 |  |
 
October 2012
August 2012 July 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
     |
 Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! April 8, 2005 CBS Cameraman ArrestedBy GreyhawkIraqi citizens informed on CBS cameraman, leading to his arrest by coalition forces: CNN has reported that this CBS cameraman has been arrested in Iraq as an insurgent. According to the report his camera contained footage of an insurgent attack on American forces, authorities believe he was 'tipped off'. Update: CBS, Amnesty International and the Pulitzer committee are silent so far... (Added Clarification: this is not meant to imply the same cameraman was responsible for both events. The identity of the prize-winning photographer is unknown. Just noting the similarity.) (Update to Update: Reporters without Borders was all over it though.) CBS original comment on the shooting was burried in another story on Iraq: A soldier shot an Iraqi freelance reporter and cameraman employed by CBS News, Abdul Amir Younis Hussein, in northeastern Mosul while working. According to what the Pentagon told the CBS News bureau in Washington, Tuesday, Hussein was shot in the hip by a soldier who mistook his camera, which he was using at the time, for a weapon. Hussein is being treated and is expected to make a full recovery.The original Reuters report: The cameraman and reporter suffered minor injuries when he was shot while covering a firefight for CBS in Mosul, CBS News said. It asked that the man's name not be reported for his protection.CBS then promptly released his name in their own report. Reuters again: The U.S. military said in a statement from Mosul released at the Pentagon that U.S. soldiers had been involved in an engagement with at least one suspected insurgent who was "waving an AK-47 (assault rifle) and inciting a crowd of civilians."Leaving out a fact that could be considered essential: A US military statement said troops also shot and killed an insurgent who was waving an AK-47 assault rifle and inciting a crowd of civilians at the site of a suicide bombing in eastern Mosul.That was left out of the CBS report too. This report from an NBC affiliate attributed to AP adds this: The incident followed a car bombing in Mosul that injured five American soldiers. More: NewsMax is reporting the arrest. And the Guardian, all with essentially the same story: But on Friday, the military said the cameraman was detained because there was probable cause to believe he posed ``an imperative threat to coalition forces.'' Iraqi citizens informed on CBS cameraman, leading to his arrest by coalition forces! More: CBS reports: A cameraman carrying CBS press credentials was detained in Iraq earlier this week on suspicion of insurgent activity, the U.S. military said Friday.According to CBS when he was shot he was a "cameraman employed by CBS News" shot "while working" - when he was arrested he was "A cameraman carrying CBS press credentials." Wow. And more: The AP, still looking for space in the trophy case for that Pulitzer, toes the line: BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A cameraman carrying CBS press credentials was detained in Iraq earlier this week on suspicion of insurgent activity, the U.S. military said Friday.In fairness, that 'credentials' bit might be a direct quote from the military press release. (Update: yes, it is.) No excuse for CBS though, they knew who he was. Hard to believe they waited so long to report. This guy was detained on Tuesday. Have they been ignorant of the fate of their cameraman for that long? Don't they care? Double wow. Final Update: More here. Does the public have a right to know all sides? You bet we do. Related Posts: Posted by Greyhawk / April 8, 2005 9:03 PM | Permalink 17 TrackBacksThe U.S. military is conducting an investigation into the detained individual’s previous activities as well as his alleged support of anti-Iraqi government activities. Read More Mudville Gazette tips us off to this news story: BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) A CBS stringer has been arrested as a suspected insurgent, U.S. military officials said Friday. The video cameraman was wounded during a firefight in northeastern Mosul between U.S.... Read More seem to have, well, a working relationship in certain news organizations. At the Mudville Gazette, Greyhawk has a good round-up... Read More Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette has more... Read More Iraqi citizens informed on CBS cameraman, leading to his arrest by coalition forces: Greyhawk is all over this one! Sisyphean Musings has the original post. The Associated Press (AP) has this to say:April 8, 2005, 2:30 PM EDT BAGHDAD, Iraq Read More ... Read More Here's a couple of entertaining posts for early morning fair: Read More The CBS cameraman I was talking about yesterday in this post has apparently been arrested. More at Mudville Gazette (thanks to reader Alene). Secular Blasphemy passes on the news about Norway's threat to shut down companies that don't have at least ... Read More CBS continued its groundbreaking tradition of investigative journalism as one of its employees, a freelance local cameraman with CBS credentials, was arrested on suspicion of insurgent activity: The cameraman suffered minor injuries Tuesday during a ba... Read More Posted by Mary Madigan The Mudville Gazette* posts on reports that a CBS Cameraman has been arrested in Iraq. The Mudville Gazette links to CNN. CNN's homepage links to a report that the CBS cameraman has been arrested in... Read More
