Conservative media figures attack CNN for airing portions of insurgent video
SUMMARY: Numerous conservative media figures have attacked CNN for broadcasting video footage of insurgents attacking U.S. soldiers in Iraq: Pat Buchanan said that CNN "ought to be treated like Al Jazeera"; Michael Savage even claimed CNN had "committed murder" by airing the video; Brent Bozell asserted that CNN was "cavorting with the enemy to get video to put on the air in the United States to break the will of the American people."
In recent days, conservative media figures have attacked CNN for broadcasting video footage of insurgents attacking U.S. soldiers in Iraq, first shown during the October 18 edition of Anderson Cooper 360. The video, made by insurgents and obtained by CNN "through intermediaries" from the Islamic Army of Iraq, shows apparent sniper attacks on U.S. soldiers. During a portion of the tape aired on CNN, a U.S. soldier is shown sitting in a vehicle while insurgents discuss an imminent sniper attack. As a gunshot is audible, CNN briefly blacked out the video feed. The soldier is then seen slumping over, apparently having been struck. Cooper and others repeatedly referred to the video as "propaganda" during the program. Brief segments of the video were subsequently replayed on the October 19 editions of Anderson Cooper 360, American Morning, CNN Newsroom, and Your World Today, and on the October 23 edition of The Situation Room.
In response to the broadcast, numerous conservative media figures have accused CNN of seeking to undermine U.S. efforts in Iraq and aiding the insurgency by broadcasting the video, while others have falsely claimed that CNN aired footage of U.S. soldiers being killed. Syndicated radio host Michael Savage even claimed CNN had "committed murder" by airing the video. For example:
- On the October 23 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin accused CNN of "figuratively flying the Islamic army flag or the Hezbollah flag on their newscasts." Host Bill O'Reilly asked Malkin, "I want to know as much about Iraq as possible. And I think the military wants to know as much about Iraq as possible. Isn't it -- isn't it if you get that kind of a video and you explain what's going on, doesn't that help us a little bit?" Malkin replied, "If you're going to run this thing the way they ran it and negotiate directly with the Islamic army or any terrorist group, you have to be very mindful of being used as a tool."
- On the October 23 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country, political analyst Pat Buchanan said of CNN, "I mean, look, if they're going to play the Al Jazeera game, they ought to be treated like Al Jazeera on the battlefield and in the White House and everywhere else." Buchanan further referred to the videotape as a "snuff film."
- On the October 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Media Research Center (MRC) president L. Brent Bozell III asserted that CNN was "cavorting with the enemy to get video to put on the air in the United States to break the will of the American people." In an October 24 MRC press release, Bozell echoed Buchanan by calling the video a "terrorist snuff film."
- In an October 24 editorial, The Washington Times wrote of CNN: "Their goal here is to undermine the war effort, even if that means being a mouthpiece for terrorist propaganda." The editorial also falsely claimed that the video included footage of soldiers being killed, writing: "Instead of heroism, we see unsuspecting American soldiers being dropped one by one."
- During the October 19 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage attacked CNN and correspondent Michael Ware, who obtained the video for Anderson Cooper 360. Of Ware, Savage said, "I'd like to take this guy and put piano wires through his ears ... I would make certain this guy never sees the light of day again for what he just did. He killed one of our men. He just killed one of our men." Savage further charged repeatedly that "CNN has committed murder," and stated, "[Y]ou don't see it that way. You psychopathic left-wing scum think that that's freedom of the press. This is not freedom of the press. This is murder. This is cold-blooded murder." CNN obtained the film after it was recorded; Ware was not present when the insurgents were firing on U.S. troops.
- On the October 20 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called CNN's airing of the video "terrorist propaganda, essentially," and asserted that the "unvarnished truth, that is CNN's, is that America sucks, that America is to blame, America deserves to lose." Limbaugh also claimed that CNN is "in league with the snipers."
Media Matters for America issued a press release on October 24 responding to Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), who called for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to remove CNN from the military's embedded journalist program because "CNN has now served as the publicist for an enemy propaganda film." Hunter was joined by Reps. Brian Bilbray (R-CA) and Darrell Issa (R-CA) in making the request.
From the October 23 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: On the CNN program Anderson Cooper 360, video from the terrorist group Islamic Army of Iraq was used in a report about sniper attacks on American troops. Apparently, CNN got the video directly from the terrorists by way of a third-party negotiation. Well, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Duncan Hunter, is outraged and wants CNN reporters removed from the battlefield. CNN says it has an obligation to report the war in Iraq in a, quote, "unvarnished way," unquote. Mr. Cooper is on vacation.
With us now, Fox News analyst Kirsten Powers and in Washington, Michelle Malkin, two ladies who never go on vacation. Always at the ready to discuss this. All right, Michelle. What do you think?
MALKIN: I think it's reprehensible, and let me tell you why. CNN has a founder who, just a couple of weeks ago, said that there was a problem with flying the American flag on American newscasts. And he was, of course, implicitly criticizing this network for doing so. These people think that we should never take sides in the war, and particularly this war on terror. But they have no problem figuratively flying the Islamic army flag or the Hezbollah flag on their newscasts. And it's all about the context. It's not just the airing of this sniper video, which undermines troop morale and undermines continuing support for what we're doing there, but it's also a whole history at CNN of choosing the wrong side, whether it's 1998 during the Tailwind scandal, when they falsely accused the -- our military of poisoning defectors in Laos during the Vietnam War. Or whether it's more recently during the Israeli-Lebanon conflict, where you had Anderson Cooper admitting, yes, you know, there are Hezbollah guerrilla fighters who are orchestrating our coverage, and they just make stuff up. They're driving around ambulances trying to concoct scenes of emergency. Or more recently Nic Robertson at CNN, who basically admitted belatedly that Hezbollah was again basically directing the news segments for CNN.
O'REILLY: Yeah, they can't get into that -- they can't get into those areas unless they cooperate. But look, I don't know about morale, because everybody in Iraq knows they have snipers that are trying to kill them. So I don't know why morale would be -- would be driven down by using that footage. And that's what I want to get into. CNN, you're right, looks at itself as an international network, not an American network. There's no question it does. And it does give moral equivalency to other nations' point of view, vis-a-vis ours. [CNN chief international correspondent] Christiane Amanpour does that all day long. OK? That's their choice. They can do it. It's America. They can do it. People can watch or not watch. But this thing here is interesting. I want to know as much about Iraq as possible. And I think the military wants to know as much about Iraq as possible. Isn't it -- isn't it if you get that kind of a video and you explain what's going on, doesn't that help us a little bit?
MALKIN: Well, look, I believe in telling the unvarnished truth about what's happening in Iraq, as well. But again, it's about the context. And if you're going to run this thing the way they ran it and negotiate directly with the Islamic army or any other terrorist group, you have to be very mindful of being used as a tool.
From the October 23 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country:
SCARBOROUGH: Pat Buchanan, CNN's saying that what it did was actually a tribute to servicemen who died over in Iraq. What's your take?
BUCHANAN: Oh, cut it out, for heaven's sakes! This is a -- an assassination of American soldiers, a series of assassinations of American soldiers. It's not news. It shows how these people went about killing these Americans. It's a propaganda film for the enemy to encourage the enemy and to show what a fine job they're doing killing the imperialist invaders. That thing should not have been shown. But worse than that, Joe, what about the reaction -- the president of the United States -- sons and daughters -- these are our fellow Americans over there, and the president is their commander-in-chief. What does he have to say about CNN, presumably an American network, showing films of how these soldiers who are under him are being taken down and killed and shot to death? I mean, look, if they're going to play the Al Jazeera game, they ought to be treated like Al Jazeera on the battlefield and in the White House and everywhere else!
STEVE ADUBATO (TV host): Joe?
BUCHANAN: I find this really -- I mean, this is appalling! Look, I'm not for this war. This is a snuff film, is what it is!
From the October 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
COLMES: You know, Brent, Duncan Hunter the congressman from California is calling for the Pentagon to yank any embedded reporter from CNN. Whether or not we agree that that should or should not have been shown, should the government get involved in terms of editing like that what a news organization does?
BOZELL: Well, in the first place I think, Alan, what you said in one of the promos was exactly right when you called this a terrorist snuff film. That's what it is. It's not an insurgency video, as CNN calls it, it's a terrorist snuff film. I think that Duncan Hunter is entirely correct to raise questions about it. Look, you know, to me, this is the height of something truly appalling that American men and women right now are risking their lives, putting their lives on the line, defending these journalists, who are right now also cavorting with the enemy to get video to put on the air in the United States to break the will of the American people. I think there's something really horrific in this, and what in the world we're doing defending them and protecting their lives and putting our good men's lives on the line for this -- I don't understand it.
