush officials, but didn't mention what he said about the news media. CNN's Wolf Blitzer led the 7pm EDT hour of Friday's The Situation Room with how “Ricardo Sanchez says 'America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.' That's a direct quote. And he's sharply critical of U.S. strategy with stinging judgment of government officials.” The critique of the media didn't come up in the segment with Pentagon reporter Jamie McIntyre. Saturday's front page New York Times article, “Ex-Commander Says Iraq Effort Is 'a Nightmare,'” ignored the media angle while front page story in Saturday's Washington Post, "Ex-Commander In Iraq Faults War Strategy," didn't refer to the scolding of the media until the very last paragraph.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Saturday's Good Morning America, however, briefly alluded to Sanchez's negative words for the news media, though “IRAQ WAR 'NIGHTMARE'; Ex-General Blasts War Effort” remained on screen as reporter Miguel Marquez related: “Sanchez blasted the media. He even recalled words that were used to describe him in reports during his tenure.” Sanchez: “'Dictatorial and somewhat dense,' a 'liar,' a 'torturer,' 'does not get it.'” But that was it, nothing about his broader take on the negative impact of the overall media coverage of the war.

News reader Ron Claiborne set up Marquez's the story:

Strong words from retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez who, in a scathing speech, became the highest-ranking former general to criticize the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq.

On Friday night, NBC anchor Brian Williams announced:

Some surprisingly harsh words today from the former top U.S. commander in Iraq, the first man to hold that job, in fact. Retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez turned on the Bush administration, accusing it of a failure in Iraq.

Pentagon reporter Jim Miklaszewski explained how Sanchez “claims that...the U.S. strategy in Iraq was doomed to fail. And in a scathing speech today, Sanchez blamed the civilian leadership at the top.” Though “Sanchez acknowledged the military made mistakes,” he, “without naming names, put the lion's share of the blame on the National Security Council, the President's top foreign policy advisors.”

The very last paragraph of the October 13 Washington Post front page story by Josh White acknowledged: “Sanchez opened by criticizing the U.S. news media, saying he was unfairly labeled 'a liar' and 'a torturer' because of the Abu Ghraib scandal, and he alleged that the media have lost their sense of ethics. He said that members of the media blow stories out of proportion and are unwilling to correct mistakes, and that the 'media environment is doing a great disservice to the nation.'”

Hume's “Grapevine” item in full on the October 15 Special Report with Brit Hume on FNC:

The media eagerly-reported comments by former top commander of coalition forces in Iraq, General Ricardo Sanchez, calling the war in Iraq a quote “nightmare with no end in sight.” There has been considerably less reporting of his harsh criticism of the press in the same speech which was made Friday to military reporters and editors. Some examples, quote:

“Over the course of this war, tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats for America because of the tremendous power and impact of the media and by extension you the journalist. In many cases the media has unjustly destroyed the individual reputations and careers of those involved,” end quote.

“You are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.

“For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own pre-conceived notions, biases and agendas,” end quote Ricardo Sanchez.

An earlier NewsBusters post has the text of the news media portion of Sanchez's October 12 remarks before a conference in Arlington, Virginia of the association of Military Reporters and Editors. The Web site for the group, which dubs itself “the official association of military journalists,” has the text of the entire address.

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video for the NBC and ABC stories quoted above:

NBC Nightly News, October 12:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Some surprisingly harsh words today from the former top U.S. commander in Iraq, the first man to hold that job, in fact. Retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez turned on the Bush administration, accusing it of a failure in Iraq. NBC News Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski is with us tonight for more on this story. Jim, good evening.

JIM MIKLASZEWSKI: Good evening, Brian. Sanchez is the highest-ranking former top U.S. military commander in Iraq to openly criticize the war, and today clearly laid the blame squarely on the White House. Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez took command of all U.S. forces in Iraq only two months after the fall of Baghdad. Now retired, he claims that even by then the U.S. strategy in Iraq was doomed to fail. And in a scathing speech today, Sanchez blamed the civilian leadership at the top.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ: Who will demand accountability for the failure of our national political leadership involved in the management of this war? They have unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their duty.

MIKLASZEWSKI: Sanchez acknowledged the military made mistakes, but, without naming names, put the lion's share of the blame on the National Security Council, the President's top foreign policy advisors.

SANCHEZ: In my profession, these types of leaders would immediately be relieved or court-martialed.

MIKLASZEWSKI: But Sanchez had his own problems. He was caught up in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and although he was cleared of any involvement, the scandal cost him a fourth star, and he was forced to retire. Still, Sanchez predicted today that even the current surge strategy in Iraq is headed for failure.

SANCHEZ: The best approach we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat.

MIKLASZEWSKI: Pentagon officials had no comment tonight, but some suggest Sanchez is clearly bitter over his forced retirement. Nevertheless, others believed that the facts on the ground in Iraq seemed to support much of the criticism that Sanchez laid out today, Brian.

