Yesterday, in a link to GayPatriot, I blogged about some extraordinary statements made by Eason Jordan of CNN at the World Economic Forum in which he allegedly said that US forces had been deliberately killing journalists in Iraq, but only today (via HH) did I read this full coverage of Mr. Jordan’s remarks The World Economic Forum Weblog: Do US Troops Target Journalists in Iraq?. Here is an excerpt:
Due to the nature of the forum, I was able to directly challenge Eason, asking if he had any objective and clear evidence to backup these claims, because if what he said was true, it would make Abu Ghraib look like a walk in the park. David Gergen was also clearly disturbed and shocked by the allegation that the U.S. would target journalists, foreign or U.S. He had always seen the U.S. military as the providers of safety and rescue for all reporters.
Eason seemed to backpedal quickly, but his initial statements were backed by other members of the audience (one in particular who represented a worldwide journalist group). The ensuing debate was (for lack of better words) a real “sh–storm”. What intensified the problem was the fact that the session was a public forum being taped on camera, in front of an international crowd. The other looming shadow on what was going on was the presence of a U.S. Congressman and a U.S. Senator in the middle of some very serious accusations about the U.S. military.
To be fair (and balanced), Eason did backpedal and make a number of statements claiming that he really did not know if what he said was true, and that he did not himself believe it. But when pressed by others, he seemed to waver back and forth between what might have been his beliefs and the realization that he had created a kind of public mess. His statements, his reaction, and the reaction of all in attendance left me perplexed and confused. Many in the crowd, especially those from Arab nations, applauded what he said and called him a “very brave man” for speaking up against the U.S. in a public way amongst a crowd ready to hear anti-US sentiments. I am quite sure that somewhere in the Middle East, right now, his remarks are being printed up in Arab language newspapers as proof that the U.S. is an evil and corrupt nation. That is a real nightmare, because the Arab world is taking something said by a credible leader of the media (CNN!) as the gospel, or koranic truth. What is worse is that I am not really sure what Eason really meant to communicate to us, but I do know that he was quite passionate about it. Members of the audience took away what they wanted to hear, and now they will use it in every vile and twisted way imaginable.
Well, I guess he stopped short of treason by backpedaling (at least as far as I understand the law), but I wonder what CNN’s advertisers will think of their continued sponsorship of this network with its bizarre Chief News Executive and his vicious and obviously unsubstantiated allegations. If I were they, I’d be running for the hills.
UPDATE: Charles is already on the case. This was not good news for Dan Rather. Of course, unlike Rather, there is nothing to be uncovered here. Jordan said it all by himself. And what he said is yet more disturbing, if you think about it. He was accusing or at least implying that US military forces deliberated targeted journalists — in other words murdered them. Wow. That is not to be taken lightly, even if, as one of LGF’s commenter’s pointed out, CNN no longer gets much of its business here in the USA, where it has been in steep decline for some time, but in Europe. That makes it even more dangerous that they are slandering this country.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
52 Comments
1. Mr. Davis:Is the video of this session being shown? I would think FNC would be running it non-stop. Or are they observing professional courtesy?
Feb 1, 2005 - 5:27 pm 2. Mr. Davis:Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted.
What are the chances that tomorrow it will be 15? (That’s how McCarthy got started.)
And who are the 12? And why is the rest of the MSM covering up their deaths? Were they all CNN employees?
How many have been targeted but not killed? The public needs answers to these questions!
Feb 1, 2005 - 5:34 pm 3. chuck:We have watched one person after another on the left go crazy. There is no other word for it. The coming debacle of the Iraqi elections as portrayed in Boondocks, the Vietnam fixation of Doonesbury, Krugman in the NYTimes, Moyers, Rather, … the list is practically endless. I suspect Eason is just one more example, and an example that endangers our reputation and hence our chances of success.
What to do about such people? There are just too many with too much support to do anything but hang in there and try to get the word out. I think it will be years before this is all worked out, and I suspect that some “Liberals” are never going to recover. They will still be babbling in the nursing homes. Things could get worse before the tide turns.
