Political Crossfire Forums

[Chymical]

No Renevent it's because Our troops shoot them.

Whoopsie, I didn't mean to tomahawk your car, sorrrrieeeee

do me a favour.

Our media is government controlled enough to any right-thinking person. Only an apologist for Government incompetence and downright evilness would countenance interferance in reporting of news in a foreign nation. And only someone of questionable conservative outlook would support the addition of more spin and lack of focus on the utter bloodbath that is Iraq in 2006, but then it's the neo-con's and 'your either with us or against us' idiot mentality.

:roll:

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: No Renevent it's because Our troops shoot them.

Whoopsie, I didn't mean to tomahawk your car, sorrrrieeeee

do me a favour.

Our media is government controlled enough to any right-thinking person. Only an apologist for Government incompetence and downright evilness would countenance interferance in reporting of news in a foreign nation. And only someone of questionable conservative outlook would support the addition of more spin and lack of focus on the utter bloodbath that is Iraq in 2006, but then it's the neo-con's and 'your either with us or against us' idiot mentality.

:roll:

Link?

[Chymical]

Do US Troops Target Journalists in Iraq?

Davos, Switzerland from the WEF 2005

This fiery topic became a real nightmare today for the Chief News Executive of CNN at what was an initially very mild discussion at the World Economic Forum titled "Will Democracy Survive the Media?".

At a discussion moderated by David R. Gergen, the Director for Public Leadership, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, the concept of truth, fairness, and balance in the news was weighed against corporate profit interest, the need for ratings, and how the media can affect democracy. The panel included Richard Sambrook, the worldwide director of BBC radio, U.S. Congressman Barney Frank, Abdullah Abdullah, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, and Eason Jordan, Chief News Executive of CNN. The audience was a mix of journalists, WEF attendees (many from Arab countries), and a US Senator from Connecticut, Chris Dodd.

During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.

http://www.forumblog.org/blog/2005/01/do_us_troops_ta.html

[Chymical]

oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: Do US Troops Target Journalists in Iraq?

Davos, Switzerland from the WEF 2005

This fiery topic became a real nightmare today for the Chief News Executive of CNN at what was an initially very mild discussion at the World Economic Forum titled "Will Democracy Survive the Media?".

At a discussion moderated by David R. Gergen, the Director for Public Leadership, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, the concept of truth, fairness, and balance in the news was weighed against corporate profit interest, the need for ratings, and how the media can affect democracy. The panel included Richard Sambrook, the worldwide director of BBC radio, U.S. Congressman Barney Frank, Abdullah Abdullah, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, and Eason Jordan, Chief News Executive of CNN. The audience was a mix of journalists, WEF attendees (many from Arab countries), and a US Senator from Connecticut, Chris Dodd.

During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.

http://www.forumblog.org/blog/2005/01/do_us_troops_ta.html

Awesome. One dude from one panel reported by one blog thinks that the U.S. targets journalists. My eyes have been opened. I apologize for doubting this revelation.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Lumina wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Wouldn't it be nice if the media were actually able to leave the Green Zone without benefit of a military escort?

Wouldn't it be nice if the media were actually able to walk freely anywhere in Iraq without fear of being killed ?

Journalists themselves being in mortal danger to get the story is part of war coverage. They're covering a war. Bullets, mortars, bombs, dead bodies...you know, just like in the movies, but smellier and scarier.

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Wouldn't it be nice if the media were actually able to go to these reconstruction sites you speak of?
One would think if that were possible, the US Military would provide them with the opportunity.

Wouldn't it be nice ?

So you think that the the U.S. military should focus on p.r. tours?

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Unfortunately, the media inside Iraq needs to be embedded with military personnel going out on patrol.
And so forth and so on...

The term "embedded" may be new, but the concept is not. Ever heard of Ernie Pyle, who was killed by a Japanese machine-gunner during WWII?

http://ehistory.osu.edu/world/articles/ArticleView.cfm?AID=3

http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=27695

[/b]

Regarding PR Tours;
chingu wrote: We see article after article from all manner of media that gives us glimps's and snapshots of the most sensational violence in and around Baghdad.
The whole premise of this thread is that the media is not bothering to cover all these great advances happening inside Iraq.
My point was that the media is only allowed to cover while embedded, hence they can not go out anywhere in Iraq, even where reconstruction is occurring due to the level of violence.
The OP makes it sound like the media only desires to cover death and mayhem while neglecting all the wonderful things happening around them.

