 |  |
 
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 9, 2005 Crossing the Line? Media and The Public's Right to KnowBy GreyhawkFor those who might as yet be unaware, a CBS cameraman has been wounded and captured by US forces in Iraq, and is suspected of working for the "insurgency." CBS: In a statement released Friday, CBS News said the man had worked as a freelancer for CBS for three months and that he was videotaping for the network when he was shot.Televised reports indicated the suspect's camera contained at least four different videos of roadside bombings. It?s beginning to look as if that means that the news networks may in fact not just be reporting the news but are also aligning themselves with one side in an armed conflict. And in this case, that side appears to be the side that is blowing up schools and shops, killing Iraqi police and attacking U.S. soldiers.I'd go a step further. It seems likely that CBS and perhaps other organizations are paying those with close access to terrorists in Iraq to obtain video of terrorist activities. (Those who are squeamish on such issues, by all means substitute "insurgents" for "terrorist" throughout this post.) In CBS-speak: "It is common practice in Iraq for Western news organizations to hire local cameramen in places considered too dangerous for Westerners to work effectively. The very nature of their work often puts them in the middle of very volatile situations". With that in mind, I re-pose several questions from Mudville's recent post on the Pulitzer Prize-winning AP photographs - an eerily similar story. Let's substitute 'CBS' for 'AP', and 'video' for 'photos': How much would exclusive photos of "insurgents" beheading an aid worker be worth to the AP? How about a series where the "insurgents" plant a roadside bomb, wait for an American food convoy, and detonate it? Maybe with an ensuing gun battle as bonus. How much for photos of that? Everything has a price, as they say. Would pictures like the ones I've described be worth more or less than those of Muslims killing Muslims? How about a planned "demonstration" at a polling place on election day in Baghdad? If that same photographer was invited by the same group to a "demonstration" there, how much would he "earn" for his pictures? The media defense of their actions generally takes some form of the argument that the public has a right to know all sides of the story. Here at Mudville we couldn't agree more with that sentiment. We don't shy away from covering all aspects of the War on Terror. With that in mind, we believe the public has the right to know: How much does CBS pay it's cameraman? Do they pay a set salary or per video provided? Or only if the video is usable by CBS? Were any American soldiers or Iraqi citizens hurt or killed in any of the attacks videotaped by CBS' cameraman? Does he in turn pay the terrorists - or is he simply one of them? If so, how do the surviving family members feel about CBS funding the attacks on their sons, daughters, husbands, or wives? If not, how do the surviving family members feel about CBS paying for video of attacks on their sons, daughters, husbands, or wives? How do CBS' advertisers feel about their money supporting this effort? Let's hope we get some answers. Update - A few more questions CBS should have answers to: The cameraman was injured. Where was he treated? Who paid for treatment of those injuries? An Iraqi hospital? The US military? And will CBS reimburse for those expenses? Has CBS ensured their cameraman is receiving the best possible medical care? If I were in senior management at the network I'd want those answers on my desk immediately. Of course, they've already asked those questions, haven't they? Posted by Greyhawk / April 9, 2005 3:32 PM | Permalink 9 TrackBacksGreyhawk has an update (see previous posts) that asks some pertinent questions. Read More Mudville Gazette has More on the CBS cameraman who was "embedded" with the insurgency. Quote: The media defense of their actions generally takes some form of the argument that the public has a right to know all sides of the story. Here at Mudville... Read More Mudville Gazette How much does CBS pay it's cameraman? Do they pay a set salary or per video provided? Or only if the video is usable by CBS? Were any American soldiers or Iraqi citizens hurt or killed in any... Read More More evidence of which side the MSM has taken in the GWOT is summed rather nicely in this post from Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette. It is bad enough that we have to endure biased coverage that misrepresents what is happening on the ground in Iraq. ... Read More I haven't posted about the CBS cameraman/insurgent propaganda specialist because I've been very upset about it. 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 Lots of unanswered questions out there. Read More and I usually don't do too much that is overly serious on Saturdays BUT.....well I'm not real happy/content/pleased with a situation and I wanna talk about it. Ever since Greyhawk posted on the CBS cameraman issue I've flipped back and... Read More 24 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 |
who would have thought that the mainstream media would allow themself to get caught in this questionsble activity. I thought that they were above the fray. Seems that they are funding the fray.
