Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

All discussions regarding politics, religion, philosophy, science, cake and related subjects should be posted here.

Moderator: Moderators

Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby GraveI » Mon Apr 05, 2010 1:46 pm

Earlier today WikiLeaks released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff. Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack.

They also made a special site for it: http://www.collateralmurder.com/

As this clearly is news. Big news that spread around the world even, why isn't it mentioned anywhere on cnn.com and/or foxnews.com? Thank god they do have room on the front page for a story or two about Tiger Woods.

Impressive footage, by the way. It left me speechless after sitting through the whole 17minutes.

I said, YEAH BABY YEAH, I am the evil Midnight Bomber what bombs things at midnight!
User avatar
GraveI
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:40 am

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:08 pm

Obligatory: http://i.imgur.com/RFsK0.jpg

But also:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36182383/ns ... tn_africa/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04 ... s-baghdad/

Couldn't find it on CNN, I'm going to bet it will be up by the 10th hour.

EDIT: full video

Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:00 pm

The idea that war can be sterilized so that the wrong people never get hurt is silly. Here's a tip: if you don't want to die, don't work in a war zone. The military has enough to worry about without the media walking around with giant cameras that do in fact look like weapons--this aside from the fact that the insurgents themselves also carry cameras.

Of course it's easier to be sensationalist about it and add a bunch of biased (in some cases factually incorrect) commentary and little arrows pointing out who's who, even though anyone with a halfway critical mind will realize immediately that the context for the video is completely misrepresented.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Kaz » Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:23 pm

Palestinian men are not allowed to leave Gaza neighborhoods getting shelled so they don't have the option of not being there. You're absolutely right that the concept of such a sterilized war is silly, but the people who have been selling this idea for decades are the Israel lobby. Sensationalism is about the only way you can reach out to people on this issue because all the usual outlets for information are heavily sanitized in favor of one of the parties. What other military in the world has the political capital to get away with leveling neighborhoods in retaliation to a couple of guys firing bottle rockets over a wall?
Kaz
 
Posts: 2984
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:04 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:34 pm

Cassiel wrote:The idea that war can be sterilized so that the wrong people never get hurt is silly. Here's a tip: if you don't want to die, don't work in a war zone. The military has enough to worry about without the media walking around with giant cameras that do in fact look like weapons--this aside from the fact that the insurgents themselves also carry cameras.

Of course it's easier to be sensationalist about it and add a bunch of biased (in some cases factually incorrect) commentary and little arrows pointing out who's who, even though anyone with a halfway critical mind will realize immediately that the context for the video is completely misrepresented.


The two journalists may have voluntarily put themselves in danger, but the other 8 individuals (2 of which were simply trying to rescue the wounded, which is something normally respected by both sides in combat) were natives. You can't tell an Iraqi citizen that it is his fault for being in a war zone when the war zone is his neighborhood.

Sensationalism aside you are still left with a blatant disregard for protocol. None of them were armed, and that is clearly seen in the video, but even then one insurgent with an AK-47 (was actually a tripod for the camera, if you didn't catch that) means the whole group is packing. An insurgent with an RPG now implies the rest also must have RPGs. Their lies to command just so that they could kill something is not only stupid but shows their inadequacy as soldiers.

And if you thought that camera looked like an RPG then you haven't played enough video games. If a person whose knowledge of weaponry comes solely from video games can tell the difference between a camera and an RPG then it should be odd that our soldiers cannot. After all, they train and fight with the real thing.

Of course this all could have been avoided if they had been fighting on the ground rather than from the air.
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:08 pm

WatermelonMan wrote:The two journalists may have voluntarily put themselves in danger, but the other 8 individuals (2 of which were simply trying to rescue the wounded, which is something normally respected by both sides in combat) were natives. You can't tell an Iraqi citizen that it is his fault for being in a war zone when the war zone is his neighborhood.

There is absolutely no evidence that these people just lived "in the neighborhood." The whole thing occurred while other troops were being attacked nearby. That's what drew the media there in the first place.

WatermelonMan wrote:Sensationalism aside you are still left with a blatant disregard for protocol.

Bullshit. All you're left with is a few soldiers who weren't polite about shooting people in the face. Because when you're shooting people in the face, being polite about it is what matters.

What you're actually seeing in that video is part peer pressure, part coping skill.

WatermelonMan wrote:None of them were armed

You don't know that.

WatermelonMan wrote:and that is clearly seen in the video

Nothing is clearly seen from the video. It's incredibly low quality.