ABC's Good Morning America, October 13, 2007:

RON CLAIBORNE, 7:02am live feed: Strong words from retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez who, in a scathing speech, became the highest-ranking former general to criticize the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq. ABC's Miguel Marquez is in Baghdad with more. Good morning, Miguel.

MIGUEL MARQUEZ: Good morning, Ron. It was a blistering speech from an unlikely source, the General who used to run things here. It was particularly odd in the timing of it because the administration had some of the best news out of Iraq recently in years. Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez was top U.S. commander here for one year. In an angry, and at times personal, speech about the news media and politics of war, he did not hold his fire. He says the latest plan for Iraq, the surge, will not work.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ: From a catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan, to the administration's latest surge strategy, this administration has failed to employ and synchronize its political, economic and military power.

MARQUEZ: During his tenure, we saw the capture of Saddam Hussein, the handing over of sovereignty to Iraqis and the scandal of U.S. guards abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. Sanchez blasted the media. He even recalled words that were used to describe him in reports during his tenure.

SANCHEZ: "Dictatorial and somewhat dense," a "liar," a "torturer," "does not get it."

MARQUEZ: Sanchez was criticized not only by the media, but by some in the Pentagon as well who felt he was in over his head as the commanding General of all U.S. forces in Iraq. The biggest problem with Iraq policy, says Sanchez, decisions about it are based on partisan politics.

SANCHEZ: There has been a glaring unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders. As a Japanese proverb says, action without vision is a nightmare. There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.

MARQUEZ: Wow, it is just an amazing speech at this particular time. Sanchez retired a year ago under a cloud of controversy because of his part in the Abu Ghraib prison. He called himself another victim of Abu Ghraib. It should also be noted that he is currently writing a book.

...

CLAIBORNE, 7:32am: A former top U.S. general in Iraq is criticizing the war as a nightmare with no end in sight. Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez says the current surge is a desperate attempt, his words, to make up for years of mistakes, but he says America has no choice but to continue our effort in Iraq.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Corruption

I think the words "culture of corruption" are more aptly used to describe the old media.

I would think that the war

I would think that the war in Iraq is on a lot more people's mind than the state of the media (beyond this site of course)

point is

the media misrepresents the state of Iraq so it becomes the daily double

"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house."       Groucho

So should the media not

So should the media not report casualties in Iraq?

on the odd occasion - as

on the odd occasion - as long as it's in a postive way that promotes the troop morale and the campaign in general - how's that?

A service of the new NB respect police

Do you ever watch your local news?

Local news comes on here at 11pm - what's the first story...murder in some high rise.  Gang-related shooting, then a fatal car accident.  You know what story comes on at the end.  The baby panda being born.  Should I assume there is a liberal bias in this case?

Yes!

Can you not understand that the main mission of the liberal media is to SCARE US - "be frightened, too frightened to step outside your door...boogeymen everywhere!!!"

if you obsessed about

if you obsessed about murder and death locally - you could make your hometown seem worse than Iraq - but the local news doesn't obsess negative like the MSM on Iraq, now do they?

Here's a comparison of Iraq to California in terms of death and violence - you may have seen this already

http://www.strangecosmos.com/content/item/118333.html

A service of the new NB respect police

Casualty count.

So should the media not report casualties in Iraq?

Of course they should. It would not be fair to omit the bad news. Just like it is not fair to report ONLY the bad news and omit the good. How many times was Abu Gharib on the front page of newspapers around the country? This week a Navy Seal won the Medal of Honor in Afghanistan. How many front pages was that on? How often do you hear about road side bombs? How often do you hear about roadside schools? The media can't claim that it is only bad news that leads. Over one MILLION children died under Saddam Hussein due to malnutrition and preventable diseases according to UNICEF. How often do you hear about it? How many times have you heard the 100,000 civilian casualty lie in the MSM?

Back to casualty counts, it is also not to count casualties like they are counting a growing weekly lottery jackpot. It is not fair to spend more time on Cindy Sheehan than Shemane Nugent. It is not fair to cover Al Gore's winning of the Nobel Prize and omit that Polish woman who saved 1500 kids from the Nazis.

So yes,they should report casualties, but they should also spend at least, if not more, time on some of the good news that comes out of Iraq every single day. They should start reporting the news and stop trying to shape viewer's opinions.

If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. --George Orwell

Essentially all wars are now

Essentially all wars are now fought in the media as much as they are in conventional battlespace.

Adios Sanchez

Perhaps the Molotov Mob has now inspired a Military Mob throwing napalm bombs, but I have had it with these retired jewelry wearers spouting off like they are "authorities" on anything.

Of the host of Clinton flunkies attacking Bush to this Sanchez half cocked howitzer how many wars have any of these twits ever won???

The answer is NONE.

Yet they always seem to be weighing in bashing everything in site giving their sermon from the Soviet gullag about what is wrong with America like a Manchurian Candidate.

In reading the memoirs of great military officers from Custer to Miles to Patton, not one of them ever took swipes at America. In every case if they had a gripe, they laid out the point, gave a solution and never left America in a degraded state.