Feb 1, 2005 - 5:46 pm 4. Roberts:I think that such unsubstantiated slanders as Eason makes require serious expiation by CNN.
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:00 pm 5. Kevin P:Roger:
I thought that the major complaint about the blogosphere by the MSM was that any rumour could be floated out by just anyone and that there was no one editing the pajama people. I think CNN needs to talk to Roger and the Powerline folks about standards and practices. If he has proof he should have his reporting teams tracking this down. If this was a rumour that he floated so he could look like a hero to the anti-american crowd at Davos he should resign or be fired.
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:08 pm 6. charlotte:Whoa. A slander too far by our anti-war media. This is such a serious and public allegation of government conspiracy and atrocities committed by our troops, that nothing less than an official inquiry should look into it. If our military is exonerated, as we would all expect, Eason et al should be loudly and publicly denounced, and the FCC should scrutinize the pathological inner workings of any networks involved. If there is no investigation, then this rumor will become an article of faith for too many who would like to believe it.
I can’t believe we’re supposed to get our news from these people. The scribblings on bathroom stalls are probably more truthful.
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:33 pm 7. Barry Dauphin:If he thinks this is true, then how many reporters does he have on the case? How far along are their stories? What can he tell us so far? Where did this happen? What are the reporters names who were killed? When did this happen? Maybe as an administrator he can’t be bothered by petty journalistic details like who, what, where and when.
This is BS par excellance and Jordan doesn’t have the balls to say this in America, because he look sorrier than an American Idol reject. And this is the type of guy who will turn around and scold the Administration that “words have consequences.” Well he’s already proven himself to be the buddy of dictators. Let him be worshipped on the Arab “street.” Maybe he can quit CNN and work for Al Jazeera. At least he wouldn’t have to pretend any more.
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:36 pm 8. augolden:I don’t think CNN has to worry about their sponsor dollars…they just need new sponsors that will reflect their new audience.
Instead of Coca Cola they can get YassirFart Cola as a sponsor. Or Jihaddi Flat Bread instead of Oreos.
They lost their audience here in the USA. Their competition is not Fox but Al Jazeera.
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:38 pm 9. mudmarine:I do believe, considering the position and stature of the individual involved, that the actions described above are treasonous. Aid and comfort to the enemy.
Eason Jordan knew exactly what he was doing. He knew exactly what the results and ramifications of his statement would be.
It is one thing to state that journalists were killed, it is another thing entirely to say that they were targeted. For him to make this accusation without the slightest bit of evidence is truly absurd. Words fail me.
Yes, I realize this is a silly statement, but when do we get to revoke citizenship?
Feb 1, 2005 - 6:44 pm 10. richard mcenroe:I would not like to be wearing a CNN press pass near any US enlisted men in Iraq tomorrow…
Weren’t we be told just this weekend that the press in Iraq was muzzled because the only way they could get anywhere in country was if the US or Brits took them?
Feb 1, 2005 - 7:04 pm 11. Jon Ravin:Isn’t this the same guy who spiked stories so his net could remain in Saddam’s Baghdad? Or am I getting old?
Feb 1, 2005 - 7:04 pm 12. Rick Ballard:Article III Section 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
mudmarine,
Legally, probably not – adhering to their enemies fit John Walker Lindh to a T and he wasn’t charged. Unless, of course, one considers CNN to be an enemy of the US. I know how I would vote on that, but I’m not sure that a jury would do the same.
Feb 1, 2005 - 7:38 pm 13. BurbankErnie:As of 7.55 p.m., not one major news outlet is carrying this story. I think it will go the way of John Kerry’s war record and swept under the throw rug of the MSM’s parlor.
Feb 1, 2005 - 7:58 pm 14. mudmarine:Rick,
Well of course, I agree with you. I was writing emotionally not factually. Gee, my old LLL past kicking in? Like I said, words fail me.
I just think he is a SOB. I do try to keep my writings on Roger’s site to a minimum so as to not downgrade the posts. I really have difficulty in expressing myself, especially when confronted with such an ass, who brings out by basest thoughts.