WatermelonMan wrote:but even then one insurgent with an AK-47 (was actually a tripod for the camera, if you didn't catch that)

All that silly text in the videos is not accurate, if you didn't catch that. Just because it says "This blur is Saeed" and "This blur is Namir" doesn't make it remotely true.

WatermelonMan wrote:means the whole group is packing.

That's a fabulous way to approach armed combat. "Only shoot the people whose guns you can see!" Go fight a war like that and let me know how it works out for you.

WatermelonMan wrote:Their lies to command just so that they could kill something is not only stupid but shows their inadequacy as soldiers.

This is some of the stupidest crap I've heard in weeks. That video is a Rorschach test. You see a camera and a tripod because that's what you've been told those things are. You can rewind the video and scrutinize it in detail, so it's obvious what's happening and the soldiers must be lying.

Except they aren't. Soldiers in combat aren't being told what's what. Little captions don't appear over people's heads when they look at them. They can't rewind what they see and deliberate the issue indefinitely. They have to make an immediate decision, and if they make the wrong one, they might die.

WatermelonMan wrote:And if you thought that camera looked like an RPG then you haven't played enough video games. If a person whose knowledge of weaponry comes solely from video games can tell the difference between a camera and an RPG then it should be odd that our soldiers cannot. After all, they train and fight with the real thing.

You can't tell the difference between a telescopic camera lens and an unloaded RPG at that distance, sorry.
Image
Image

WatermelonMan wrote:Of course this all could have been avoided if they had been fighting on the ground rather than from the air.

This could all be avoided if you didn't try to pull the same moronic stunts as every other wahoo when it comes to political arguments. Some different people shot some other different people in a different country? Holy shit! Relevance to this thread: 4%.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:32 pm

Camera lenses and rocket launchers are the exact same size, after being blown up to match.
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:51 pm

It would help if you knew what you were talking about. Telescopic lenses are huge. They get even bigger than the one below. On their own or in a case they could easily be mistaken for an RPG by someone specifically trained to be wary of such things, especially from as far away as a helicopter. I told you: Rorschach test.

Image
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:05 pm

He was just a single-father in New Baghdad trying to support his kids with his photography. And they fucking killed him.

Image

This could all be avoided if you didn't try to pull the same moronic stunts as every other wahoo when it comes to political arguments. Some different telescopic lens shot some other different pictures in a different video? Holy shit! Relevance to this thread: 5%.

Spoiler:
Image
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:52 pm

WatermelonMan wrote:He was just a single-father in New Baghdad trying to support his kids with his photography. And they fucking killed him.

And other mothers and fathers trying to support their kids die every day when they don't pull the trigger fast enough. It's a no-win situation, not a problem that someone somewhere can just snap their fingers and fix. Parroting intarweb memes isn't scoring you any points here.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:05 am

Trying to justify their actions doesn't get you anywhere either. Justifiable and excusable are two different things. The one thing we should be capable of is showing a little humility and admitting that, yes we fucked up, but like you said war is hell and sometimes shit happens, sorry guys. But what the government did instead was cover it up for 3 years.
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Ensabahnur » Tue Apr 06, 2010 7:54 am

Iraqi Body Count: 95,786 – 104,492 violent civilian deaths as a result of the conflict. This is estimated and doesn't include wounded I believe. These numbers are from March 2003 until the present. Source: http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

How often do you see these numbers in the media?

You don't.
User avatar
Ensabahnur
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby GraveI » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:08 am

Ensabahnur wrote:How often do you see these numbers in the media?

You don't.


This would be true of any country involved in any kind of war anywhere around the world.
I said, YEAH BABY YEAH, I am the evil Midnight Bomber what bombs things at midnight!
User avatar
GraveI
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:40 am

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Ensabahnur » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

What?!!!?!? The US isn't the only country that doesn't control their media?!
User avatar
Ensabahnur
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Ensabahnur » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:49 am

I <3 PBS
User avatar
Ensabahnur
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:56 am

WatermelonMan wrote:Trying to justify their actions doesn't get you anywhere either.

Yes, it does. It gets me everywhere. And I'm not "trying." Their actions, the actions of the soldiers themselves, are justified, just like when a police officer shoots someone for having what looks like a gun but ultimately isn't, it's sometimes justified. Other times it isn't. This is not one of those times. Just because the whole thing sucks doesn't mean it's anyone's fault. In the real world there isn't always someone to blame for these situations, despite what the TV may tell you.