I couldn't agree with you more. I have been linking to other sites and following the story.
NOTE: FoxNews is carrying the story now.
Key points in their coverage...This is a big counterintelligence issue...credentials can be used to access sensitive areas.
However, the analyst also stated that the "insurgency" is growing. I don't believe that is true...I believe the media (aka MSM/DNC) are simply reporting more and stirring up the stories.
Any input from those in Iraq?
Air Force Voices
I've written to Mr Lutz over at General Motors asking him to explain how he can drape his products in the Flag and fund terrorist cameramen at the same time.
More binary thinking from Greyhawk.
How conveniently you forget all the rogues the US Government and CIA paid off to do our dirty work. Saddam Hussein himself comes to mind.
If the CIA "jacks up" who they hire and trust w/ secrets, how can you logically fault CBS with far less investigatory resources at their disposal?
Again, making a mountain out of a molehill.
RETIRE ALREADY!!!
With each passing day you further betray the tradition of active military members being "non political."
Who are you? What would your senior rater think of all of this?
Please allow me to play devil's advocate for a second or two.
Wouldn't it be correct to say that these journalists are "embedded" with the terrorists?
We all watched the coverage of the "Thunder Runs" into Baghdad... how is this any different?
If a U.S. journalist, embedded with American troops were shot while covering their combat operations, would we be calling on that media outlet's advertisers to stop patronizing them?
Not to be too cynical, but it's not very surprising that a) journalists -- freelance or otherwise -- are counterintelligence liabilities, b) CBS News is employing the most rabidly anti-American of them, or that c) the journalistic community comes to their knee-jerk defense.
Having said that, it's clear that there should be no outrage over his wounding. Journalism is a dangerous vocation, and covering warzones is the most virulent type. But someone needs to disabuse journalists all over the world that they are somehow special by virtue of being journalists. If this story is true, this journalist was a combatant, just as all of the US embeds were. To hear Reporters without Borders, the Pulitzer people, et. al., journalists are such noble people, so as to be Olympian, so high that they shit marble.
Oh, and "IRR Soldier", you're a real douchebag. I'm not sure that you understand the idea of "active military members being 'non political.'" They're non-political in terms of domestic political partisanship. Not in terms of US vs. rest of the world. And, speaking of binary thinking, there is no more mindless an analysis than the old "the US Government and CIA does horrible things" gambit. You know, the one that says that America -- and by extension, Americans -- have no standing to make moral statements because of actions conducted by the US intelligence services. I've heard it more times than I can count. And it is always deployed in the same manner, by the same morons: even though i have nothing material to add to the conversation and advance our understanding of the issue, shut up you -- you're American, you can't say anything, I won't allow it! Talk about binary thinking.
Terrorist or insurgent?
Do the victims care what they're called?
I can't help wondering how many of these attacks would NOT have taken place if there was no news media "thirst" (did I mean "blood thirst"?) to have pictures and/or video to plaster over TV screens all over the world...
The media's complicity doesn't pass the "smell" test for me.
Yaah, go CBS for bringing us all sides of the story, and in the process helping the funding of these poor downtrodden misunderstood "insurgents" who only want to kill all the minions of the Great White Satan. Thankfully they don't let any possible concern for US soldiers to mar their clearheaded thinking over who they hire and pay in such an area.
Hopefully CBS will continue to financially support their efforts and do their part to stop the evil warmongering US from bringing Democracy into the Middle East...
Hmm, how much is required for "material aid and support" in a legal sort of sense...? I doubt we're there yet, but what would it take?
IRR -- and why did we supoort those "rogues" to engage in proxy warfare?
Because people like you, more afraid of the appearance of American "imperialist arrogance" than the reality of tyranny, discouraged us from the decisive use of American force when it was called for.
As I said, from the link above:
Instead of removing these melanomas from the skin of the world, we kept them there to avoid the "failure" of warfare ... and even used them as our proxies, to avoid the "failure" of direct confrontation with our biggest enemy.
And, from the comments associated with that link ...
We have a responsibility to mitigate the damage ... and our knee-jerk refusal to wage DECISIVE war over the last five decades made the inevitible more protracted, more costly ... and more deadly.
When are you and the Leftist fellow-travelers you appear to support going to acknowledge the abject errors in policy, that were derived from your knee-jerk disdain for the decisive use of American force?
IRR I'm confused. Are you implying that Democrats are in favor of CBS imbedding photographers with terrorists and Republicans are opposed? I never thought about it in those terms. The videos alledged to be in the cameramans possession were of roadside bombs. Are you implying Democrats are in favor of roadside bombs? I disagree. Not everything is political.
And a one time warning: the comment section here is open to all viewpoints, and although I'm open to criticism and will admit when I'm wrong I find personal attacks are simply tiresome. If you want to defend CBS do so - I think they'll have few defenders. Keep it civilized, stay on topic, and you might win converts to your point-of-view.
Same warning applies to any who respond to such comments. Don't stoop to that level.
Everyone seems to be missing the point that the US is at WAR with the terrorists!! CBS having reporters "embedded" with them is the same thing as if CBS had "embedded" reporters with the German army in WWII! The word treason comes to mind....
Anyone want to get a pool going on how this flames out and CBS has no egg on it's face whatsoever! I'd like to see the NYT's, LAT's, NBC, ABC, CBS (oops) headline this repeatedly like they did and continue to do with Abu Ghraib. Then you have a pretend IRR Soldier trolling and talking about black helicopters running behind him. I think he's from the 70's.
Toni,
"Anyone want to get a pool going on how this flames out and CBS has no egg on it's face whatsoever"
Any one want to bet what will happen to CBS's advertising revenues when advertisers that drape their products in the flag start getting e-mails from Family Members of Soldiers in Iraq accusing them of (indirectly) supporting the terrorists that are trying to kill the Sons and Daughters of America??
IRR is at it again. Hope you don't have an AKO E-mail, Greyhawk. He'll be happy to post info about you! The executives at CBS that hire the "embedded with terrorists" camera operators that have foreknowledge of a danger to U.S. and Iraqi citizens, and don't inform the authorities should be tried for treason. They should take this tape, work the money trail back, and hang anyone that touched it if anyone was killed in those bombings. If you support (pay) terrorists, you are providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Period.
Thanks ACE. You hit the nail on the head. You are so right.
IRR - Maybe you should read the regulations again. US military members are ALLOWED to be politically active. However, military members are not allowed to represent their views as the views of the military service that they are attached to. Also I would think Greyhawk's Senior Rater would be thrilled that he was exercising his constitutional rights that he is defending by engaging in a lively political debate.
SC: That whole thing about "Senior Rater" folk sounds like something that can backfire when used by a blowhard trying to threaten people into silence and/or retirement.
From another soldiers dad. IRR is just hiding behind his status. What do you expect. If he had any class he would re-activate and do his duty.
David A,
When one enlists or gets commisioned into the military they do not join for life. In fact, almost 75% of first term Marines leave the Active Duty Marine Corps after 4 years. The Army number is about 49%. The overwhelming majority of these men go to the IRR to complete their 8 year MSO. Are you asserting that those that have already deployed, seen combat and then chose to return to civilian life lack "class"?
I certainly hope not. I'm sure that a good reactionary like youreslf loves the notion of the "volunteer" military. Why the beef when others do their time, perform their duty and then move on as is allowed by law and regulation?
Does Blackfive lack "class" for pontificating about Iraq and military life in general when he is no longer in uniform? Be consistent now...
I've done my active duty - thank you very much and even volunteered to stay an extra year from what I signed on for. Now, I'm continuing to do my duty that I signed on for - in the IRR - as provided by law.
A lot of you are mssing something significant here. You assume IRR soldier is a male - but read the "voice" of her comments carefully - she's not. There are numerous women serving honorably these days and IRR Soldier is a female too.
To IRR. No I am not asserting that these people have no class. That was addressed to you alone. I am also going by what I have read in these blogs as to what some IRR soldiers have done. As for your accusation of my being a reactionary loving the voluntary army, careful with your assumptions,I'm old enough to be your father. So don't go there. And finally, my son just got home from serving 15 months of his 2 years of IRR in Iraq, which he volunteered to activate for active duty and served with his unit. And I am darn proud of him.
Old Soldier,
Last time I checked, I was a male.
My bad IRR - your shrill tone when you show up here once a month screaming about binary thinking threw me off.
My apologies to women everywhere.
priceless Old Soldier
Sucked 'em right in....
test
test.com