Sanchez only exhibits stupidity and ignorance. He offers no plausable solutions. He offers no understanding of scenario and positive outcomes "of making lemonade from lemons".

In that, Sanchez should just do what old soldiers are paid on their high retirement officer's pensions.......get a terrier named Bull, smoke cigars looking authoritive and shut up.

If I wanted an opinion on Iraq, I would ask Keith Olberman. If I wanted a solution on Iraq, I would provide one which I have without degrading this wonderful nation and our rather President who needs to remember like Eisenhower he is an American first.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Some Understanding

 I think General Sanchez has a better understanding of how the media works.  I read his complete speech and the media should be ashamed of the way they presented it, but they aren't. The Democrats couldn't treat this war, the way they do, without the unconditional support of the media.

Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.

Your last sentence

tells the whole story!  Collusion from the highest executive position to the freshmen reporters - ALL are in concert to make our country out to be the bad guy of the world.  Where have all the American reporters gone???  It seems all we have left are socialists with an agenda so strong that they will allow NOTHING to stand in their way.

This MOST SERIOUS omission in the reporting of Gen. Sanchez's speech only confirms their bias.  I read the entire speech and they focused only on the few words that would support their views...sad sad sad

Rebirth of the Federalists?

It is a grave disservice to this Great Nation, when journalists find it more important to demonize those who do not share their ideology, than they do the dissemination of information to the public. We the people do not desire some of the information that they see fit to share, but all of it, to be judged by every American for themselves.

third

I don't know whether you saw Keith's rant earlier today...it was kind of off the wall.

But he, and you, do have somewhat of a point.

We all allow this nonsense to go on, non-stop, all day long.

We can all sit here, on our keyboards...and moan about it.  But when all is said and done, what will we really DO about it?

Other than quit watching (which we've all done, BTW).

I am so anti-legislation, but there is something that should be put to the fore....make the damned journos tell the truth.  I'm not sure we can (or should) make it stick, from a legislative standpoint....but maybe we just ought to figure out a way to mock them into truth.

I kinda like that...."Mock them Into Truth". 

Let's MOCK THE MEDIA INTO TELLING THE TRUTH!

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Blonde


Let's MOCK THE MEDIA INTO TELLING THE TRUTH!

I couldnt agree more, Blonde. And there are few things funnier than the Truth.

3rd

Mock the vote.  Or the polls...either way.

Mock the dems. Mock the Journos!  Especially the Journos!

Mock em all!

Mock 'em, mock 'em!

The truth is a wonderful thing. 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Media followup

What strikes me is that no one is following up with Sanchez. You'd figure he'd get a prime time special, wouldn't you? I know why, of course -- they're afraid he'll lecture them about what he said about the media. They're not sure they want their own partisanship exposed while they try to humiliate the administration.

But jeez, this is a guy who's crying out to be interviewed, in depth, and with specificity. Only a weasel would just blunderbuss these charges and then hide -- and this guy doesn't strike me as the weaselly type. He clearly wants to be interviewed in depth.

I read Sanchez's speech. While Sanchez made some powerful charges, he wasn't all that specific. He accuses the president's advisors, and the State Department, and everyone else for not bringing the full spectrum of American power - economic, political, diplomatic - to the fight. That's a great general statement, but what does it mean in particular? How did the State Department fail? What advisors on the National Security Council sabotaged victory?

  • Specifically, did Rumsfeld or anyone else tell the generals not to request more troops, even while the Administration was claiming that they were giving the generals whatever they asked for? I mean, if you read Sanchez's speech, that is clearly the implication. Why isn't anyone asking Sanchez that specifically?

We can acknowledge the possibility that Sanchez may have some mixed motives, like everyone else. Maybe his story is just sour grapes, but so what? I expect the media to followup with this guy.

  • Let's grant that while Sanchez was in charge, the strategy wasn't working. The administration painted the picture that the White House had turned over the conduct of the war to the military, and wasn't interfering -- and if true, it was Sanchez's strategy that was failing, so he might have sour grapes.
  • Also, the recent news from Iraq is cautiously better than when Sanchez was there -- maybe Petraeus' strategy is working better.
  • Even so, Sanchez was the commander in the field. He deserves to be heard, and if he says something uncomfortable, well, we're adults. I want to hear his facts, his arguments, and his philosophy.

So why aren't they following up? If the media wants to cover their collective posterior by claiming to search for truth, this is a prime opportunity. Because right now, the media is doing exactly what Sanchez is accusing them of doing -- they're exploiting this (like everything else) as just another chance to hurl partisan charges, but they're not following up to get the story straight. Sanchez claimed that the media's desire for the sensational story is interfering with the truth ... and the media's reaction to his speech is proving, no surprise, to be another example of it.

I'd like just once...

For someone to sit down with a Wolf Blitzer type and in a calm and reasoned discussion find out why  he and these reporters, report as they do. I understand that they hate Bush and everything about him but facts on the ground are hard to dispute. Yes, events can be interperted a certain way but when progress is being made how can they say otherwise.

 

They call me Mr. Nieve