WatermelonMan wrote:But what the government did instead was cover it up for 3 years.

This is a completely separate issue which has nothing to do with the soldiers themselves. And in this case, unlike with the women in Afghanistan, the "government"--by which you don't actually mean the government--didn't cover anything up. They showed the video to Reuters and released a statement about what happened a week or two afterward. That statement has yet to be contradicted. So the so-called cover-up consisted of, what, not releasing the video to the public? That's both their prerogative and the right call. All that comes of releasing it is stoking the angst of irrational people, as this thread demonstrates.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Herosbane » Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:47 am

I was so angry...

But then Cass said everything I was thinking. Playing video games and live combat are nothing alike. The chemical cocktail in your brain during live combat is ridiculous. You don't get to just relax and wait to respawn if you die.
User avatar
Herosbane
 
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:36 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Tue Apr 06, 2010 12:42 pm

Cassiel wrote:This is a completely separate issue which has nothing to do with the soldiers themselves. And in this case, unlike with the women in Afghanistan, the "government"--by which you don't actually mean the government--didn't cover anything up. They showed the video to Reuters and released a statement about what happened a week or two afterward. That statement has yet to be contradicted. So the so-called cover-up consisted of, what, not releasing the video to the public? That's both their prerogative and the right call. All that comes of releasing it is stoking the angst of irrational people, as this thread demonstrates.


More like a year or two afterward. They didn't even show them the full video, they showed them their edited version which I imagine looked pretty clean.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1617459520070716

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL05399965

http://file.wikileaks.org/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:03 pm

WatermelonMan wrote:More like a year or two afterward.

More like within two weeks. Read the article you linked:

In 2008, Reuters said it had been shown video of the incident shortly after it happened, and that it immediately filed a Freedom of Information Act request to have the video released.

Is this somehow confusing for you? They were shown the video a few days after the investigation was completed, which was a week after the attack.

And while we're on the subject of articles you've linked, they're telling you the exact same thing I am:

While it may be true that a camera never lies, it certainly can be misleading. The video is harrowing, and a viewer armed with nothing more than 20/20 hindsight can feel the knot in his stomach tighten as death draws near on Baghdad's outskirts. But viewed in isolation, lacking any insight into what else was going on in that neighborhood on that particular day, what may have seemed at the time to be a justified military action looks wanton and possibly against the rules of war.

The hew and cry all boils down to two things: the lack of context, and the soldiers' demeanor--which is itself meaningless without context.

WatermelonMan wrote:They didn't even show them the full video, they showed them their edited version which I imagine looked pretty clean.

You have no idea what they showed them. Take off your tinfoil hat.

WatermelonMan wrote:http://file.wikileaks.org/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf

Maybe you should start actually reading the things you link to. Their reasons for wanting to shut the site down are legitimate, and have nothing to do with this issue or with covering anything up. In principle, Wikileaks is a good thing. So is anarchy, in principle. But in practice it's not so clear-cut. If someone as innocuous as Geraldo can put people in real danger, what do you think Wikilinks can do?

TheRaven7 wrote:They had to submit a FOIA request to even get the video.

Mon Dieu, is this really that hard to follow? They were shown the video. They were not allowed to have a copy of the video. They submitted the request for the video to be released under the FOIA. They never actually got the video. Instead the video was leaked.

TheRaven7 wrote:They covered it up.

No, they didn't, and if you mooks can't stop misrepresenting the facts I'm just going to close the thread. There are plenty of angles on this issue that are worthy of discussion, yet your sole tactic has been to make shit up in support of alarmist nonsense.

It's amazing how much you have in common with the soldiers, actually. Hooray for group polarization.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:14 pm

It's neither a cover-up nor a lie. The belief was that, aside from the reporters, the people who died were insurgents. They were walking around an active combat zone with weapons. There still isn't any information contradicting this, including the presence of children. Terrorists hide behind children all the time.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Merlin » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:04 pm

Image
Image

Etc.
User avatar
Merlin
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Cassiel » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:08 pm

Holy shit at the second one.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby Zeuter » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:49 am

Tripod has been shopped out.

Aside from that, we could say he's well armed, huh?
simply
it is enough to
your task is simple;
just
all you need is to
User avatar
Zeuter
 
Posts: 3746
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 11:07 am
Location: オランダ

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby WatermelonMan » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:35 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100407/ap_ ... iraq_video

I lol'd, typical bureaucracies being typical.