The Mudville Gazette* posts on reports that a CBS Cameraman has been arrested in Iraq. The Mudville Gazette links to CNN. CNN's homepage links to a Read MoreFrom Instapundit and Mudville Gazette we have the story of the CBS cameraman that has been arrested on suspicious of insurgent activity. He was evidently turned in by Iraqi informers. Since the invasion occurred the western news media has been... Read More A few years ago I was taking the bus home from a lecture in Manchester when I was approached by a guy who wanted to sell me a Minidisc player. It was a decent model, and back then this was the height of technology. He told me it was mine for 25 quid.... Read More Al Qaeda in Iraq has weighed in on last week's raid on Abu Ghraib. Abu Usaid al-Iraqi, the Commander of the Military Wing in Iraq details the attack (translation compliments of Evan Kohlmann of the indispensable sites Global Terror Alert... Read More Mudville Gazette tips us off to this news story: BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) A CBS stringer has been arrested as a suspected insurgent, U.S. military officials said Friday. The video cameraman was wounded during a firefight in northeastern Mosul between U.S.... Read More Iraqi blog explosion, frontline photos, more photos, progress in Falujah, women-owned companies get contracts, reconstruction highlights, Iraqi government moves forward, British exit plan talks, Poland and Ukraine withdrawing, attacks on heels of Runsf... Read More 27 Comments |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
 
 
 Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com  Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
Looks like the Iraqis have another face to put on that new reality TV show. And CBS has some explaining to do...
The American military shot another reporter. That is not new. They are trying to spin it to make it look like he was an enemy. That is to be expected. And all of you idelogically blinded people in the blogosphere buy it, like you all bought the "a few bad apples" theory of Abu Gharib and so much more. Sadly, that is not news either.
Another graduate of the Dan Rather School of Unbiased Reporting and Film Making!
Please tell me this was the same Pulitzer Prize winning guy that "just happened" to be on the scene of the assasination of those Iraqi civilians. Or the Pulitzer Prize winning guy that "just happened" to be in position to take the photos of burned bodies of the Blackwatch Security guys that were hung from the bridge in Fallujah. That would be oh so ironic but we couldn't be that lucky!
And it goes on. Ad nauseum!
Anyone else get the feeling that the average Iraqi is about fed up with the "insurgents"?
"They are trying to spin it to make it look like he was an enemy. That is to be expected."
Really? How many other times has the U.S. military done this? If it's so common, I'm sure Mr. Zimmerman will provide us with dozens of links of examples where the U.S. has detained journalists on suspicion of involvement with the insurgency.
I probably shouldn't, but... is it impossible that a reporter or camera man be an enemy, Charles? If it's impossible, why? And how can you tell the difference. US military active duty hold jobs as camera persons and reporters, after all. If they were captured it would not be as a member of the press but as a member of the Coalition forces. Why is it impossible for the insurgents to have members who take pictures?
This man may or may not be guilty of what he's suspected of being. Someone with immediate knowledge and the ability to investigate will make that determination. If you want to talk about ideological blindness, you'd be wise to use a mirror.
Good. Glad to see this. I have lived inside some of these stories for the last 20 years and note that not once, NOT ONCE, has a journalist ever gotten a single story about the military fully correct in the 10 or so stories I had personal knowledge of and the 100 or so stories I heard about through military reports. (Even when we gave them the quotes and facts on tape or in written form, they would throw that away and go find someone else to interview and when they got his words wrong, he would complain and they would say that is what you said, even if not in the order you said it, or not the complete quote.)
