Posted By Joshua Keating Share

If you missed it, last night's Colbert Report taped from Baghdad was absolutely phenomenal television, culminating in President Obama making an appearance by satellite to order Gen. Ray Odierno to shave Colbert's head:

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Obama Orders Stephen's Haircut - Ray Odierno
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorStephen Colbert in Iraq

Kudos to Colbert for putting on a great show for the troops and the viewers back home. But given that the show is paired with Colbert stint as "guest editor," of a Newsweek special issue on Iraq, it's fair to ask what exactly the point of this project is. Colbert quipped last night that, "I thought the war was over, because I haven't seen any stories about it in a month," and the show and the magazine seemed to be designed to bring media focus back to a war that Americans haven't been paying much attention to lately.

Newsweek editor Jon Meacham's ultra-meta-editor's note puts it this way:

Some readers and critics will inevitably object, saying that this is a publicity stunt. To them I solemnly say: you are half-right. Of course I am seeking publicity for the magazine. I would argue with the term "stunt," though, but only because of the popular assumption that a stunt is something silly. (The dictionary definition is a feat of daring, but we do not live in the dictionary.) Colbert's involvement is an exercise not in silliness but in satire, and the two are very different things. His role means more attention for NEWSWEEK, yes, and to me that is a good thing. It also brings more readers to a serious subject—and that heightened interest is a good thing, too.

Believe me, as editor of this blog I'm sympathetic to the desire to use celebrity buzz to attract eyeballs (trade secret: the top two Google searches leading readers to Passport right now are "sex photo" and "Susan Boyle") and we've even attempted to harness the power of the Colbert bump ourselves, but I'm skeptical of the idea that "heightened interest" is a good thing in and of itself. 

First of all, I suspect that Colbert's involvement with the issue is going to get quite a bit more attention than the stories within. Second, Iraq is going to be back increasingly back in the news anyway as the planned withdrawal date draws closer, so is there really something to be gained by "drawing attention" to it right now?

Possibly, but it depends what you do with that attention. Colbert (the real person or the character) isn't really saying much new about the war, leaving that to the guests on his show and the "serious" writers in the magazine. Since his TV guests this week are mostly military and Fareed Zakaria's Newsweek cover story about victory in Iraq is the kind of goalpost moving that Colbert has relished mocking for years, it's hard to say that he's making any sort of critique. And it's hard to call this week's shows satire given the free publicity he's giving the president and General Odierno to publicize U.S. achievements in Iraq.

Again, there's nothing wrong with Colbert making great television or Newsweek selling magazines, and I can only imagine how frustrating it must be for troops in Iraq to see the dwindling media coverage of their efforts, but I'm not quite sure that attention on its own, particularly with Colbert himself hogging the spotlight, is really going to do much for them.  

EXPLORE:CELEBS, IRAQ, MEDIA
 

48G FAO

8:35 AM ET

June 10, 2009

Colbert at Al Faw Palace

Lighten up everyone!

How about we stop trying to read to much into this.

As a member of the audience and an occupant of the "palace", it was great to have the Colbert Report here. It definitely accomplished its extant purpose which was to bring some levity and fun to our otherwise serious existence.

 

KENNETH SORENSEN

10:22 AM ET

June 10, 2009

Comedian, maybe. Its a very

Comedian, maybe. Its a very primitive humour, poking fun at everyone, but not Israelis and the millions of New Yorkers supporting this neo-colonial enterprise - the greatest desbilising factor in International politics and the world greatest terror-incentive. If there were no Israel - no War in Afghanistan and Iraq, this is absolutely sure. And porbably no housing-bubble that got punctured, because Alan Greenspan lowered the interest rates too much following 9/11. He -- and the rest of the ruling elite -- was so keen to demonstrate that the U.S. was not deterred, but would keep on regardless. Instead they should have examined whether there perhaps was a problem in U.S Middle East policies, and whether it was disproportionate in some way, and whether it was this that caused 9/11. If we had closed Israel in --say-- 1965, nothing of the following would have happened.

