CNN insurgent sniper vids - Page 5

Wagner · #41 10-26-2006, 07:10 PM

The media wasn't taping in WWII.....

Sponsored Links

Eric5273 · #42 10-26-2006, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WagnerX5

The media wasn't taping in WWII.....

Wrong.

Cameramen and Photographers from the media were allowed to acompany the military in all battles.

Joe Rosenthal was the photographer who took the picture of the 6 men raising the flag in Iwo Jima. He was not a soldier. He was a civilian and a photographer for the Associated Press. The picture was taken during the battle -- on the third day of a 36 day battle. It was not taken after the battle was over.

Most of the flim and photographs of the various battles of WWII were taken by civilian photographers and cameramen.

Today you have what a war journalist discusses in this article:

War without death
The Pentagon promotes a vision of combat as bloodless and antiseptic

As this article discusses, at the beginning of the Gulf War there was a huge battle when we invaded Kuwait. The Iraqi troops were bunckered down in trenches, and many thousands were killed.

Have you ever seen the film of this battle?

You have not seen it because such video does not exist.

The journalists and photographers are not allowed to witness the battles. If they go in on their own, they will be targeted by the military. Once the battle if over and the mess is cleaned up, then they are allowed in. Since there is nothing to see anymore at that point, there is nothing for them to report except what various statements are issued by the Pentagon. All video and pictures that they take must be approved by the Pentagon.

So no video of the war exists, except for some "video game" looking shots from up in the sky showing the smart bombs and cruise missles hiting their targets.

Death is not shown at all. And the reason for this has nothing to do with respecting the dead. The dead of WWII were very much respected, yet there are tons of videos showing soldiers being killed, bodies laying in piles after battles, etc. Death is not shown because those in favor of war policies do not want the public to relate war to death. They would prefer if the public think of patriotism and the American flag when they think of war.

It has become so rediculous that I have heard them refer to videos of soldiers or civilians being killed as "propoganda videos", as if to suggest that they are not really true.

Wagner · #43 10-26-2006, 08:07 PM

Please...those weren't censored at all(

). For someone with such "the govt. lied beliefs" I can't believe you're buying that.

Eric5273 · #44 10-26-2006, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WagnerX5

Please...those weren't censored at all(

). For someone with such "the govt. lied beliefs" I can't believe you're buying that.

The reporter who is sharing his experiences in that article is Leon Daniel. He died earlier this year. Here is an article with his bio:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...032202369.html

Leon Daniel, 74, a colorful United Press International reporter who spent three decades covering many of the world's hot spots, died March 19 at a hospital in Glen Ellyn, Ill., from a blood clot in his lung, five days after a heart procedure.

A former Marine who spent 36 years with the wire service, Mr. Daniel reported on the civil rights movement in the South, rebel movements in Afghanistan and the Dominican Republic, and the Gulf War in Kuwait.

He first reported from Vietnam in 1966 and was one of the few Western reporters to remain in the country after the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975.

So basically you are saying that everything he says in that aritcle is a big lie?

I have a feeling you didn't read the article at all, but here is a summary of what he says:

1. Reporters were not allowed into any areas where fighting was taking place, and were only allowed in after the fighting was long over and the dead bodies had been cleaned up.

2. All photographs and video had to be approved by the Pentagon before reporters were allowed to leave with them. He cites a couple of specific cases where reporters had their cameras seized and destroyed for trying to subvert this policy

3. He says that more than 70 reporters were arrested by the US Military during the war for failing to follow their rules

4. He says not a single photograph or video was taken by any of the media from the initial invasion battle between 300,000 US troops and 300,000 Iraqi troops.

Read the article.

Wagner · #45 10-26-2006, 08:24 PM

Okay, please show me any part of any of my response that says "lie"??

Man you're worse then the media at twisting a comment....is CNN hiring?

Deuce · #46 10-26-2006, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Joe Rosenthal was the photographer who took the picture of the 6 men raising the flag in Iwo Jima. He was not a soldier. He was a civilian and a photographer for the Associated Press. The picture was taken during the battle -- on the third day of a 36 day battle. It was not taken after the battle was over.

You do know that was the 2nd flat raising right? The 1st flag raising was done by Platoon Sergeant Ernest I. Thomas. There were no shots fired by the Japanese during the flag raising.

Eric5273 · #47 10-26-2006, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuce

You do know that was the 2nd flat raising right? The 1st flag raising was done by Platoon Sergeant Ernest I. Thomas. There were no shots fired by the Japanese during the flag raising.

Yes, I know that. But the reporters were there during the middle of battles. Many of them died during battle. The cameraman who shot the video of the same flag being raised did not make it out of Iwo Jima alive.

And Wagner: I think I misunderstood your original post. I tought you were saying that you didn't believe the article. Now upon reading it again, I think perhaps you are suggesting that film and photos from WWII were censored.

I don't doubt that they were censored to remove anything that was classified or secret, but they were obviously not censored to remove the details of war, like death, bodies, fighting, etc.

I have no problem with the Pentagon not wanting classified details of the military filmed. But to not have a single photograph or video of one of the largest battles of the 20th century? Common.

There is a difference between censoring things to protect classified information and censoring things in order to propogandize the American public. What they are doing is trying "sanitize" war in order to increase support for the war. I do not see any evidence that they did this during WWII. But I would be happy to read any articles or essays that do suggest this happened.

Contrary to what you may think, I do not automatically suspect that the government is lying in all cases. I do need to see some sort of allegations or evidence.

rjs1222 · #48 10-26-2006, 10:03 PM

Eric,
If you want to see war so bad then join up and go. As for the WW2 video, if you look at it you can see Americans killing Japanese soldiers instead of taking prisoners. If war was conducted today in the same manner as WW2, there would be so much public outrage you wouldn't be able to keep soldiers on the battlefield. War has become an event where people expect little or no death, so how can you blame the military for trying to keep it off of the television.

Eric5273 · #49 10-26-2006, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjs1222

If war was conducted today in the same manner as WW2, there would be so much public outrage you wouldn't be able to keep soldiers on the battlefield.

We live in a democracy. That means that the leaders are elected to do what the majority of the population wants. If the majority of the population does not want war, then the leaders should not go to war. It does not matter why the majority of the people do not want war. But instead, our leaders lie and feed false information to the public so that they can trick them into supporting war.

You cannot have democracy without an informed public. The moment the government lies to or deceives the public, democracy dies.

ifly · #50 10-27-2006, 01:44 AM

The time to get an image in front of an eyeball has gone from months to milliseconds from 1970 to today and the ability to censor anything has gone the way of the dinosaurs with the ability to deliver multiple mediums to the consumer and the consumers insatiable appetite for information regardless of what it is. Gone are the days of film and Black and white, everything is now digital with no transfers and the home is the end of the line. So no matter what your views the internet and even television can provide anything you want to see or hear (or anything you don't). I think every side has a right to be heard and that wearing the blinkers in todays modern world is a tough way to miss a wonderful experience called life. So let the opinions and comments flow, I have seen atrocities in real life and not had the ability to hit the pause button or stop and the only way to survive and move forward was to keep my eyes open. I was not intending to start a political thread here nor promote the terrorists (note the word) agenda but put this out there for comments with an emphasis on comments regardless of whether they are good or bad.

I now cease and desist and give the floor to others.

Sponsored Links