Feb 1, 2005 - 7:58 pm 15. MeTooThen:Roger,
Start the countdown!
How long before this story makes it to the New York Times?
How about CNN?
LA Times, IHT, Boston Globe?
OK, how about ABC, CBS, NBC?
Amd if it does get MSM play, will it get to FOX first?
Any guesses?
Just askin’.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:01 pm 16. Rick Ballard:mudmarine,
I’ve never noticed any lack of clarity in your writing. I really do agree with you on this one, it’s just a shame that maliciously defaming those who defend us is not a serious crime.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:09 pm 17. Kevin P:Roger:
This is OT but it is another example of the MSM’s attitude about the war. In tuesdays LA Times Paul Brownfield carped about Fox’s coverage of the election, specifically Geraldo. I will admit that sometimes the story because a bit over the top but I found one of his complaints quite telling. he did not like Geraldos description of one of the female victims of election day terrorism. This is the line that set Brownfield off. “What are these heroes after?”Rivera demanded. “This makes any civilized person absolutely sick. God rest her soul, this is deplorable”. Granted, Geraldo can get melodramtic but the story of a Iraqi women getting killed because she wanted to vote is one that I have no problem with the reporter editorializing a bit. it is disgusting. Did Brownfield want Geraldo do give a balanced version and give the other side, that he shouldn’t judge when a fanatic butcher kills a woman simply because she wanted to vote. I found his emotion in this case to be genuine and I totally agree with it. it is ok for a reporter to take sides when you are dealing with fascists. I don’t want a neutral look and i don’t think geraldo has to respect their views.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:39 pm 18. Hylas:Robert Kaplan recently wrote an essay that sheds some light on the mentality of people like Eason Jordan. It’s worth reading the whole thing:
The Media and Medievalism
It’s too late at night for me to give an articulate summary, so I’ll just lift out a short excerpt:
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:50 pm 19. AST:I was astonished that this creep is even allowed in polite society after his earlier admissions about covering up the Hussein family’s atrocities in Iraq.
Is it just me or is “journalist” becoming an synonym for “arrogant, stupid, anti-American jerk”?
CBS presents obvious forgeries and thinks than nobody will challenge them because they’ve been copied several times and then faxed. The AP reports that terrorists have captured an American soldier who turns out to be a toy action figure. Now this.
If I were the head of a J-School, I’d be re-examining my admission standards and curriculum.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:50 pm 20. Occam's Beard:Everyone drop a note to CNN, as I just did, urging them to require Jordan to substantiate his claims or end up on the Mary Mapes plan.
If he can’t substantiate his claims, he should be fired before the week is out.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:51 pm 21. Dishman:I’ve been thinking about this in light of Haifa Street.
He may well have spoken truthfully. He may be referring to stringers for AP and others, people who’s names he knew and were killed by the US and Iraqi militaries.
That they were carrying arms at the time might be irrelevant to Mr. Jordan.
If he lied, it’s not a problem.
If he was telling the truth, it could well be criminal.
Feb 1, 2005 - 8:58 pm 22. chuck:Folks,
I think we are in for a long fight. The election did not decide the issues. There is going to be a prolonged struggle for hearts and minds in this country stretching across the next decade or two.
I was hoping for time off and some unity and acceptence in the country, but it is not to be. The divisions run too deep. The ideological war goes on.
Feb 1, 2005 - 9:04 pm 23. Rick Ballard:Dishman,
When the new Iraqi government is formed I will not be surprised at all if a number of the AP Iraqi stringer are charged (justifiably, in my opinion) with treason against Iraq. A camera is an arm when used as they do. Next month I believe that we will see some real changes in the way the pro-terroist propagandists are treated.
Feb 1, 2005 - 9:11 pm 24. Kevin P:Roger;
One more note on the Brownfield article. He suggested that Al Jazeera should be on every basic cable package, implying that it provided better coverage of the mid east. This statement explains a lot as far as how the LA Times covers the war.