  • 1967: 250.000 Palestinians with Arafat and the rest of their leaders are forced to flee. The humiliation and defeat of the Arab forces in that war 1) prompts the Palestinians to take the matter into their own hands, seing that no one else are able to fight for them and 2) leads to a new phenomenon: Militant Islam, as people all over the Arab world turn to the mosques for the answers that the secular leaders have shown they were unable to provide.
  • 1970: (September) The Palestinian leadership and a few thousand fighters gets kicked out of Jordan, which they had tried to take over. This has two consequences: 1) They flee to Lebanon, where they apparently have a negative influence on the Civil War there. What is certain is that the Civil War starts in 1975 - after they have arrived. And their activities prompts Israel to invade Lebanon in 1978 and again in 1982. Here they encounter and even greater and better organised foe: Hezbollah, founded in 1982 with the explicit goal of kicking the israelis out of Lebanon, which they succeed doing in 2000. 2) It triggers the biggest and most serious terror-campaign the world have ever seen, far out-dwarfing recent hype about -- for the most part -- non-existing terror. The world sees aircraft-hijackings for the first time on a grand scale, and the hostage-taking of eleven Israeli atletes at the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972. 'Only' two got killed by the hostage-takers; the remaining nine, five out of eight hostage-takers and one west-german police-officer are killed in the ensuing gunfight, after the two helicopters -- just given in accordance to an agreement about free transfer away -- cowardly and amateurish are attacked by West-german police.
  • 1973: The Arabs turns the tap in protest against unilateral Western support for Israel in the October-war of that year. This triggers the most severe recession since thee Depression, with prices of all raw-materials -- not just oil -- rising 4 times, followed by the quadroubling of the price of goods and subsequently a quadroubling of salaries. In an attempt to counter the effects of the recession, governments all over the world takes on loans on an unprecedented scale, some of which are still running, - albeit often in a refinanced form.
  • 1982: 1.700 Palestinian women, children and non-weapon carrying men are killed by Christian Falangists in the Sabra Chatilla refugee camp-ara, while Israeli troops are keeping watch close by. All in all 17.000 people, most of them Palestinians are killed in Lebanon during Israels presence there. This was before the Internet and the rapid distribution of news; today they would not have been able to get away with it.
  • 1983: The deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima occurs when a suicide truck-bomb rams the barracks at Beirut International Airport and kills 241 marrines. Needless to say the Americans got dragged in due to the Israelis onheard-of advance right up to Beirut. This was the first time the Americans abandoned their principle of never to intervene directly anywhere in the Arab world, but instead 'hover over the horizon'. The second was Iraq.
  • 1987: The first Intifada. For the first time it dawns on the world that there exist another people in the area, that have had their human rights abused and spat on. Israel tries frantically to quell the unrest with great brutality;
  • 1996: Israel under the leadership of PM and Nobel-laureate, now President, Shimon Peres shells a UN-camp in Qana,the same town where Jesus turned water into wine,- where 102 civilians are hiding, resulting in their death.
  • 2000: Ariel Sharon takes a walk on the Holy Temple Mount, triggering the Second Intifada.
    • 2001: (September)The WTC and Pentagon are attacked by flying fuel-bombs. The Congress was the target as well, because, to quote the official 9/11 report: "It was the greatest source of support for Israel in the US". The architect of the attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's, animosity towards The United states stemmed not from his time there as a student, but because of his violent opposition to U.S. support for Israeli policies towards the Palestinians. If you wish to include other motives, the secondmost important such, was US troops continued stay on holy Saudi soil after the end of hostilities following The Gulf War in 1991. King Fahd had been promised that they would be withdrawn immediately after the war. The guy who was responsibly for their continued stay was the superzionist and -lobbyist Martin Indyk -- an Australian jew, and US-citizen from 1993,-- later US ambassador to Israel.
    • 2001: (October) The invasion of Afghanistan would not have happened without 9/11
    • 2003: The invasion of Iraq, would not have happened without 9/11 (see above) and not without the prodding of Israel, and particularly The Israel Lobby
  • 2003: Israels onslaught on the PA's headquarters in Ramallah
  • 2006: Israel kills 1.100 Lebanese in a brutal onslaught of Lebanon, cripling its infrastructure.
  • 2008-09: Israel kills more than 1.300 Palestinians in its brutal onslaught of Gaza
  • ____

    OBS!, the above is original work by me. It is based of years of following news from the ME, visiting Israel and Egypt, spoken to the people there, putting 2 and 2 together, and figuring out how the problem can be solved. It turns out it can be solved by closing Israel. We must be bold and just go ahead and do it. Nobody in their right mind talks about throwing them into the sea; instead the majority of them will go to The United States, when we shortly introduce Arab Majority Rule, by omitting all the Palestinian refugees and their descendants back to the land they are named after, and let them have a vote, as how they think this land should be governed. And of course the [remaining] Jews should have a vote to. [What do you take me for?]. You cannot have it any more democratic than that; one man one vote.

 

KXB

11:10 AM ET

June 10, 2009

Don't Ask Don't Tell

Colbert took on the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy on Tuesday night's show, and he did it rather cleverly. Rather than focus on the plight of gay soldiers, he focuses on the absurdity of implementing the policy. It is a policy that focuses on the private behavior of troops, by not asking them about their private behavior. The audience seemed enthusiastic and respectful. There may be some in the audience that approve of the policy, and others that don't - but Colbert was sharp enough not to hector either side.

He also showcased the new military - interviewing an Arab-American soldier who enlisted after 9/11, along with a female MP, who pointed out there is no such thing as a "front-line" anymore. So, the idea of keeping women out of combat has been quietly shelved, without fanfare.

 

USAMA2

7:37 PM ET

June 10, 2009

Shark Jumping, Gay Pandering Colbert

Dont Ask Dont Tell (DADT) is a critical issue to discuss? Talking about loosing gay Arab translators who accumulated in that branch of the military?
This is a bogus issue which ignores the fact that there are millions of Arab American citizens who are qualified to be translators but find military service unconscionable.
The US foreign policy has supported imperialism and defended authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, alienating and pushing away Arab Americans. This, when America could benefit from its Arab citizenry now if it was upholding good policies. Instead, sustaining corrupt and despicable policies of invading countries and protecting dictatorships is THE REAL MORAL FAILURE OF AMERICA.

Moreover, only 48% of black and latino boys graduate from high school and over 4000 in every 100,000 black males 18-24 end up in prison. Why isn't Colbert addressing the BIGGER ISSUE of America failing black youth who arent even qualified to join the military?

The majority of gays Colbert is concerned about are white males. White males are not an underprivileged, disadvantaged minority- they dominate America. Sexual conduct is a private matter for the majority of people, except those who make it their public identity. Colbert is merely advocating privileges for aberrant white male sexual conduct. He has failed to confront the manipulation of news and media by the US military in Iraq and Pentagon.
Colbert failed to question US commanders in covering up US atrocities in Iraq.
Colbert played the same game for "the troops" as all the Mainstream media have done.
He sucks, he jumped the shark.

 

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.

Read More