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

Hmm....I see no backing of your claim here. Whoopsies :lol:

[Chymical]

Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

Hmm....I see no backing of your claim here. Whoopsies :lol:

It's ok , I know reading hurts sometimes. :lol:

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: Do US Troops Target Journalists in Iraq?

Davos, Switzerland from the WEF 2005

This fiery topic became a real nightmare today for the Chief News Executive of CNN at what was an initially very mild discussion at the World Economic Forum titled "Will Democracy Survive the Media?".

At a discussion moderated by David R. Gergen, the Director for Public Leadership, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, the concept of truth, fairness, and balance in the news was weighed against corporate profit interest, the need for ratings, and how the media can affect democracy. The panel included Richard Sambrook, the worldwide director of BBC radio, U.S. Congressman Barney Frank, Abdullah Abdullah, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, and Eason Jordan, Chief News Executive of CNN. The audience was a mix of journalists, WEF attendees (many from Arab countries), and a US Senator from Connecticut, Chris Dodd.

During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.

http://www.forumblog.org/blog/2005/01/do_us_troops_ta.html

Awesome. One dude from one panel reported by one blog thinks that the U.S. targets journalists. My eyes have been opened.
I apologize for doubting this revelation.

Not that I have any info on the topic of reporters being killed by US forces but,
this one dude you allude to is Eason Jordan, Chief News Executive of CNN
Not quite some anonymous blogger on the internet.

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

Hmm....I see no backing of your claim here. Whoopsies :lol:

It's ok , I know reading hurts sometimes. :lol:

Please, point out your backing, if you would be so kind :wink:

[Chymical]

Richard, I wonder how many notes he got to back down and shut up! Somethings gotta account for that missing gigatrillion dollars spent in all this uselessness.

must really stick insome of you guys craw watching iraq turn to poop even in the eyes of conservative media, I wonder if it was this difficult before Vietnam calmed down, and what that does to the faith the ordinary joe has in not only the republican party but the democratic process in general.

[Chymical]

Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

Hmm....I see no backing of your claim here. Whoopsies :lol:

It's ok , I know reading hurts sometimes. :lol:

Please, point out your backing, if you would be so kind :wink:

sorry, better things to do...

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: oh also you can look here for a relatively impartial guide. Check each one and see what proportion include the coalition as much as anyone else. it will surprise you.

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

Hmm....I see no backing of your claim here. Whoopsies :lol:

It's ok , I know reading hurts sometimes. :lol:

Please, point out your backing, if you would be so kind :wink:

sorry, better things to do...


Alright then, thank you very much for your insightful input.

[Chymical]

You are most welcome Renevent my Lord.

[Revenant]

Chymical wrote: You are most welcome Renevent my Lord.

All in a day's work

*escapes it Batmobile*

[BornedAgainandAgain]

Chingu wrote: Wouldn't it be nice if the media were actually doing it's job in Iraq and elsewhere?

We see article after article from all manner of media that gives us glimps's and snapshots of the most sensational violence in and around Baghdad. I'd post a few through links - but we all see them every day in our papers, on the network news, on the cable channels and from AP and Rueters etc.

Wouldn't it be nice if there were a "State of Iraq" regular weekly report coming from the troops of journalists over there?

They could - if they were serious about reporting the news accurately, report on the state of affairs across the IRaqi nation rather than focusing entirely on IED's and Secular violence.

The following is an example of what I am talking about.

"Iraq, this week saw more violence in Sad'r City where shiite and Sunni militias were responsible for seven car bombs, two roadside IED blasts and three suicide bombings that took the lives of over two hundred Iraqis.

No American troops were reported killed in the weeks violent incidents.

Ten bodies were found in a sandy field outside Baghdad. They were the victems of assassination all found with single or double bullet wounds to the backs of their heads. Shiite militia loyal to Al Sadr are thought to be responsible.

Iraqi Police in Fallujah report that they have captured three Sunni radicals who they have charged with building improvised explosive devices.

In Takrit, Iraqi military units accompanied by a US Marine Contingent engaged a pocket of Al Qeada terrorists. A firefight erupted and twelve Al Qeada were killed, three captures. One Iraq Army Sargent was wounded. No Americans were wounded or killed in th brief skirmish.

