The first casualty of war, according to observers and victims, is really the truth.
There is, in fact, a book with the title “The First Casualty” written in 2005 by Ben Elton. The British author was way ahead of his time even before the advent of “fake news” and “alternative truth.” The government and our legislators are so aghast by the proliferation of “fake news” in social media there is now a proposed law penalizing its purveyors.
But our onion-skinned public officials should look at themselves in the mirror to realize that they, too, in many instances, are guilty of spreading fake news. Spokespersons of public officials are quick to deny reports that hurt their principals. But journalists in the mainstream media will tell you that the first confirmation of a sensational scandal story is a denial by the suspects or people involved.
Some journalists may be accused of writing inaccurate news reports, but this is due to deadline pressure. Journalism, after all, has been called “literature in a hurry.”
That, of course, is no excuse for irresponsible reporting. Anyway, there is an existing libel law punishing the malpractice. The complainant or aggrieved party, however, must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the journalist wrote the story with “malice aforethought.” A ground for dismissal of a libel case is if the plaintiff cannot prove the accused wrote the story maliciously with the intent of maligning and damaging the name and reputation of the aggrieved party.
And so the cycle of denial or confirmation goes on. That social media discovered and learned they have a potent tool to join the fray added to the muddled, heady mix of bashing, cyber-bullying and fake news.
What we are now experiencing is a modern-day Tower of Babel.
There are, however, sober and incisive comments by some officials regarding certain current events.
“The real casualty of this war is the truth,” succinctly said Zia Alonto Adiong, the spokesman of the Marawi City crisis, adding that there is a misconception this is a war between Muslims and Christians. Adiong said this is farthest from the truth. Christians and Muslims have been living peacefully even before the ISIS-backed Maute terrorists laid siege to the city.
Marawi with its many beautiful mosques is home to Muslims who compose 90 percent of the population.
Why, then, did the Maute/ISIS terrorists attack Marawi? One of the reasons given is that ISIS wanted to establish a caliphate in Asia’s predominantly Christian country. What better place for propaganda purposes than in Marawi, Lanao del Sur?
Adiong said a crime was committed against Islam by the Mautes/ISIS group who purveyed a false picture of Muslims as a flock of violent extremists. This is not what Islam preaches, said Adiong who pointed out that the Mautes with their ISIS supporters have a different, violent, ideology, if you can call it an ideology. This violent extremism, nonetheless, still manages to recruit and convert young Muslims to join a dark and sinister world that has no regard for human life.
What god-fearing people (whether they believe in Christ or Mohammed) would commit such atrocities of death and destruction? Survivors in the Marawi siege recount horrific tales of beheading of male victims and the rape of women captives.
There is retribution and punishment for those who commit such horrific crimes. The Mautes are almost wiped out—their leaders Omar Maute and Isnilon Hapilon—were killed Monday by Philippine Scout Rangers sharpshooters using night-vision lens.
With the death of the two leaders, President Duterte declared Marawi liberated. At the same time he warned terrorism might spread to other parts of Mindanao and even to Metro Manila. This he said can be expected because the terrorists want to recover from their setback in Marawi. That of course justifies not lifting martial law in Mindanao just yet.