EDIT: Here's Wikipedia's entry for the whole thing. A lot better than the shitty collateral murder website imo
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Not newsworthy enough for Fox or CNN?

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:27 am

You go in, good people die. You don't go in, good people die.

It's then a question of numbers and the howabouts, to weight the options. To Saddam's time they slowly tortured thousands to death and used chemical weapons on farm villages.

In this video people died faster than they knew what hit them, and they lived and died as free men. They did not act very smart, it killed them. Yes it's still terrible. And it is bound to happen, because things are ugly and complicated out there.

There were many good reasons not to wage wars in Irak and Afghanistan. Those good reasons were not very moral either. The US overextended itself, resource wise and geo-political. Moral wise, there is no question that hanging Saddam was the right thing to do. But is that and a more theoretic world strategic gain worth the investment? We'll see. And you'd better hope it was. Because with all that childish vitriol against the US, whom else can and would do world leadership better? Russia? China? China grows too fast for it's own good and yet is not reliable and responsible enough to play with the grown-ups. The US does well in strengthening its bonds to Russia to strategically counterweight Asia, it's the only option, and it's a good option, because Russia at least knows that being on world stage has not only advantages but also serious obligations, whereas China acts like a spoiled kid that sees the world a candy shop.

What many people also forget is the limitations of this world's resources. Although it's so much being talked about, I think it has yet to really sink in with people. A little known example: did you know that the Lithium salts used for Lithium Ion batteries, built into everything from handy to laptop, are incredibly rare in cost effective extraction points? And those few points will be used up within one or two decades. That's also why widely produced electro vehicles based on such are mere dreaming, as much as hydrogen, as long as no other viable technological approach is developed. And aside that, we all know about oil, and how its chemistry is needed for about every cheap mass production process today, not just fuel for cars and power generators.

The fact is, with all things we consume in our parts, what is affordable to us, other people must suffer and die, be it to extract and deliver resources, be it to ensure they prefer you and give you the best prices.

You don't like that? Then don't always buy the cheapest on everything. Or better yet, abstain. But you can't, you can't abstain enough. Because we are vile beasts. You could at least try for the flimsiest of moral authority by doing so, but you don't because you want that burger, and because you want to play WoW, and even if you didn't want, your most basic needs are already enough to have someone somewhere killed in this lousy world, because we are just too many to be reliably supplied otherwise. And it's those with the most "elaborate" lifestyles, having shelves full of Apple products, comfortably sitting in their cushy chair, the most whiny and sniveling when even the tiniest detail about their comfort is not comfortable enough, taking their wealth for granted, that are righteously mouthing the most about morals, and talk derogatory and ill-informed crap about others and their mistakes, conveniently and anonymous on the internet.

You want to live good, or at least what you understand for it? You need good strategists and a strong military, sometimes doing difficult decisions and ugly things, sometimes doing mistakes, to ensure you can. Because this world is bad, you are bad. Live with it. Do your part to make it less bad. Do, not talk.

See those reporters dying, soldiers at blame? Blame your greedy little unsatisfied individual self that ultimately made them go in there, the soldiers and the reporters, in a clash of fates. People like to praise their individuality when it comes to what rights they should have, but when it comes to obligations and shared guilt, it's supposedly always the collective others.

You want to know why they don't want you to see this? Because you can't take the truth. You just want and want and want, and vote down people who can't give what you want, while you can't take the truth about what it really is that must be done to grant you what you want. You want to know, you don't want to know, a schizophrenia, but most of all you want to know that it is not you who is at fault, someone else is. And once again, someone else has to get nailed so you can feel good about yourself.

Personally, I don't like "all-in"s in real world politics, the people in charge gamble with more than they should feel entitled to. Going into Irak and Afghanistan was not wrong, be it morally or amorally, but was it wise? Most people are too clever for their own good.

And then there is the believe the wars were right, but were only waged wrong. I believe there was no right way to wage it, maybe a bit better or worse, but a right way? Only people that don't know the region and its history can believe that. Going in there was from the beginning bound to be bad and messy, very bad and messy, nothing would prepare you enough for it, this is why most people who knew their stuff didn't dare touch it. This is why Saddam felt save and failed, he thought his opponents were aware and reasonable. And same for the Taliban, there is a reason Afghanistan is called the Graveyard of the Superpowers.

Only an ignorant fool can just do. Sometimes it takes an ignorant fool to do anything big and good at all. Let's hope this turns out one of those times.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4454
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Next

Return to The Bloody Stump

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron