|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 04/15/2003 : 13:14:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
Let's make sure to keep this in context of the original incident.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) made the comments after an incident in the northern Iraqi town of Tikrit in which a security guard hired by CNN fired his machinegun at a checkpoint when the CNN convoy came under gunfire.
What's all this "armed journalists" and "new arm of the military" hyperbole?
What you guys are arguing against are military escorts who fire upon strategic targets of opportunity accompanying the journalists. This is not at all what happened in the incident mentioned in the article, and not at all relevant to the question at hand, which is should journalists have armed protection in case they are attacked.
[unless, of course, one thinks the journalists' lives are less important than one's "right to know"...]
[/quote]
Ahhhhh. No.
They are not military escorts. They were armed mercenaries acting as bodyguards. Military escorts would not be hired by CNN, they would have been assigned by the military.
The question still remains about the quality of reporting when armed gunsels are skulking around and attractiveness of journalists as a target when they have trigger-happy mercenaries as bodyguards.
One's right to know does not leave the reporters off the hook when it comes to calling in their own deaths. Why should I feel sorry for a bunch of twits who get zapped through their own stupidity? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2003 : 17:36:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by @tomic
There is no hyberbole. Check your facts.
My facts consist only [of] what you provided in your opening post! (The linked article.) |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 04/15/2003 17:37:06 |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2003 : 23:20:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by @tomic
I was watching this live. It was not attacking targets of opportunity. They went somewhere they knew was dangerous and they brought non-military security. The journalists acted as if they were part of the US military not people out looking for a story. In fact, they way the story unfolded it was damn near like they were doing a mission for the special forces. Only they were a CNN crew out on their own.
There is no hyberbole. Check your facts.
@tomic
Maybe this is like the movie 'Capricorn One', it's all a hoax. Staged for the public for whatever reason. My reason would be so the government could raise taxes. |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2003 : 05:18:02 [Permalink]
|
So far, I like the points presented by Val and Slater. Armed guards do compromise the objectivity of the reporting, and the 'embedded' troops have benn seriously compromised by the US military minders.
I don't think that the embedded journalists are told what they can or cannot say beyond strategic reports, but the presense of the Marine and Army guards does slant what information can be gathered. Furthermore, I have little doubt that US military personel entering into mostly Sunni neighborhoods present a noticeable lack of embedded reporters.
As for the lone wolf, independent reporters, rent-a-cop security is the choice of the individual journalists that should posess the personal candor, and integrity to admit as much in the finished product. |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