COLMES: The issue is: Should the U.S. government be able to stop a news organization from airing this kind of footage? Should they get in the middle of this? And should the government be the arbiter of what gets on the air?
BOZELL: Well, listen, I don't think that suggestion that the government be the arbiter of what's on the air. I think the government is saying what in the world are we doing defending, putting our men's lives on the lines, defending the lives of these people who are working against American interests?
From an October 24 Washington Times editorial:
A new Hollywood movie about the battle of Iwo Jima opened last week right about the time CNN began airing footage it obtained from terrorists showing U.S. soldiers being killed with sniper fire. It is a fitting contrast. The movie tells the story of the three surviving GIs who were immortalized on film raising the flag over Mt. Suribachi. The CNN tape shows the exact opposite: Instead of heroism, we see unsuspecting American soldiers being dropped one by one. No flag raising, no glory; just another dead U.S. soldier.
Of course the Mt. Suribachi photograph is a distortion. The United States did win the battle, but long after the flag had been raised. In fact, three of the flag raisers would never leave the island alive. In 36 days of fighting, there were more than 25,000 U.S. casualties -- one out of every three men -- of which nearly 7,000 were killed. By comparison, in the Iraq war's 1,680 days, the United States has lost 2,800 troops. Yet that single photograph further roused Americans to keep confidence in final victory.
Which brings us to Sen. John Kerry's defense of CNN's decision to air the terrorist footage: "As painful as the images of war are, it's important to understand what soldiers go through." If there had been a CNN equivalent in 1945, would it have been important to air footage of Japanese machine guns mowing down GIs as they waded ashore? Imagine watching hundreds of Americans being killed in one day of battle. Japan's imperial government couldn't have asked for a better propaganda weapon. The impact on a war-weary America would certainly have been emotionally crushing for those with sons and husbands still in battle, and might well have played in to antiwar sentiment. But it is much more damaging today when the nation is not as fully united as it was during World War II.
But let's take Mr. Kerry and CNN at their word and assume that this type of footage has journalistic merit. It follows that CNN should also have shown its hours of footage from September 11. We're talking about the people trapped in the World Trade Center who decided to jump and the other grisly images most Americans have never seen. Or what about the tape showing Iraqi terrorists beheading Nick Berg? CNN has kept this footage locked away out of some faux sensitivity for Americans' fragile spines. The only way one can see the full horror of September 11 and other terrorist carnage is by downloading amateur videos off the Internet.
In a mind-numbing article on Sunday, Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi also defended CNN's decision, because, as she understands it, Americans are too dim to appreciate the reality of war. "Without a draft, it is easy for the rest of the country to tune out casualties," she wrote. "Much of what is seen on television makes war feel as bloodless as a video game."
This sort of forced logic does a poor job of masking CNN's and its defenders' real motives. Their goal here is to undermine the war effort, even if that means being a mouthpiece for terrorist propaganda.
From the October 19 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: There's another story I want to get to right now. As you know, CNN is a -- is a traitorous network. It's not just a liberal network; it's actually walked over to the other side, crossed over a long time ago. Today, they hit a new bottom. One of their reporters in the following clip can be seen -- or heard, rather -- translating as Iraqi snipers are shooting U.S. troops on video, and listen to what you hear in clip one:
WARE [audio clip]: Wait, wait, he fell down. "God is great," says one of the team as they disappear until it's time for the next strike in Iraq's sniper war.
SAVAGE: I'd like to take this guy and put piano wire through his ears. I don't know what to say to you anymore, and the reason a man like Michael Ware of CNN and CNN itself can get away with running this kind of tape as one of our boys is being shot by an enemy sniper is because of the corruption and the lack of leadership in this country. Mark my words, if we had a real president, this piece of crap would be picked up and he would be tried in this country for crimes against our troops. Mark my words, if we had a real leader, this guy wouldn't last another day. But because we have corruption and because we have weakness, they are running all over our country. Listen to clip two:
WARE [audio clip]: A sniper is watching these America soldiers. You're looking at the unobstructed view from the sniper team's vehicle and they are waiting for their moment as the soldiers mingle with Iraqi civilians. "People are around them," warns the sniper's spotter, who seems to be operating the video camera. "Want me to find another place?" "No, no," comes the reply. "Give me a moment." And then [sound of gunshot] the soldier falls forward. You hear the sniper's vehicle start, and they slip away.
SAVAGE: So I would get this guy tomorrow. I'd send Special Force teams out to find Michael Ware; I would snatch him from wherever in Britain he's hiding; I'd put a mask over his head; I'd put him on a Learjet; I'd fly him back to America; I'd take him to Gitmo [Guantánamo Bay, Cuba]; and I would make certain that this guy never sees the light of day again for what he just did. He killed one of our men. He just killed one of our men. But no, you don't see it that way. You psychopathic left-wing scum think that that's freedom of the press. This is not freedom of the press. This is murder. This is cold-blooded murder.
Now, Bush has nothing to say about it; Rumsfeld has nothing to say about it; but they'll be glad to prosecute your son if he was in the military if he did his job a little too well. Why doesn't Bush have anything to say about this? Where is the great commander in chief? When you're listening to a so-called reporter gleefully reporting as the enemy shoots and kills one of our men -- I'd like to find out which one of our men was just killed. I'd like to find out which one of our men just lost an arm or a leg. And I would like to talk to that family, I would like to pay for that family to hire a lawyer to prosecute both CNN and Michael Ware, and I'd like them to sue them for everything they're worth. That's what I'd like to do. But no, that won't happen because the international sluts, called lawyers, would say that this is simply a reporter doing his job. OK, I can get very angry right now, but I'm going to resist it. I don't want to get angry. Listen to clip three:
WARE [audio clip]: Here, the spotter warns the shooter he only sees Iraqis 'til he's sure he's identified an American. "I'll read you his name --"
SAVAGE: Do you hear this? Do you hear this? Listen to clip five:
[begin audio clip]
WARE: So the insurgents do have accurate sniper fire?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger. Yeah -- to what I've observed, two very good shots that were definitely more than 300 meters away that aim to kill.
WARE: So it's a trained sniper?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.
WARE: Probably working in a team with an observer?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, that -- one of the tactics -- you know, the local community, they talk to us about what they see, and they said that they saw a car pull up, a guy get out of the back seat -- get out the front seat, climb into the back seat and move a panel from off his car and aim from the car to our rooftop position, which unfortunately resulted in the death of one -- of one Marine who was on the rooftop.
[end audio clip]
SAVAGE: CNN has committed murder. CNN has committed murder. I want charges brought against CNN, and I'll be right back.
From the October 20 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: Stand by, audio sound bites -- let's see -- nine, 10, and, I think, 11. I don't know how many of you have seen this. CNN is airing video footage that is disgusting. It is terrorist propaganda, essentially. It is videotape which shows snipers in Iraq killing American servicemen. Now, we can't see the video of 9-11, because we don't have the mental toughness. "It's too soon. It's too traumatic." We can't see that again on the news. And we can't see pictures of Americans, innocent Americans jumping from the higher floors of the World Trade Center, committing suicide to avoid burning to death. No, no, no, we can't see that, but we can see videotape on CNN of U.S. soldiers being shot by snipers in Iraq. Now, CNN's not entirely insensitive. They do fade to black before the moment of impact when the soldier dies. I wonder if terrorists were taking sniper-type potshots at journalists running around, CNN would find that newsworthy. "A CNN executive said Thursday the network's effort to present the unvarnished truth." -- let's face it, CNN: The "unvarnished truth" to you is not the unvarnished truth of reality. The unvarnished truth that is CNN's is that America sucks, that America is to blame, America deserves to lose.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: So CNN's in league with the snipers, has a contact somehow. Do you think they would ever impart the information to the U.S. military so that these guys could be dealt with? No, of course they can't get involved. CNN cannot violate its cherished principles of journalism by choosing sides, it can't do that. It is just there reporting what's going on -- and here is Anderson Cooper after the report.
COOPER [audio clip]: Just a production note. We dipped to black at points in that report so as not to show the moment of a bullet's impact, and I should just restate that sniper video and the interview with the insurgent that you just saw are exclusive to CNN.
LIMBAUGH: Oh, good.
COOPER [audio clip]: Sniper videos have appeared on the Internet and elsewhere on Arab-language stations around the world; this video has not.
LIMBAUGH: Oh, good, Anderson, it's for ratings! You want us to know that it's exclusive to CNN. I'll tell you what I take from that. The insurgents think they're in bed with you.
Not just media figures. I saw some stories where legislators were calling for the banning and suppression of this stuff to be shown.
I know I'm not suppose to say so, and put up the front, but I would have been happy to see this footage only if the target at the other end of the barrel was a fat drug addict bloviating propagandist.
Don't they have a season for Republican Pundits hunting, or is that the November elections.
I have not seen the video because I don't get cable, or dish TV though I would not have watched it anyway. I have seen death enough, I don't consider it entertainment, exept when it is legal hunting season, and I have a tag.
Imagine drawing Rush, it would be kind of anti-climatic, so fat, so helplessly drugged.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Necon orders to Mainstream Media: Don't show the realities of war, victims getting killed on either side, coffins of US soldiers returning, don't talk about the number dying, put the Iraq war on page 6 of the newspapers, attack anyone against the war as supporting terrorists, a traitor, or someone who cuts and runs (except for Bush 1 in Iraq, and Bush 2 in Afghanistan). Remember it was only last spring when the media was reporting that they weren't reporting enough of the good stories in Iraq. What happened to that story?
the insurgents could just produce a weekly propoganda film for CNN.
They could sell anti-war democratic campaign ads along with ACLU and CAIR ads to get some extra revenue to pay for this free programming.
Too bad Tokyo Rose just died, or they could have hired her to do the narration.
During WWII, Ernie Pyle was a great writer. Not always "friendly", but is this what you hate?
[link to www.private-art.com]
How about the Normandy invasion?
[link to www.normandy1944.com]
Maybe you don't like this type of propoganda:
[link to www.authentichistory.com]
How about Bill Mauldin? Exactly like many of our current pundits. Hang him?
[link to www.awon.org]
"Those officers who were raised in the army during peacetime were generally offended by Mauldin, who parodied the spit-shine and obedience to order without question view that was more easily maintained during that time of peace. General George Patton once summoned Mauldin to his office and threatened to "throw his ass in jail" for "spreading dissent". This after one of Mauldin's cartoons made fun of Patton's demand that all soldiers must be clean-shaven at all times, even in combat. But Dwight Eisenhower, the Supreme Commander, told Patton to leave Mauldin alone, because he felt that Mauldin's cartoons gave the soldiers an outlet for their frustrations."
Which of the above do you want to do away with for your dream of blind obedience to your fuhrer?
Maybe you didn't get the memo, but your kind is not permitted to use the correct title of the "Democratic Party" to describe the Democratic Party. You're supposed to say "democrat" party.
It's time that Americans saw what was is. Today, we're led to believe war is glorious and honorable. It is no such thing. It is man at his absolute worst, on both sides. It's well past the time for our citizens to have their eyes opened to the evil that has been unleashed in our names.
" It's well past the time for our citizens to have their eyes opened to the evil that has been unleashed in our names. "
You wooos. What kind of animal will decide that America started this war on terrorism? What kind of idiot thinks America is responsible for actions taken by an evil religion? You take sides with an enemy that kills women and children just to show that they can, and call Americans the stupid ones. Terrorists kill to create terror and YOU say "good for them", then try to tell us that YOU are right? You are a long way from being right. Perhaps you should just move to Iraq and join the terrorists, you already seem to give all the support you can to them!
You should ease up on the hate. It won't solve anything. You call me an animal, stupid, a wooos (whatever the hell that means) and implied I was an idiot. You might be right. Maybe you need a little time on the front lines to understand that no one can describe the truth about war. It must be experienced, first hand.
Only they are allowed to exploit war imagery. Only they are permitted manipulate people with fear.
It doesn't matter what you show on TV. We all know thar war is hell. Maybe some don't. Savage and Billy O. likes to paint a rosey picture but I think that the American people needs to see what war is really like and then they might not be so quick about giving an idiot the OK to start one on such false pretences. but did you notice how brave Savage is while he is sittint at his keyboard. Do you think he would be the same if he thought someone had him in their sights. Johnny Strawther
"Luger, $100 ... camera, $150 ... Iron Cross, $12 ... it is good to be captured by Americans."
Sound familiar?
F'n crybabies . . . If Malkin, Rush Limpballs, Savage Wiener, and Bull O'Really are so concerned about news coverage from Iraq, why don't they get off their arses, go over there - outside the green zone - and report all the "good news"?
So CNN airs a video showing the insurgents . . . that is harsh - but - know what that's called? REALITY. Sorta gets in the way off all that talk about us being greeted as liberators and the insurgency being in its last throes, eh Leatherhead?
For people who claim the insurgents "hate us for our freedom", you guys sure don't mind practicing censorship . . .
I think if CNN can show a film of muslims shooting Americans, why can they not do the same for our side? This crap about being sensitive to the muslims is just an excuse. If you are going to be fair, one needs to do the same for both sides. I feel if these journalist think this is fun and news worthy watching Americans get shot, why are we protecting them. A true person on our side would turn in these scum bags to our soliders for our side to kill. The problem with our media is it tries to please the muslims too much! If we would have had these journalist and media reporters in WWII we all would be speaking German!
So you want US soldiers to shoot journalists for showing the realities of war? Did you complain loudly when al-Jazeera was showing the victims of US bombs and bullets? I bet you did.
The more of the enemy that dies the better the chance we have to win the WAR on terror. When cowards hide behind children, women, and elderly people that is the price those people pay for associating with the terrorist. Who cares what happens to the other side, we need to win the war and not worry about who and what we kill! I guess you dumb butts would have opposed the dropping of the nukes in WWII because some innocent people would have been killed. You rather see our troops die so the enemy can win! Wow, our country is sunk, get out the United Nations Flag and throw away the stars and strips to make liberals happy! Journalist who also associate with terrorist are traitors and need to be shot!
"The more of the enemy that dies the better the chance we have to win the WAR on terror. When cowards hide behind children, women, and elderly people that is the price those people pay for associating with the terrorist."
-----
Who is the enemy? The innocents the terrorists hide behind without their knowledge or permission? Yeah, right, kill all the elderly and children, because the GOP cowards know they can't fight back. They knew Sadaam didn't have any WMD, because if he had they wouldn't have attacked Iraq, thinking they might have had the ability to fight back. North Korea has nukes, you can bet the GOP isn't thinking of attacking them. The last great GOP war? The heavily-fortified world powerhouse called Grenada. They couldn't fight back either, so the GOP went ahead and invaded.
Also, there is no such thing as a WAR on terror. Terror is an emotion. You may as well have a WAR on sadness or a WAR on altruism. It may be possible to have a WAR on terrorISM, but it wouldn't be easy and might require sacrifice, and Americans who are asked to sacrifice won't vote GOP any more, so the effort by the ruling class probably won't happen any time soon.
The GOP rules of war are "kill everyone, including innocents, because we can't tell who a terrorist may be, and once everyone of a certain religion is dead, there will be no more terrorism. And don't worry about taking care of our troops who come home wounded, they're only of value to us while they're being asked to die for nothing. That why we'll cut funding for Veterans while giving another huge tax cut to the comapnies who got rich gouging them while they were in theater."
And the right and the GOP wonder why they hate us.
The leaders of this country have reduced the symbol of the nation to the stars and "Strips". That's all that's left after the Neo-cons have destroyed our constitution.
So you want to shoot journalists to terrorize the others into only showing what you want shown on tv or only reporting what you want reported? Hmmmm, don't that make you a "terrorist wanna-be"?
I have no idea whether or not this story has been reported in the US and if so what footage is show, but with regards to Rush Limbaugh's comments about how CNN wouldn't show footage of journalists being shot at. Over here in the UK our news programmes have showed footage of the ITN reporter Terry Llyod veing shot at by US Marines to which he unfortunately lost his life. They also played the Marines audio recording (which has an explained gap in it, the American authorities say they don't know why this is and this is how the recording was given to them). This is an innocent man being killed unlawfully and the footage is shown, we have no problem with this footage being aired in the UK. This is the harsh and horrible reality of war and if people are going to preach and comment so vociferously about the war then they should allow and support the airing of such footage so that those of us who wish to examine the evidence ourselves and make our own judgements can do so.
We seem to have little problem with showing Iraq and Palestine's dead on news coverage, so why no show footage like this. Whether it is American, Iraqi or Palestinian doesn' matter, they are all essentially human lives.
Were these same folks whimpering about bad media coverage in 1993 when the Rangers/Delta crews were shown in footage where at least two of them were dragged through the streets?
I remember some of that footage being USED BY CONSERVATIVES as a propaganda tool against Democrats.
They used footage of the hostages in Iran in '80 as propaganda footage against Democrats.
What we are looking at here is simply media footage being reported; its not even being used politically the way the GOP have done in several instances in the past.
I haven't read the entire Scarborough transcript but I could swear Pat "Never-Met-a-Nazi-War-Criminal-He-Didn't-Like" Buchanan (formerly of the Nixon White House) said something like: " I don't want the American People seeing stuff like this " -- denoting the CNN & similar video footage.
So much for Freedom of the Press...again...as usual...
GOP Mess AmeriKKKa...
====
Limbaugh should be treated “hog-appropriately”…
====
If they don't have a problem showing someone's son getting killed, why don't they show the insurgents getting killed by our soldiers????? I would love that.
I wouldn't "love" to see footage of anyone being killed.
What's your definition of "insurgent?" The founding fathers of America and the Revolutionary Army would have fit the definition of "insurgent," as formulated by the British, also. I'm not equating the two, but, as the line from The Princess Bride goes, "I do not think that word means what you think it does."
I cannot believe you have the nerve to compare our founding fathers to the dirt bag insurgents! Did the founders of this country drive wagons into civilian areas and blow up civilians? Did the founding fathers want to create a Christian state to convert and conquer the whole world to Christianity? Did the founders want the bible to rule the country? Did the founders want to tell you what to do, or did they not want you to have freedom? Did they want to kill women because they did not dresses correctly? Did they go and kidnapp people and then behead them? Was the battle of Yorktown and Sarratoga a terriorist style battle? Did the founders have sleeper cells in England and other countries ready to kill innocent people? You need to reread your History and know what Washington and his buddies stood for! If you think cave dwellers are equal to our founding fathers you need to leave this great country and go live in the caves with the terrorist! Would the cave dwellers allow you the freedom of speech against them?
I believe that showing American soldiers getting killed serves the purpose and goal that CNN and the MSM are working toward...undermining our efforts in the war and basically reinforcing their "lose at any cost" campaign. Hell, they are reluctant to even show footage of the planes hitting the towers anymore but they have no problem showing snuff film of our soldiers getting shot? I don't recall ever seeing coverage of an enemy fighter being killed in action. Heaven forbid they might offend the terrorist...how about not offending Americans? Showing this footage was offensive to many Americans but CNN could care less. And for all those people who think this is something we need to see so we can know how bad war is...well duh! War IS bad. People GET killed. But war is sometimes a necessary evil and in this case our efforts are honorable and necessary to defend our country. Maybe one day we can all become so civil, so refined and enlightened that war will no longer be necessary on this planet. But until our enemies are on board with that plan we will need to defend ourselves and fight against people who attack us and want to prevent us from living our lives.
CNN is helping the terrorist by broadcasting this terrorist recruiting video and I think it borders on treason. Their coverage is predictably biased toward anything that hurts the U.S. and its allies. If CNN can't do better than this they should be removed from imbedded positions on the battlefield.
Why would this video make a non-terrorist want to be a terrorist?
We are dealing with people who have been taught from birth that it is a good thing to kill the "evil Americans". When video of the supposed "evil Americans" being shot is shown to people with a pre-disposed hatred of Americans it inspires them to join the fight and kill some Americans too. This is how they inspire their people to fight. This is a recruiting video in every sense of the word.
Then isn't footage of the planes hitting the towers the same thing?
snipers shooting the enemy is an everyday occurrence in war. No reason to show it except to inspire others to join in or undermine our efforts in Iraq. Commercial airplanes hitting skyscrapers in NYC is not an everyday occurrence in war and was instead a barbaric, unprovoked attack. Those are two completley different things. Has the WTC video inspired many people to take up arms to defend the country...the greatest and most compassionate country in the world by any standard? Yes, of course it has. Anyone with an ounce of patiotism would be inspired to step up and defend our country after seeing that. But to believe that the two videos are the same thing IMO is just crazy.
Nobody's saying they're the same thing, only that they could have the same effect of terrorist recruitment.
Considering the "evil Americans" have bombed their country and invaded their homeland and destroyed their infrastructure and killed their women and children to the tune of 650,000 in just the last three to four years alone, not to mention the more than one million killed in the 12 years before that and the thirty-plus years of unconditional support we give to the Israelis to kill people on the other side of the Lebanon Mountains....gee, I wonder why they hate us.
I don't know why you bothered to put the words "evil Americans" in quotes since that is obviously what YOU believe to be true.
No, you just wish that we thought that way, CB. You want to demonize the left. You want the left to look as bad as possible, especially before Congressional elections. Open your eyes. I believe I'm safe in saying that no American believes that the U.S. or Americans are evil. The war prosecuted by Bush is evil. Most people can see the difference, except you Conservatives who see everything in black or white, for us or against us. It's sad that you're trapped that world. Opening your eyes might help you a bit.
CSL
"We are dealing with people who have been taught from birth that it is a good thing to kill the 'evil Americans'."
-----
And Americans have been taught from birth that we do not torture, and that we are for freedom.
Yet we now send prisoners to foreign countries to be tortured, knowing they will be tortured, for the express purpose torturing them. And when we use our freedom to speak up about it, we are told we shouldn't use our freedom of speech. The GOP has abridged the Bill of Rights so that the entire document now reads simply, "Congress shall make no law."
The GOP America: Land of the free (who better not act free or use any of those freedoms), and home of the craven GOP.
You're running late for your family reunion that is being held at a large hotel in downtown New York City. You get a call from an interrogator at a prison overseas (o.k...I know it's far fetched) who tells you not to go because terrorist have stormed the hotel where your family is and have taken them all hostage. Your children are being held with a large knife at their throats, the terrorist are all chanting "god is great" and they have promised to kill your whole family starting in five minutes if their demands are not met. The interrogator tells you that he has a man in custody that has information that will defuse the situation and assure that your family will not be harmed. The problem is, the prisoner refuses to reveal the information. The interrogator, realizing your position on torture, asked for direction...he says "I know I can get the info but I will need to start cutting off his fingers one by one to do it." If he does it, your family survives. If he doesn't, your family all die. What would you tell him to do?
Government policy can't be based on these extremely rare "hypotheticals". This isn't a TV show. And it's also no longer the nation that I was born in. We've allowed the Bush Administration to make America the worlds bully, without morals or principles.
We have become what we fear. We've allowed our enemies to change us, we've become more like them.
Hypotheticals do nothing to further the discussion. They only serve as tangeants - making the reader take their eye off the topic at hand. Please stick to facts. The hypothetical, well, you can stick that elsewhere.
like your hypothetical interogater already has all the information. Also if the terroists are already in control and making demands what information could the detainne have that would possibly help. In fact, our president has already stated that the terrorists are constantly changing their tactics Therefore under Bush's own argument any information held by a terrorist who had been in custody for more than 24 hours would be useless anyway. If this man was in custody would not the terrorists at large have already changed the tactics to neutralize this threat to their plans? Which hypothetical makes more sense?
Who got killed? The Pentagon reported that the soldier shot by the sniper survived.
Again, who was killed? Why the uproar?
Are you uncomfortable seeing one of our own shot? Then maybe you should question the war, not the media.
So the right-wingers are waving the flag and expressing outrage over the airing of this piece on three grounds: 1 it was inhumane and anti- American to show a killing on the air; 2 it was an intrusion on the privacy of the deceased and his or her family to air this piece(even though we can't know the victims identity) 3 it is a rebroadcast of terrorist propaganda piece
Resonse: 1 it wasn't inhumane when Hannity, Linbaugh and FOX news showed the Daniel Pearl tape repeatedly to show how brutal the terrorists were ? And that was much more graphic than this piece; 2 after promising not to use 9-11 for political self-promotion, Bush's first tv ads in '04 showed flag covered bodies being removed from the rubble of the WTC. When objections to the privacy of the victims were voiced, Karen Hughes,Ken Melhman, Rush Limbaugh and others immediately defended the ads; 3 at this very moment the RNC is spending millions to broadcast election ads which use footage of bin laden and al zawahari propaganda videos for the purpose of promoting themselves
From Bush to Malkin and the rest of the Nut Cases, appear to spout their bile before their daily colonic. I am absolutely amazed that these people get paid for this spew. I suspect, that different cultures raise their children differently. I was always taught that if you cannot be civil, polite and courteous to others, then you must expect to be treated in a like fashion. After living in the US for 30 years, I still cannot fathom how people can fatten their wallets by indulging in mindless name calling, which sort of tells one a litlle about their IQ being equivelant to their belt size. Did I forget about Tucker..sorry!
You will do ANYTHING to undermine our troops! Even trying to dishearten them with these SNUFF films! You guys have got to be working against us ALL the time! How do you justify this PROPOGANDA?! The Islamofascists WANT the media to show this.. YOU ARE HELPING THEIR CAUSE YOU TRAITORS!! Do you think in a million years the US media of yesteryear would've shown footage of our troops being mowed down at Pearl Harbor? NO... IT IS LIBERALISM THE MENTAL DISORDER AT WORK!
How do you justify attacking a country that was not involved with any terrorist attacks against the US and killing hundreds of thousands of people, many of them women and children? What was the plan? To "terrorize" the rest of the Middle East into obeying US commands?
If you actually support the troops, you'd demand them to be brought home and the people who started this war crime and used them as weapons of mass destruction to be placed on trial and jailed for consecutive life sentences.
They are killing themselves.... Stupid morons they are.......
"They are killing themselves.... Stupid morons they are......."
-----
And the brothers who killed brothers in the American Civil War were all geniuses?
But you seem to be falling into the trap of underestimating our enemies. We've done this before. That's a plan for sure disaster. If they were morons, and all of the other things so many people have called them, don't you think the best military in the world would have eliminated them by now? To me they seem resourceful and determined. And when you face someone like this, on their own turf, it's a hard and brutal slog. No one in power in this country seems to have taken that into consideration this time.
So it wasn't US forces that invaded Iraq? It wasn't US Marines that flattened Fallujah? It wasn't US Special Forces caught helping a death squad kill innocent civilians? How can we have all those troops over there shooting and bombing and blowing stuff up and NOT be killing them?
I guess it’s easy to point fingers and say that the US is the bad side in this WAR... I guess it makes sense when you look at how many idiots we have in this country who are more concerned with protecting the guilty then they are with helping the innocent.
Did you actually believe this WAR would end in Afghanistan? If you did, you might as well go join radical Islam, because that is what is going to eventually happen with liberal idiots leading this country. WE ARE AT WAR. I thought 9-11 was a clear view into the future of America, but I guess for many it was just "a terror attack". Do you honestly believe that if we wouldn't have gone into Iraq that the terrorists would have stopped? What if we had killed Osama Bin Laden? Would we have stopped future terrorist attacks against our country? Obviously not, because we have not heard from him now in a long time and yet terrorism is still growing. Lets take a step back and see how our past government delt with terrorism. Clinton ignored the 1993 bombing of the WTC and refused to label it as it should have been... the beginning of the terrorists bringing the fight to us. He failed to stop funds going from this country to organizations supporting terrorism. Don’t you find it ironic that most Americans in the mid-90s never even knew the name Al Qaeda even after they were linked to 4-6 terrorist attacks? Our government failed to do its job to inform and protect this country. The writing was on the wall, just as it is today. I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, I am an American.
Lets compare: Almost 30,000 troops died in a month when we took Normandy, and you liberals are crying over a 2 year old war with only 2,000 US troops killed? Wow, I sure am glad we had more faith in WWII then we do now, or we would all be living in Germany. We were far enough away from the war in Europe to ignore it and move on with our lives, and for awhile we did just that. However, when you are attacked, you must fight. Make no mistake spineless friends... we are at WAR, and it’s not with a particular country, instead, it lies in the notion that the Western world needs to be "exterminated" (President of Iran). WAKE UP. This is the world we live in.
I want to make a comment to the idiot above who compared the American Revolution to the terrorists in Iraq. First of all, if you look at the Iraqi poll results you will see that they do prefer a democracy. In fact, thousands of Iraqis risked their lives to get to the polls just to prove that point. The fighters in Iraq today at not the population of Iraqis that lived there pre-war and love the country. We are fighting against foreign terrorists and not Iraqis that we trying to push us out. Nice try though, just do some research next time.
Back to Iraq: Let us start calling the enemies what they really are, "foreign fighters" and terrorists. MAJORITY of these terrorists are not Iraqi, they are from neighboring countries drawn to Iraqi by terrorist organizations and terrorist nations (Iran, Syria). When will people learn that we are in the beginning of WWIII. This is not a problem that will end in Iraqi, or Afghanistan.
Radical Islam gives you 2 choices...
1. Convert to Islam or 2. Die
Which do you choose? Because it will never stop unless we take action. We are in a fight for our right to exist, because obviously the enemy believes we should all die.
So should we implement the Final Solution to the Moslem Problem?
Funny how all these "kill all moslems" Crusaders have appeared en masse suddenly....think old Rovie has sent his internet crew here on a mission?
"I guess it makes sense when you look at how many idiots we have in this country who are more concerned with protecting the guilty then they are with helping the innocent"
IMO this comment makes you look like the idiot. Yes your right they hate the innocent and just want to help the guilty. Your oversimplification of this issue gives you ZERO credibility. It makes you sound like your just interested in getting folk upset without putting any actual thinking into your comments. We are a country of laws and rights - We are suppose to be the democratic modle that Iraq is looking up to correct? What kind of example are you setting when you suspend or ignore laws just because its easier to do so then actually follow them?
Do I need to give you a million examples of how governements and leaders in power have abused that power over and over again throughout history?
It appears to me that I put far more thought into my comment then you obviously did.
I guess I have to explain this differently for some.
I never said we are in a WAR with all Muslims, I said 'RADICAL ISLAM". Please read next time. Whos the idiot now?
Yes, we live in a country with laws and rights, that is a given. What do you do when those rights and laws work against you? It seems to me that the America after 9-11 is far better off then it was before 9-11. Before you flame me on this one, please read it in full.
Do you realize that even if we would have stopped those terrorists from getting on those planes, what proof would we have had to arrest them on? What actual proof did we have? Box cutters and maps? They were on a "watch list", but what does that really prove? We couldn't have interigated them for a long period of time, or held them without proof. The fact is that they would have gone free, or got a "evelated risk" attached to their names. The fact is that we totally have let our guard down in this country and expect our government to protect us after we tie their hands behind their backs.
Since 9-11 our government (in our best interests) has created programs within the NSA, CIA, and FBI that allow us to gather a wealth of information through information taps. Despite what liberals tell you, these programs are not to listen in on what kind of food your mother wants to prepare for dinner, or how foolish you think your neighbor is. It is an advanced system that listens for combinations of words or flagged words and develops a pattern. Would you rather terrorists speak freely about the next planned attack? We have terrorists in this country right now living here that are waiting for the "call".
Funny how no one ever talks about the 3 potential attacks our government along with the UK have helped to prevent due to things like the Patriot Act.
Do you realize that even if we would have stopped those terrorists from getting on those planes, what proof would we have had to arrest them on? What actual proof did we have? Box cutters and maps? They were on a "watch list", but what does that really prove? We couldn't have interigated them for a long period of time, or held them without proof. The fact is that they would have gone free, or got a "evelated risk" attached to their names. The fact is that we totally have let our guard down in this country and expect our government to protect us after we tie their hands behind their backs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please, before your next post, put down the crack pipe and sober up a bit. By the snippet of your post above, are you really saying that we couldn't have prevented 9/11? Are you implying that there is really nothing that we could have done?
You really need to get your arguments straight. In one post, you said that since 9/11, we are safer and no attacks have happened because of the Patriot Act. In the post above, you say "we totally have let our guard down in this country and expect our government to protect us after we tie their hands behind their backs." Which is it? Are we safer, or not? You totally contradict yourself, which proves that you're just repeating BS that you hear from Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, et al.
CSL
I am talking about pre 9-11 when I said we let our guard down. However, if we continue to try and fight off things like the Patriot Act, then we will once again find ourselves in the same position.
Obviously you should tell me what information or evidence we had on the attackers prior to 9-11 that would have allowed us to bring them to justice. The answer sadly would not hold up in a court of law pre 9-11.
...you should be more clear in your posts. I even quoted you in my post, refuting your post. If that's not what you meant, then you should clarify - and be more careful how you word your posts. Evidently you're not communicating your thoughts so that others might understand what you're trying to say.
Personally, I believe that the administration knew about the attacks. I believe they knew they were going to happen and did nothing to stop them. Google PNAC. See what PNAC.com (or PNAC.org) says in their mission statement about a "Pearl Harbor-like event". Notice who are members of PNAC. They are members or former members of this deceitful administration.
The fact of the matter is this: we are no safer today than we were before the attacks - just more fearful. For you to say otherwise is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. The Patriot Act is nothing but a Presidential power grab made possible by a Republican-led Congress that has done nothing to benefit the American people.
Bush used 9/11 to invade Iraq...not to chase terrorists. Ashcroft used the Patriot Act to jail a Texas porn lord...not to chase terrorists. Bush used his illegal wire tapping on a Quaker anti-war organization...not to chase terrorists. And now they just allowed Bush to torture and jail people without trial...you can bet he won't use it to chase terrorists.
Hitler used the threat of a communist attack on the German government to demand extraordinary dictatorial powers...first people he jailed were the liberal politicians. A little bit of history repeating, methinks.
" Personally, I believe that the administration knew about the attacks. I believe they knew they were going to happen and did nothing to stop them. "
So, you're one of those who think Bush is the most brilliant president we've ever had? Only the most brilliant mind around could keep that kind of conspiracy silent for this long. Why do you keep complaining about him if you think he is so brilliant? You also believe in the 'grassy knoll' theory, don't you? Put the kool-aid down and seek help.
No, obviously I don't think that Bush is the most brillian president we've ever had. In fact, America has sunk to new lows with him as president.
Your personal "kool-aid" talking point insults aside, it's too much of a coincidence that a group called PNAC, of which people like Wolfowitz, Kristol, et al. are members, needed (according to their mission statement) a Pearl Harbor-like event to strike the United States in order for them to gain more power and advance America's imperialism throughout the world. Bush's name isn't listed as a member of PNAC, but those who are listed are members of his administration. Notice how we STILL haven't received the whole story of what happened on 9/11. Notice how there haven't been full and complete investigations of 9/11, the invasion of Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq. Why? Because the Republicans in power defend this disgusting piece of s**t as president - and those behind the scenes who obviously control the president.
Bush couldn't think on his own if he had to. He has proven that, not only in his presidency, but in his private life.
But you know, I have a right to hold my opinion. The only "kool aid" that is being c0nsumed is by people like you, RH, people who refuse to think for themselves and hold their government accountable. After all, they work for us, don't they? Should they not answer our questions? Should they not explain to us everything that happened - in the interest of truth? Oh, wait...truth is inconvenient for the right-wing.
CSL
Do you think news organizations in America would have benefited America by filming WWII from the Nazi's perspective?
I think not. We had things called journalistic integrity, and American pride back then. Now we are left with ratings and idiots.
very true.
America, nation of pansies.....
Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage, Malkin, Coulter, Beck, O'Reilly and their ilk are all shining examples of journalistic integrity. Have you ever thought that maybe it's because of people like those listed above that journalistic standards have fallen as they have?
You know, I don't remember there being an issue with journalistic integrity until Fox News Channel disgraced the American airwaves with their BS back in the mid to late 90's.
CSL
I was quite upset at the tone of the reporter. It may have been different if the reporter had expressed his sympathy for the fallen marine. But no, stail, monotone voice. AS IF HE CARED!
That is how it seemed to me.
Now, why not show the throat slittings the terrorists performed? Why not?
Why not nationaly broadcast the true hero that threw himself on a gernade to save his fellow marines recently? Why not?
Why not nationaly broadcast the true hero that threw himself on a gernade to save his fellow marines recently?
Is there film of it?
but no word in the mainstream press about it.
"but no word in the mainstream press about it."
-----
That's how Max Cleland lost three limbs in Vietnam. The mainstream press here swallowed the GOP Kool-Aid and suggested his wounds were self-inflicted.
Why don't you complain about that?
Wasn't there just a huge plot to take down 12 planes in the UK enroute to the US? Wow, never heard much on a follow up from CNN on that topic. I guess its not news until you kill 3,000 Americans. Its a really sad world we live in when people can not atleast acknowledge that we safer then we were pre 9-11. I do not agree with everything Bush has done, but atleast I can once again go about life without worrying about the next attack.
You're worried about CNN's lack of follow-up on the 12 planes between the U.S. and the U.K.? What about our government's lack of follow-up?
Oh, that's right. They made rules that you couldn't take liquids on the plane. There's a solution for you.
Then, they lift the ban on liquids. You can have, what, 3 ounces of a liquid on the plane now? What if 5 terrorists got together, each with 3 ounces of liquid, combined to make 15 ounces of liquid which could be used as a bomb? The lack of critical thought from the President on down through the FAA is nothing short of appalling. Dumb, I'm telling you. Just plain f*&^*&g dumb.
Give me a break...
I think it was the liberals that pressured the liquid ban to be removed. Wait a sec... I recall the ACLU complaining about peoples rights being violated. Oh yes, now I remember. Do you? Then again they complain about being patted down too.
Don't pin that crap on our government. They could careless if we ever had liquids on a plane again.
I think it was the liberals that pressured the liquid ban to be removed. Wait a sec... I recall the ACLU complaining about peoples rights being violated.
Do you have any factual basis at all for that claim?
That particular "threat" was proven to be a hoax created by the British Government to scare Americans for Bush.
I had to Google around a bit, but I did find the story, and I found it in the - gasp! - mainstream press. Not only the mainstream press, but the "ultra-liberal" Boston Globe! Here's the link: [link to www.boston.com]
Very inspirational story.
Hey, how about you google around and tell me why all the positive things we do everyday in Iraq are not on the front pages? Also, explain to me why America should care that Foley sent dirty IM's to a house page and why that is top news? Who really cares about all of the scandals? Every single politican has dirty little secrets.
I am basing my vote on 2 things. 1. The Economy 2. Security
....and I am guessing that the majority of the hard working Americans will agree.
Californian politics don't count beacause they lost touch with reality long ago. We don't live in a time of gum balls and lolli pops. There are other issues far more important than gay marriage and global warming.
What positive things? The US isn't rebuilding ANYTHING over there. All the money is being stolen and the only thing being built is an embassy the size of the Vatican, by Filipino labour smuggled in and treated like virtual slaves.
Only think the US is making in Iraq is corpses.
Thinking like that will only go to prove that liberalism is the root of all evil in the world today. How can you say there isn't good happening in Iraq? Do you drink so much kool-aid that you now mix colors to give it different flavors? One day (when you grow up) you'll realize that freedom IS a good thing. Good liberals fight for freedom, bad liberals complain that they aren't free enough.
RepublicHater said:
"One day (when you grow up) you'll realize that freedom IS a good thing. Good liberals fight for freedom, bad liberals complain that they aren't free enough."
Yeah...and Conservatives take freedoms away.
First of all, the logic you used in the above statement is TWISTED. Good liberals do fight for freedom. You're right about that.
But this statement got to me: "Bad liberals complain that they aren't free enough". I'm perplexed. Can people ever be TOO FREE? Isn't the first part of fighting for freedom to begin with addressing (complaining) about wanting more freedom? Isn't that what you mean by "fight[ing] for freedom"? Or, does fighting for freedom mean invading a country for no good reason, only to assert dominance in the region and rape it of its natural resources?
Seems CNN has promised the insurgents favorable coverage if they gave them the tapes of the snipers. This is the second time CNN has been nabbed with their hand in the cookie jar in Iraq, cavorting with the enemy.
I wonder if CNN would show impact shots of enemy combatants? I will not hold my breath waiting.
I love it when the left shows their true stripes.
CNN is not part of "the left."
I get it...;)
Glenn Beck is part of "the left"?
Why is Brock and MMfA defending them to this extent? Would they defend Fox in the same way?
I will agree with Brock, but only if we show both sides,
"CNN has a right and a responsibility to cover this war in its entirety...The American people deserve more, not less, coverage of the war in Iraq." - David Brock
We do deserve to see more enemy combatants hit with SAW fire. How about some impact shots on EC's? I fully support David Brock and his campaign to show more gritty, real, unadulterated death in prime time.
Will YOU support us?
MMFA defending CNN? Check out the MMFA home page. Several of the items are about conservative misinformation on CNN. CNN gets quite a bit of criticism on this site.
Brock is not defending CNN. He is defending the American peoples' rights to see what the hell is going on in Iraq - and in other parts of the world, without republico-fascist shills like you trying to censor what they show on television.
Take a few minutes to read a copy of the Constitution, just so you know what rights you and other American's have.
As I posted and you obviously overlooked, I'm agreeing with Brock. Let's just show it all. I hope CNN shows U.S. sniper attacks. How about some .50 cal turret shots? Better yet, get the gun camera footage of an AH-64 busting 30mm chain gun on the EC's.
Will you support that? I somehow doubt it.
I remember you conservatives screaming "foul!" when Al-Jazeera was showing the dead children from the US invasion. We heard Repub politicians whining that the pictures from Abu Ghraib made the press. Now you want total coverage of the war?
I support the publishing of all photographs, videos, etc. of this "war", no matter how heinous it might be. A news organization is there to report the news, not act as propoganda gophers for the Bush Administration, showing only what the Republicans want to show. I say, show it all. If you can't handle it, switch the station.
Don't pretend to know what's in my head, Hog. You have no idea.
CSL
you are so dam gung ho and adamant at how evil us libs are then why don't you enlist? Are you a coward or just a jerk with nothing better to do than trolling? I swear, I'll give you my address and we can take outside. I love this country and I'll be dammed if I'll let some punk sitting in a dark room some where question the lefts patriotism. Go ahead flag me hog. you punk.
I would never flag an articulate, thoughtful, scholar like yourself. Your post is a shining example that should be immortalized for all time.
Good work ol' boy. Keep posting.
I for one will never watch CNN again, I love this country too much.
Our soldiers are fighting for something that most Americans close their eyes to... freedom from oppression. Americans have been given a choice. Death or Islam, which do you choose?
"I actually deleted CNNs Channel from my TV"
-----
Keep deleting everything that you disagree with. Soon you will be a Limbaugh dittobot who gets all his news and his opinions from Fox, the network whose audience has been proven ignorant of current events.
Wait, you already post that way...
Whats ignorant is the fact that you are supporting a network that plays terrorist snuff films and undermines our military every chance it gets. Is it really that impossible to understand that we are a country at WAR and that was enemy?
Maybe we should give the president of Iran more time to explain how the Holocaust never happened, would that be news also? Or how about we show the life of a Christian in the Middle east. All the way up until they are beheaded, but why stop there? Its all news right?
Whats ignorant is the fact that you are supporting a network that plays terrorist snuff films and undermines our military every chance it gets. Is it really that impossible to understand that we are a country at WAR and that was enemy?
Maybe we should give the president of Iran more time to explain how the Holocaust never happened, would that be news also? Or how about we show the life of a Christian in the Middle east. All the way up until they are beheaded, but why stop there? Its all news right?
______________________________________________
Logic 101 is a class taught at universities and most community colleges. I would suggest that you take at least the basic course in logic and critical thinking. You seem to lack those skills.
First of all, the soldier who was shot in the sniper attack survived, according to the Pentagon. I don't condone such an attack and I hope our soldiers were able to dispatch the sniper quickly.
That being said, complaining about what CNN showed on its network is nothing more than an attempt at censorship. Conservatives don't like it. It supposedly causes morale to drop. GMAFB. The fact that we are bogged down in Iraq, stuck in the middle of sectarian violence during a civil war couldn't at all be the reason why morale is down. No, it's because of what we show on American television. Again, GMAFB. We already know that the right-wing in this country is all about censorship when it suits their needs. They don't want to show what is going wrong in Iraq because it takes more and more credibility away from the treasonous Bush administration. If you're so interested in morale, you'd do well to work to bring the troops home, not cover up what is truly happening.
Your posts are totally bereft of basic logic. In an earlier post, you claimed that we are more secure since 9/11 especially because of the Patriot Act, which has done more to supress Americans' freedoms than anything. Just because there hasn't been a terrorist attack in the U.S. since 9/11 doesn't mean that the Patriot Act or the Bush administration has protected us.
Finally, this argument regarding the video from CNN is just smoke and mirrors, designed to divert Americans' attention from the up-coming elections and to instill fear before an important Congressional election. Why do you repulsive Conservatives not want to talk about the issues? Why do you have to divert attention? It's because the Republicans are in serious danger of losing power - and that would just kill you, wouldn't it? How about this: the Republicans have been in control of both houses of Congress since 1994. They have done NOTHING to benefit the average American. They have done nothing but lie, cover up, cheat and steal in order to push through special interests. Hell, look at all of the scandals, ranging from sex to money. What happened to your belief in "family values" and "morality"? The issue with Foley isn't that he sent messages to an underage page - as despicable as that is. The issue is that he was sending messages to underage pages with the intention of sexual gratification, all during a time when he was supposed to be protecting the very same minors from predators. And your Republican trolls in the House covered it up. You people disgust me. You're hypocrites and liars. Why should anyone trust you or your fear-mongering tactics, all in the name of saving face and retaining power?
Please, make coherent arguments next time. It's a lot more fun to debate people who have brains and use them, instead of simply regurgitating right-wing shill talking points.
CSL
Freedom from opression? Bush has broken the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments. He has demanded and gotten the power to jail and torture anyone. No moslem is trying to force us to convert to Islam while the US Dominionists are actively trying to force a Christio-fascist regime upon us. It's not the Moslems who are stomping on the Bill of Rights.
If our troops are fighting to keep us free, why aren't they in DC arresting all the fascist politicians?
Spouting mindless racist rhetoric and empty propaganda will not make reality go away.
...one doesn't need to view it through the lens of our opponents' cameras. While we might be justifiably upset at the administration for any number of things related to Iraq, we should not so readily accept the airing of terrorist-produced videos.
The Islamists who produced the video likely did not have "teaching the horrors of war" as a reason for doing so. You can be sure that they edited it to show only success, and they are probably quite happy it received airtime here in the U.S.. Like the beheading videos, this shows Islamists in a position of having the power of life and death over American soldiers. This can be a tool for demoralization of their enemy (us), and a tool to encourage other like-minded individuals that they can fight "the Great Satan" and win.
I admit to being mostly ignorant of what coverage was like during other wars, but I am willing to bet it didn't include materials produced by our opponents. Imagine the impact had American theaters during WW2 shown Nazi-produced video of their pilots shooting down our planes. Americans certainly are, for the most part, ignorant of the horrors of war. However, there are ways to teach that without giving a platform to our opponents.
Bottom line - and there's no way any of us can avoid this single truth - we are in a war of ideologies, Christian/Secular vs. Radical Islam. We can sling mud at whoever we like when it comes to assigning blame for whatever causes led up to the war and its handling since, but we are in it and should not give ANY airtime to those who would like nothing more than to see us either die or live under religious oppression.
In simple terms, CNN gave airtime to Islamist propaganda. That's the "unvarnished truth."
To teach or to learn about war. Anyone who says otherwise has never experienced it.
However, most Americans will never get closer than their TV screens. As a result, I think we need to be somewhat selective in choosing what gets aired. I suppose you could call that's censorship, but I'm not saying we should insulate anyone. Show death, destruction, and whatever else you might think would approach communicating that horror to the masses, but without giving our opponents a vehicle for self-promotion.
We need to be more selective in the wars we fight. We should never chose to go to war when American interests have not been proven to be at stake beyond any reasonable doubt. And we have to insist that those who promote these wars be willing to risk their lives or the lives their loved ones, before they risk ours.
Of course we should avoid war. That's a given. However, that's rather beside the point in the current situation, don't you think?
Camaross3406677,I bet you were jumping up and down like a little kid at Christmas,cheering,drooling all over yourself yourself,High-fiving the mirror, when CNN was showing the bodies of Saddams sons on the slab in the morgue! Here's a question for all you offended bedwetters, out of the group of soldiers in the so-called Snuff Flick ,which one was shot? The one closest to the camera,the one on the left?the one on the right? The video went dark for a instance, as the shot was fired,on the CNN video I watched,help me out! Did your local CNN affiliate show the real Mc Coy? I needs to know!
If you think about all of the rapes and murders those criminals had comitted, I guess I was happy to see them dead.
However, once again you are missing the big picture here. Thats ok, most liberals don't do well with looking towards the future.
Right now there is very little democracy in the middle east. By winning in Iraq we can force a wedge between the dictators and people who would like democracy in their countries. Its pretty obvious that if we don't lead the way then no one will.
However, once again you are missing the big picture here. Thats ok, most liberals don't do well with looking towards the future.
Right now there is very little democracy in the middle east. By winning in Iraq we can force a wedge between the dictators and people who would like democracy in their countries. Its pretty obvious that if we don't lead the way then no one will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, liberals/progressives ARE the ones who look towards the future. It is Conservatives who want to go back to the days of Ward and June Cleaver, where Ward makes all the money and June stays at home, being the perfect mother. In case you haven't noticed, it's a different world now. Conservatives tend to look to the past to solve current problems. Conservatives have a real issue with looking into the future. (Paraphrased from "Whats the Matter with Kansas").
Conservatives also have a need for authority. It was the "conservatives" who sided with King George III before the revolution. The "conservatives" wanted the King to lead the colonies. The "conservatives" were against an all out revolution. (Paraphrased from "Conservatives Without Conscience" - John Dean).
The current form of Conservatives/Republicans stem from a pure hatred of FDR. They were the opposition during FDR's "big government" expansion. Such an expansion pulled us out of a recession, gave us the TVA and Social Security (something I'm pretty sure members of YOUR family depend upon in order to live).
So please, until you have the facts, don't tell me that liberals don't do well looking toward the future, when it's the Conservatives who want to take the U.S. back to the 1950's.
Further, the argument that forcing a democracy in the Middle East will drive a wedge between Middle Eastern dictators and those who want democracy is fallacious, as both of your premises are false, based on future events that may or may not happen. Based on what I've seen, the people of the Middle East may very well want democracy, but they want the democracy on THEIR terms, not with the barrell of an American gun to their heads - and not to the detriment of their country (such as raping them of their natural resources).
CSL
" First of all, liberals/progressives ARE the ones who look towards the future. .... In case you haven't noticed, it's a different world now. "
Yeah, a world where we have "abortion on demand" ('need' isn't important), stem cell research (that still hasn't brought any good to the world after 15 years), gay marraige (which removes all family values and morals) and child molesters being given the OK to do what they want (only if they have a "D" before their name, though).
Thanks a lot for ruining this country, mr liberal. Which country you going to ruin next?
All that horrible stuff must be why we now live in the weakest, poorest, least influential country on earth.
Oh wait, the opposite is true.
Lebanon is a democracy and we sat back and fed Israel missles to destroy it. If you are still gullable enough to believe that we are there to establish a democracy in Iraq you are lost, you've had the lobotamy already there is no turning back you have brain damage. You are a danger to yourself and others.
All the misplaced animosity towards CNN and the left regarding this sniper footage and once again cons show they hate the left and the media more than the enemy in Iraq. CNN is a news network and they do a horrible job at it most of the time but their function is to deliver news, bad and good. It seems to me those who take umbrage with the video in question simply can't handle the truth. That's what our soldiers are dealing with. Ms. Malkin and the rest of the con elite have to put down their martinis and pain killers and recognize there is actually violence going on. It destroys their illusion that everything is just fine and the president knows best. Maroons. Hopped up haters of America is what these cons are under the guise of "we support our troops." Well do you support our troops getting shot from 300 meters? I don't and am glad that CNN had the balls to actually show some reality so the chest thuming fox news crowd can get a dose of reality. Chickenhawks. How dare some of you people imply that any American enjoys seeing this kind of thing. They shouldn't be there in the first place. Any one who's been paying attention knows this war in Iraq has made us more vulnerable to attack and the world a far less safe place. But cheer on the war you cons, keep cheering until your kid is drafted, or you are drafted or your brother comes home in a body bag. War is for suckers.
There were many people back in the 1940's that disagreed with the US entering into WWII, much like there are people today that disagree with the WAR in Iraq. However if history has taught us anything, it is that WAR is necessary to bring about peace and retain balance. No one likes WAR, but it is here to stay, so get used to it. If you think we weren't eventually going to engage in another WAR in the middle east?
I guess your opinion of the WAR in Iraq depends on if you can make the connection to what democracy could mean in the middle east.
However, I am willing to listen to how you would approach destroying terrorists that are in multiple countries that hide among the civilians. Lets hear it, and don't say "kill Osama Bin Laden". (as if that would even matter, or ever would have)
However, I am willing to listen to how you would approach destroying terrorists that are in multiple countries that hide among the civilians. Lets hear it, and don't say "kill Osama Bin Laden". (as if that would even matter, or ever would have)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I put trust in the President to get Bin Laden after the 9/11 attacks. Five years later, the President doesn't really think about him all that much. The trust that might have been there 5 years ago has been crushed. Again, a Republican doesn't come through on his promises. Color me surprised.
...why this flock of Crusaders has descended out of the blue on this site for this issue.
Their racism is so thick you could cut it with a knife. It's all "war against Islam!". And they say the other side is waging a holy war? Looks to me like they're the ones who want to commit homicide on people for their religion. The fact that the US invaded Iraq, a nation NOT involved with 9/11, doesn't seem to enter their thought patterns at all. It's all "war against Islam! Islam gonna get us! Gotta kill them now!". The Israel Lobby's propaganda at work again. They sure have gotten the psychos eager to kill arabs, don't they.
By the way, sniping at invading troops is VALID military resistance, not terrorism. The British used to whine that the American riflemen used to snipe at their officers in the Revolution...looks like the Tories are living up to their past.
I don't know if you'd count my post above in among those you're criticizing here, but I'm going to address it anyway.
"Their racism is so thick you could cut it with a knife. It's all 'war against Islam!'"
It's not racism when it's the ideology that's the problem. And like it or not, each of the Abrahamic religions - Christianity, Judaism, and Islam - are inherently divisive due to the holy texts upon which they're based. Each has a bloody history. It just happens that in recent years Islam has taken center stage as the prime instigator of violence.
"And they say the other side is waging a holy war? Looks to me like they're the ones who want to commit homicide on people for their religion. "
Who started it is irrelevant at this point. We can point fingers at ourselves (or rather, our representatives in government) as much as we like does nothing to change the fact that the "other side" is indeed waging a holy war.
"The fact that the US invaded Iraq, a nation NOT involved with 9/11, doesn't seem to enter their thought patterns at all."
You are 100% correct. Again, regardless of who started it does not change the fact that we are engaged with opponents motivated primarily by religious zeal. Iraq was not part of the war on terror (which is a ridiculous notion in the first place), but it has become part of it. We are in an untenable situation - we can neither retreat or advance without creating future problems. The same National Intelligence Estimate (declassified excerpts here) that indicates our presence there is fueling the jihadists also indicates that our early departure would be perceived as a victory by jihadists, as well as leave Iraq in a shambles.
So, what are we to do? This quandry is arguably of our own making, but we can't simply abandon Iraq, as tempting as that might seem.
"It's all "war against Islam! Islam gonna get us! Gotta kill them now!". The Israel Lobby's propaganda at work again. They sure have gotten the psychos eager to kill arabs, don't they."
Radical Islamists would like nothing more than to see the world adopt Islam. It's not very much different than Christian fundamentalists who would like to see Christianity embraced throughout the world. However, radical Islamists are, at this point in history, quite willing to kill non-Muslims (or even Muslims they perceive as deficient) in a misguided attempt at forcible conversion. No doubt there are a dozen other reasons that contribute to their zeal, but their basis for action is their holy book.
"By the way, sniping at invading troops is VALID military resistance, not terrorism."
It most certainly is. That does not, however, mean that our news networks should air our opponents' propaganda videos.
Exactly "Who and When" did anyone ask Bush to come to Iraq ,and establish a democracy?Where can I read up on this "Behind the Scene Diplomacy,or did Bush have a dream? Camaross3406677,you never answered my questions,here they are again:Which soldier did you see killed in CNN's snuff film? Why did the military report the soldier was only wounded? (which in itself is a bad thing)
Don't hold your breath, my friend. ACAMAROSS is just a troll who isn't here for any substantial conversation. He's here to be devisive and displays his ignorance in every post.
I cannot wait until the Dems take over. We need some oversight. We need investigations. Nancy Pelosi OWES it to the American people to use subpoena power to it's fullest extent. In order for the U.S. government to regain it's credibility in the world, it needs to regain it's credibility with the American people first.
CSL
Look, I am not asking you to bend your beliefs. Do I not have "freedom" to come here and point out opinions that are not being expressed? I think you will find there has been a few people that agree with some of my suggestions and views.
However, that is besides the point. Once again I ask for an answer to the solution of the growing population of radical Islamic terrorists and no one seems to have one. Funny how when people actually get off their asses and do something they are always put down. I guess we should just sit around and discuss these "issues" with people that want to kill us. Hey, maybe if we all just convert to Islam we can live in a world "free" of hate?
On another note: (I hope I am wrong) If the democrats get into office you can expect higher taxes.
I love the word "troll", because it is used by people that only feel strong behind the saftey of a computer monitor. I think its funny that when I actually debate some of these "blog heros" that they immediately toss around words because I am not nodding my head and patting them on the back. I am a free thinker, not a YES man.
However, I guess when you are posting in the "MEDIA MATTERS" site you are not free complain about the media or news networks.