Iraqi intelligence uncovered a weapons cache complete with a bomb building one room factory in a remote village in teh anbar province. The small deserted building had been in recent use. Apparently, the operators of the facility evacuated before the Iraqi military units moved in.

In Northern Baghdad, Iraq, seven new middle schools were completed in the ongoing reconstruction efforts. Iraqi Security forces were stationed in a perimeter to ward off possible sabotuers or Al Qeada who have been responsible for earlier killings in the area.

In Southern Iraq, children, ages five through seventeen are now going to school on a regular schedule in greater numbers than they had prior to the war in Iraq. There was no reported violence in the Iraqi region South from Baghdad to the borders.

The Kurdish region of Iraq continues to flourish without violence.

The ministry of Oil said wednesday that output from the recently reconstructed northern Tikriti oil fields has been ramped up to the highest level in over twenty years and that Security forces have encountered no threats from Al Qeada or other Saboturs as they had at other reconstructed and operation oil facilities in the north central region of Iraq known as teh Sunni Triangle."

And so forth and so on.

Wouldn't that be nice?

LOL Chingdu, who needs media? WHy not just read the whitehouse and pentagon press release?

[Lumina]

LOL, why set up a bogus either/or construct when there's a wealth of news-alternatives available?

[gavnook]

Revenant wrote: Chymical wrote: No Renevent it's because Our troops shoot them.

Whoopsie, I didn't mean to tomahawk your car, sorrrrieeeee

do me a favour.

Our media is government controlled enough to any right-thinking person. Only an apologist for Government incompetence and downright evilness would countenance interferance in reporting of news in a foreign nation. And only someone of questionable conservative outlook would support the addition of more spin and lack of focus on the utter bloodbath that is Iraq in 2006, but then it's the neo-con's and 'your either with us or against us' idiot mentality.

:roll:

Link?

Here is a link to the Wikipedia article about the Al Jazeera documentary "Control Room". I've seen it, and I think everyone should. The following quote is relevant.

Wikipedia wrote: One of the central focuses of Control Room is on the alleged friendly fire attack against the Baghdad headquarters of Al Jazeera, on 8th April 2003. The film shows footage of the attack, including the firing of a missile by an American A-10 'tankbuster'; the film reports that the alleged target was a group of insurgents who opened fire on coalition forces from within the Al Jazeera building, thus justifying retaliatory fire. Some doubt is expressed within as to whether such an explanation is viable. During the attack, one correspondent working for the news network, Tariq Ayoub, was killed; the film records one subsequent episode during a press conference, when the late Ayoub's wife beseeches journalists to 'tell the truth' concerning her husband's death, for the sake of those innocents already killed during the war.

The same day that witnessed the attacks on Al Jazeera also saw attacks on other news networks: a strike by US troops on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad killed a Spanish TV cameraman and a Reuters cameraman. Claims that US troops were returning fire upon a sniper were 'greeted with incredulity by reporters on the ground, including Sky News reporter David Chater, and at central command in Qatar.'[2] On the same day, Abu Dhabi TV was also hit, 'which means the US forces [had] attacked all the main western and Arab media headquarters in the space of just one day'[3].

[blockhead]

Chingu wrote: In Northern Baghdad, Iraq, seven new middle schools were completed in the ongoing reconstruction efforts. Iraqi Security forces were stationed in a perimeter to ward off possible sabotuers or Al Qeada who have been responsible for earlier killings in the area.

In Southern Iraq, children, ages five through seventeen are now going to school on a regular schedule in greater numbers than they had prior to the war in Iraq. There was no reported violence in the Iraqi region South from Baghdad to the borders.


You think building schools in Iraq is important? Did they not have schools in Iraq before the war? Did our military demolish those schools? Why are we rebuilding/painting schools?

Do you have a link that provides the statistics of pre/war attendence to post/war attendance at schools?

Yes, I need to know more about the schools in Iraq. Why would I want to hear about US troops dying or getting maimed, or 100 bodies showing up daily in the streets. As long as the schools are open and freshly painted.

[jawsome]

It would be nice to see the private, independent media companies acting like the corporations they are and attempt to maximize their profits and satisfy their customers.



Oh, wait...