What does everybody think about the soldier , shooting that?

The Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPJ) notes that 366 journalists worldwide were killed over the past decade.
Armed conflict is one reason: 60 journalists or 16 percent were caught in crossfires. In Afghanistan, nine were killed in a year. In Iraq 36, another 18 percent died, not in combat, but in "conflict situations," i.e., while covering violent demonstrations. The deaths of 76 percent could be traced to corrupt politicians, drug and criminal groups.
"Whenever one journalist is exposed to violence, intimidation or arbitrary detention, because of commitment to truth, all citizens are deprived of the right to express themselves and act according to their conscience,"
Is it your guess, JustWonders that all those dead journalists were just in it for the fame and $?

0 Replies

I believe we're talking about Kevin Sites here, Dys.

0 Replies

that'sd not what it sounds like to me

Quote:

I'm thinking it might be a good idea if we make the reporters check the wounded jihadists.

0 Replies

Ok. Only the ones that act like mercenaries, then.

0 Replies

Since I consider the motives for getting into Iraq to be pretty mercenary, how about we get Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld to check the Jihadists?

0 Replies

Delusional souls will always be with us, but at least this guy gets it.

0 Replies

At least Bush, Cheney, et al. bear responsibility for the invasion of Iraq. I find your suggestion that journalists be put at risk and/or killed outright to be distasteful, at best.

Your assertion that I am delusional is either weak repartee or sloppy thinking. Surely you can do better?

0 Replies

Interesting that a mere mention of "delusional souls" was taken so personally. Surely you can do better?

0 Replies

MerlinsGodson wrote:

Your assertion that I am delusional is either weak repartee or sloppy thinking. Surely you can do better?

JustWonders wrote:

Interesting that a mere mention of "delusional souls" was taken so personally. Surely you can do better?

I see I overestimated your ability at repartee; I shall have to switch to my second hypothesis.

0 Replies

Hey, you two ... if you're gonna do that sorta stuff, how 'bout gettin' a room? :wink:

0 Replies

LOL, Timber Smile

I'm done ... g'night!

0 Replies

Interesting that the Fallujah incident is big news and this isnt:

Quote:

French Soldiers Fire On Crowd in Ivory Coast

By Peter Murphy and Ange Aboa
Reuters
Tuesday, November 9, 2004; 2:25 PM

ABIDJAN, Nov 9 - French soldiers fired to disperse protesters in Ivory Coast on Tuesday after days of rioting in the main city Abidjan.

Three people lay dead after the shooting. One was an Ivorian paramilitary policeman, one man had his head blown off and a woman lay lifeless on the ground with a large wound in her back ...

From the evidence, the crowd appears to have been neither actively violent nor even angrily confrontational. Before the firing began, video shows that people were milling about in rather unorganized manner, and there was no apparent indication of lethal threat to the French troops. There are several separate instances of gunfire over a period of time, fusilades, sounding very like light automatic fire from several weapons, interspersed with occasional single shots.

Raw Video of incident (Download note: approx 100MB - VERY GRAPHIC)

A shorter, less graphic version is featured in this approx. 50MB clip of a Swiss TV interview with a senior French General.

The clip is in French. As near as I can make out, the interviewer says it appears the French troops fired on the crowd without provocation. The general denies that is what happened, saying something along the line of reports that French troops fired on the crowd were incorrect, manufactured by the Ivorians - who were responsible for the initial gunfire which brought about suppressive fire from the French troops - and the reports were intended to inflame anti-French feelings. The interviewer responds something like Swiss TV had spoken with many witnesses, none Ivorian, and all had said the crowd had been peaceful, and that all the firing had come from French troops. The general squirms a bit, and says the European witnesses were wrong.

0 Replies

I don't know anything about the Ivory Coast or why the French are there.

We are not the French.

I am concerned about what the Bush administration is doing in my name. If those of us who don't approve of the US being in Iraq never speak out, then it will assumed that all the United States citizens are in approval of it. That is why I speak up about it. It is a personal thing for me.

I agree completely with dyslexia on Iraq. We should get out, the longer we stay the more we continue to do wrong. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

JW--you think so completely opposite of me that I can't hardly relate.

You make an awful lot of assumptions on people that you do not know.

I believe what Kevin Sites had to say, he seemed very sincere to me.

He said that he was in a pool of reporters. He said that it is the rule that you got to share your stuff with the other reporters when you are in a pool of reporters. He said he considered hiding it or destroying it, but he felt that would be not a good idea. He had an obligation as a reporter to report the news, that is his job. He did his job. It is not his job to screen the news by the military first. If it was then chances are we would never even know about any of the deaths or the events of the prison abuse scandal until long after those said events have filtered and talored. We have freedom of the press so far and i hope that we continue to have it.

0 Replies

That's right ... "we are not the French." The French should not be criticized in their actions, nor even scrutinized, for after all ... they are not the US. The US has taken a "'morally superior' position" and therefore should be held to a different standard than the rest of the world.

0 Replies

Quote:

That's right ... "we are not the French." The French should not be criticized in their actions, nor even scrutinized, for after all ... they are not the US. The US has taken a "'morally superior' position" and therefore should be held to a different standard than the rest of the world.

Um, yes, we should be held to a different standard than the rest of the world.

We continually hold ourselves above the rest of the world, why can they not do the same?

For us to continue to carry the moral justifications we need to invade sovreign countries and not be seen as imperialists or colonialists, we have to be held to a higher standard of conduct. What is so hard for you to understand about that, Tico, other than your (quite predictable) knee-jerk conservative reaction of French-bashing?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Well, that just shows that we are not the only country whose military can overreact. It's for reasons like these that I am on my way to becoming a pacifist.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
That's right ... "we are not the French." The French should not be criticized in their actions, nor even scrutinized, for after all ... they are not the US. The US has taken a "'morally superior' position" and therefore should be held to a different standard than the rest of the world.

For us to continue to carry the moral justifications we need to invade sovreign countries and not be seen as imperialists or colonialists, we have to be held to a higher standard of conduct. What is so hard for you to understand about that, Tico, other than your (quite predictable) knee-jerk conservative reaction of French-bashing?

I thought he was "liberal"-bashing.

As for the French troops... Ultimately, they are responsible to their chain of command who is responsible to the civilian authorities.

Hmm... I see a parallel here. Wait! Wait! Let's call what they did "security rounds" and ignore it since afterall boys will be boys.

0 Replies

Cyclops wrote:

... we have to be held to a higher standard of conduct.

Are you an equal opportunity critic, or are you just critical of the US? When the US takes action, you are critical. Yet it seems to cause you pain to even be critical of the terrorists/insurgency in Iraq. It comes as no real surprise that you, apparently, are not critical of the French.

I'm not sure how you arrived at your "the US claims to be morally superior and therefore it should be held to a higher standard" belief, but why do you limit its application to the US? And do you seriously believe the French don't claim to be morally superior concerning EVERYTHING?

0 Replies

logical defense of "war"
(1) population control
(2) canabalism
every other excuse is just that, an excuse.

0 Replies

Someone might be perceived as only being concerned with US actions because those actions are done in the name of her citizens, which probably includes said person.

I might be equally critical of both armies, but the one I care more about is the one fighting in my name.

I am amused, though, by the response of some. We did something bad, well, it wasn't that bad, you don't know all the facts..... Hey look what the French did!!

0 Replies

What does everybody think about the soldier , shooting that?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know