I'll believe ANYTHING the DoD press office puts out before I'll believe anything a press journalist puts out in the last 10 yrs. It ain't that the military is always right. It's just that journalists (and my Mom was one -- she hates todays "egotistic so-called journalists") over the last 10 yrs are wrong more than they are right. They have none of the integrity of newspapermen from 20 yrs ago. There is more integrity in a military man's little finger than in a journalist's entire body.
"If you can bear to hear the Truth you've spoken, twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools......."
If you want the Truth, don't ask a newsman.
Subsunk
Don't be surprised, if their stringer turns out to be a bad guy, that CBS blames the US Military for the security situation that they have to hire untrustworthy Iraqis.
Here I've been looking for a story link that I read last night about the US military killing journalists and guess what? It was right here under the open posts for the 7th. See:
http://sisypheanmusings.blogspot.com/2005/04/reporters-without-borders-misreports.html
Sisypheanmusings has alot of links gathered about topic. :+:
"They are trying to spin it to make it look like he was an enemy. That is to be expected." >>
Really? How many other times has the U.S. military done this? If it's so common, I'm sure Mr. Zimmerman will provide us with dozens of links of examples where the U.S. has detained journalists on suspicion of involvement with the insurgency.>>
Just watch the movie "control room". No, not a specific example of detaining journalists (killing them instead) but many general examples of their spin to justify what they do to them.
>
No it is not impossible, but I use common sense in judging the probability of these things. Which is more likely, the insurgency using a CBS cameraman as an undercover operative, or the military shooting him and then trying to cover it up? Just writing the first possibilty makes me laugh at the absurdity of it. Yet despite this, all you "conservatives" (thats what you call yourselves, I'd call you unwitting dupes of the state) just lap it up.
However, I will concede that I could be wrong in this case, it is just unlikely and would not disprove my point.
Here is the part of my previous post that did not show up:
--is it impossible that a reporter or camera man be an enemy, Charles? If it's impossible, why?
No it is not impossible, but I use common sense in judging the probability of these things. Which is more likely, the insurgency using a CBS cameraman as an undercover operative, or the military shooting him and then trying to cover it up? Just writing the first possibilty makes me laugh at the absurdity of it. Yet despite this, all you "conservatives" (thats what you call yourselves, I'd call you unwitting dupes of the state) just lap it up.
However, I will concede that I could be wrong in this case, it is just unlikely and would not disprove my point.
CBS News -
First hey had fake memos
Now they employ Johnny Jihad.
Talk about a "made for TV" insurgency...we always knew the insurgency was "playing for the press"....now we know that it is "paid by the press"
wow. a dinosaur troll. how original...
Zimmermann, why would the military need to cover it up? Our military has made VERY CLEAR to the media tha dangers of associating with insurgents. Our soldiers will kill them, and they will not hesitate to do so. If a photographer is attached to their hip and get shurt in the process, it's his own damn fault for not listening to warnings.
Actually Charles, I think it is much more likely for CBS (and other western news outlets) to hire, knowingly or not, insurgents than it is for the US military to be shooting journalists and covering them up.
That may make you laugh, but it comes down to who do you think the enemy is, what do you think he's capable of, how diligent do you think the press is, whose side are they really on, and how lawful or unlawful you think the US military is, doesn't it?
I know which side I'm on; more importantly, we know which side you're on. Charles Zimmerman: Jihadi at heart.
What Tim said.
"Which is more likely, the insurgency using a CBS cameraman as an undercover operative, or the military shooting him and then trying to cover it up?"
Charles. I think you are functioning under the serious delusion that the "CBS camera man" is an American sent over there with the CBS reporters and film crew. If that were the case I'd consider it laughable as well.
Question: in WWII, you had journalists embedded with both sides (but no American journalists embedded with the Germans or the Japanese, or vice-versa, at least to my knowledge). Were they regarded just as soldiers or did their press credentials give them any protection?
Charles Zimmerman;
You wrote
"The American military shot another reporter. That is not new. They are trying to spin it to make it look like he was an enemy."
I consider it most likely that the 'cameraman' was an insurgent acting as a cameraman and paid for by CBS news. News organizations like CBS readily admit that they pay local Iraqis for this kind of news coverage because it is too dangerous for Americans. We know for a fact that insurgent attacks have no military value; their value lies only in their propaganda effect, i.e., blow up a checkpoint -> get $2 million dollars worth of free publicity ("news coverage") for the cause. Is it really such a leap for you intellectually to realize that many of these Iraqi 'newsmen' are nothing but adjuncts to the insurgency? I would suggest that if you are looking for ideological blindness you don't need a computer.
CBS says that they hired this photographer three months ago, through a "fixer" who has had a trusted relationship with CBS news for two year's. This is being reported at CNN.!! Plus his camera has video of numerous attacks on U.S. forces. I think we need to find the "trusted fixer". Along with those at CBS who hired these guys..
If it turns out the guy is an insurgent, it's great that they have him in custody. Hopefully they'll get some good intelligence out of him.
The fact that he was working for CBS shouldn't tarnish their reputation.
"The fact that he was working for CBS shouldn't tarnish their reputation."
[cough] [snicker] [bwahahahahaha!] [ROFL]
Whose reputation?
LA is right: "The fact that he was working for CBS shouldn't tarnish their reputation."
How does one make black blacker?
Charles - It is quite possible that this cameraman is not a tried and true Jihadist. But there are certain morals to journalism. I can usderstand being in the right place at the right time and accidentally catching a death on camera. However, it is not ok to have "information" on pre-planned attacks and not divulge that information to the people that that attack is meant to harm. Here is an example in our realm of affairs: If a mass murderer calls me up and tells me that he is going to be in a tower on a college campus in Texas and he is going to kill as many people as he can, it is my duty to inform the authorities. It would be illegal and highly suspicious if I told no one and went to the campus and took pictures of the whole thing. And I certainly shouldn't receive a Pulitzer for this type of reporting.
Now I am reserving judgement of this reports actions until I see more information. But I does seem a little fishy to me.
Also if you know anything about military Public Affairs, you would know that the first rule that they adhere to is: Never publish false information. It would destroy their credibility. In fact, PA will not even work with Pyschological Operations folks because of this. So I highly doubt that the military is trying to spin this.
Charles, I love how people can actually write that it is unlikely that the terrorists would infiltrate the media and use it to their advantage. Read Charles Henderson's new book, Goodnight Saigon, about the last days of Vietnam and you will discover that many Western reporters were being "assisted" by VC operatives, among them those bastions of the mass media, Peter Arnett and Morley Safer. Gee...CBS never does learn, does it?
Can't this be filed as just another "Who Cares? -- If the Liar's a Liberal"?
LA is correct: The fact that he was working for CBS shouldn't tarnish their reputation...
I wouldn't hold it against the terrorists for working with such a discredited "news" organization. Causing mayhem and death, and being a bunch of jack***es, yes, but working with a shoddy news organization, no.
Heh, looks like Osama is giving CBS an award for its Affirmative Action Program.
http://usefulidiots4osama.blogspot.com/2005/04/my-thanks-to-infidel-cbs-news.html
I'm seeing a lot of comments like "Is it so hard to believe that..." and "It's entire possible that..." and "I believe that..." Does anyone, commenter or blogger or anyone, actually have any evidence that this guy was an insurgent? Anything at all?
Before you reply, please keep in mind: "the government said" and "what are you, a terrorist" are not evidence.
celexa when should i take pills celexa stratera http://japanime.net/celexa/boards_celexa_message.html is celexa for anxiety celexa drug effects side http://japanime.net/celexa/could_celexa_make_you_have_an_increased_sex_drive.html and .... celexa effects sexual side weaning off of celexa http://japanime.net/celexa/celexa_side_effects___panic_attacks.html celexa dosage celexa sexual side effects http://japanime.net/celexa/pregnancy_and_celexa.html how to wean off celexa depression forum celexa http://japanime.net/celexa/ssri_celexa_side_effects.html .Thanks.