Feb 1, 2005 - 9:17 pm 25. Dishman:I’m uncomfortable with the camera being involved in that connection. I’m more comfortable with “accomplice before the fact”. That is often effectively the same as the crime itself.
Feb 1, 2005 - 9:24 pm 26. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):Lets not stop with this one issue…
There are plenty of places where journalists are faced with access versus cooperation. The Palestinians have long been careful in press management – write the wrong stories, and you not only loose access, but you might get beat up.
Jordan may be an all around toad, but there are others facing similar dilemmas all over the place. Hence news from those countries, especially via CNN, needs to be viewed skeptically.
BTW… His statements do not amount to treason. I looked into that a bit (as did some of the lawyer bloggers) regarding Kerry, who I believe did commit treason. Kerry’s actions were far more directly associated with “adhering to the enemy” (meeting them at least twice, once secretly) than Jordans. Jordan is simply a terrible excuse for an American.
It is time we got really conservative and dragged in a practive from our past: tarring and feathering.
Eason Jordon should be tarred and feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail towed by a “red neck” pickup truck – all the way to the Canadian border, across which he should be unceremoniously dumped. They already have a long habit of granting asylum to people who need to be in an asylum for the criminally insane or stupid.
Feb 1, 2005 - 9:46 pm 27. chuck:They already have a long habit of granting asylum to people who need to be in an asylum for the criminally insane or stupid
But I thought that was what universities were for?
(pace, WichitaBoy & Charlie, and other innocents)
Feb 1, 2005 - 10:08 pm 28. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):Chuck,
You have a point there.
But he can do that at a Canadian university just fine.
First, the tar, then the feathers, then the rail. Then he can get on with his miserable life.
The old excuse (”I said it to make them think”) is a pathetic dodge. The man is anti-American, and I think American needs to be anti-him.
Feb 1, 2005 - 10:59 pm 29. truepeers:John Moore,
We are just getting close to the retirement years for all the angry leftists who left the US in the 60s-70s for Canadian universities. No doubt Canadians are responsible for hiring them, and they have been given the time to corrupt our young and cultivate acdemic successors. As a refugee from the universities here, but still, in theory, a believer in universities, I pray we get no more.
There is a false impression that Canada is monolith of liberalism. (Neo)conservatism has a strong and growing, if not yet the majority, voice here. The young we have to win over are often trapped in the facile anti-Americanism of today’s global youth. I know, with admiration, that you are worthy of the old 60s label, `freedom fighter’, so please don’t mistake my friendly tone when I say, help, Canadian conservatism is not served by facile anti-Canadianism south of the border. It just encourages youth in their silly misconceptions of redneck America.
Feb 1, 2005 - 11:51 pm 30. truepeers:But I do think Eason should be tarred and feathered. (-:
Feb 1, 2005 - 11:54 pm 31. gc:Well said Peers. While I consider myself neither Con or Lib, I am definetely beginning to dislike the vacuous Democratic party and I am repulsed by this example of slanderous, baseless propaganda. On the world stage no less! Were I amongst the forces there I would find a competing network , get myself on air and insist this braying ass apologize or show some proof.
And did anyone notice Dean say that “he hates Republicans and everything they stand for”.
Incredible. This prick says he HATES, through and through, one third of his fellow citizens.
Imagine a Republican saying something like that, how they would gnash and wail, wallowing in faux revulsion, The SCOUNDREL!!! Oi, mighty tolerant!
We desperately need the Libertarian party, or ANY other, to replace the visionless, moral vacuum that is the Democratic Party so I can have an option when I vote.
Feb 2, 2005 - 12:52 am 32. Terrye:I don’t know if it treason, but it stupid. People all over America have relatives in the service.
Besides if our soldiers were in the habit of killing journalists deliberately Sipes would never have made it out of Fallujah alive.
If our men killed 12, who killed the others? And if journalists make these claims they should back them up. I would not think a reporter would need to be reminded of that. As for the applauding world wide press I suggest the next time they need protection, they ask the guy with the hood over his head.
Feb 2, 2005 - 3:12 am 33. Mikey:Terrye: You have a good point, other people are shooting guns over there, people who like to slice off heads. Besides, if our soldiers were deliberately targeting journalists, well there would be a lot more than 12 dead journalists.
Bring me Dan Rather’s pelt!
(Just kidding!)
Feb 2, 2005 - 6:03 am 34. Katherine:Assuming journalistic standard of ìfalse but accurateî reporting I think we are finally getting a glimpse of true identity of those AP stringers who just happen to be at a scene of terrorist arrack. It is not very difficult to have camera mounted on apiece of your gear and have it running, why you are engaged in your core mission such as shooting up election workers.
Mr. Jordan may have very well been telling the truth: one manís terrorist is another manís journalist.
Feb 2, 2005 - 6:52 am 35. richard mcenroe:You know, if reporters are keticulous about keeping their appointments with terrorists to film election workers and policemen being murdered, they really can’t complained if they’re inside the burst radius…
Feb 2, 2005 - 7:51 am 36. PeterUK:Since this is an allegation of multiple murder,shouldn’t Jordan be questioned by the police or FBI or whichever authority that has jurisdiction?
Feb 2, 2005 - 8:07 am 37. Katherine:PeterUK,
He should but he wonít. And even if they tried to question him he will clam up to ìprotect his sourcesí. Freedom of the press, donít you know.
Pity CNN was less particular with regard to Iraqis who worked for them during Saddam regime.
Feb 2, 2005 - 8:15 am 38. Old Dad:His comments are telling, especially coming in the hothouse environment of Davos. Surrounded by compatriot leftist elites, Jordan let his guard down, and what did we learn:
That he hates his country
That he despises our troops
That he has a total disdain for the truth.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is CNN.
Feb 2, 2005 - 9:01 am 39. PeterUK:Kathrine,
One would think he is concerned about his colleagues and being a journalist somewhat curious as to their alleged fate.
I know it is a bit laborious, but couldn’t somebody check their inventory of journalists,somewhere twelve of them won’t have put their expenses in,there’ll be vacant barstools, editors will be fuming over their deadlines. Can’t be French or Arab since it is too quiet and can only be either one of the majors or a stringer in Iraq.
Jordan should be pushed on this until he either retracts or gives details,the police may not be able to do this but the blogs can.
Feb 2, 2005 - 9:12 am 40. Kevin P:Roger:
This story should not be buried. Everyone should e-mail CNN and vent. They should also e-mail Fox. If Fox receives enough mail someone there will pick up this story and that would force CNN to comment. Let’s face it, unless Fox picks this story up it won’t get out to the vast non-blog population. Jordan should be forced to produce the facts or resign. I did it, it takes 10 minutes, and if enough people spend those 10 minutes of typing this schmuck might have to take responsibility for his slanderous remarks.
Feb 2, 2005 - 10:36 am 41. Terrye:I went on CNN’s homepage and emailed their general comment section and informed them that I think it is outrageous that these young people are sent overseas to risk their lives just so that they can be slandered by some self serving toad who is not above pandering to an audience that largely hates his country.
For all the good it will do me.
And to think Danny Pearl’s widow is hanging out with this sorry bum.
All well love is blind and stupid.
Feb 2, 2005 - 11:52 am 42. Terrye:I checked out lgf and they have another interesting aspect of this tale.
It seems that a person named Chris Cramer of the International News Safety Institute based in Brussels [doncha know] is also a CNN exec. He said in Novermember 2004 that journalists were being targetted for telling the truth.
The plot thickens.
I think CNN has given up on beating the Hitlers at Fox and so they have decided to be a part of the growing I hate America industry.
These guys are not poor, if they are so frigging worried why don’t they get some security instead of relying on the murdering Americans to cover their asses?
Feb 2, 2005 - 12:19 pm 43. charlotte:One would think he is concerned about his colleagues and being a journalist somewhat curious as to their alleged fate.
Well, yeah! Were a major news exec and other journalists actually to believe there could be any merit to these charges, wouldn’t they investigate and then report on the biggest story of the year? How could prisoner panty and pyramid humiliation stories be a bigger deal than journos being targeted and murdered by our armed forces? Jordan must be waiting for Better Homes and Gardens to break the story before he jumps on it.
Or, perhaps he’s rumor-mongering to advance CNN’s business interests in European and Asian/ Arab markets. Nothing like a little anti-American and “honest broker” cred to increase corporate prospects overseas. Jordan’s accusations might also serve his political interests by increasing the natural distrust between media and military that had begun to dissipate a bit with embedding. Maybe he would like to see journalists stay more unsympathetic in their coverage of our Iraq efforts, just as those efforts were starting to get positive press.
Official inquiry, please.
Feb 2, 2005 - 12:33 pm 44. Helveticus:I sent a sternly worded e-mail to CNN via their Web site and received thius as a reply:
“Many blogs have taken Mr. Jordan’s remarks out of context. Eason Jordan does not believe the U.S. military is trying to kill journalists. Mr. Jordan simply pointed out the facts: While the majority of journalists killed in Iraq have been slain at the hands of insurgents, the Pentagon has also noted that the U.S. military on occasion has killed people who turned out to be journalists. The Pentagon has apologized for those actions.
“Mr. Jordan was responding to an assertion by Cong. Frank that all 63 journalist victims had been the result of “collateral damage.”
If you read the comments of the eyewitness in the Davos session, it sounds hard to imagine that Jordan’s comments were taken out of context. He apparently repeated his assertion “a few times”.
I am of the opinion that people like Jordan, Ward Churchill, and others whose comments have come racing back to haunt them, are true cowards, backing down at the very first opportunity and claiming they were misunderstood. Bravo Sierra! If they actually said “US soldiers have murdered 12 journalists” or “The 9/11 victims had it coming”, what makes them so afraid – days, weeks, or apparently even minutes afterward – to stand by their own opinions?
Feb 2, 2005 - 1:03 pm 45. Katherine:Terrye,
ìThese guys are not poor, if they are so frigging worried why don’t they get some security instead of relying on the murdering Americans to cover their asses?î
Why spend your own money if you can use the taxpayer funded best-trained security on the planet i.e. American troops free of charge? And then you can bitch about them and slander some, and get a great headline in the process.
Helveticus,
I cannot decide: is this a case of ìFalse but Accurateî reporting, or ìI was for accusing American troops of being murdering bastards before I was against itî ?
These guys need a new playbook.
Feb 2, 2005 - 2:48 pm 46. scalefree:There’s a stench of hypocrisy here. I’ve read several stories here, on LGF & Freep in recent months, where a journalist or cameraman in Iraq did or said something that the Right disapproved of. There followed a cascade of comments to the effect of “he better watch his back, because a soldier might mistake him for a terrorist & shoot him (snicker snicker)”.
Now someone comes forward & says he thinks maybe some of those soldiers took that action that so many of you quite clearly approved of & perhaps even encouraged him into taking, and you act all shocked & hurt that anyone would suggest such a thing. Take the logs out of your eyes, brethren, & you might see things a bit more clearly.
Did any soldiers target journalists in Iraq? I honestly don’t know & I hope to God they didn’t. But if they did, I sure as hell know where they got the idea.
Tim
Feb 2, 2005 - 2:56 pm 47. Bostonian:Tim/Scalefree (if you ever come back):
Use your noggin already. If this had actually happened, 1) it would have been a giant story and 2) it would require official investigation. So where’s the story? Where’s the investigation?
Please don’t try to tell me the press would not hunt this story down, if it were real!
But there’s nothing. This is a rumor the guy made up on the spot.
Feb 2, 2005 - 3:20 pm 48. PeterUK:There is a world of difference between overheated commenters on a website and a major company’s Chief News Executive speaking at an international gathering.He wasn’t even speaking off record.
Presumably Jordan did not get to his position by blurting out the first thing that came into his head otherwise the CNN lawyers would have spent most of their time handling libel cases.
The indications are that this was regarded as a legitimate thing to say,despite the enormity of its implications,that the US military was in effect getting carte blanche to kill journalists and that his organisation was too idle,incompetent or dilatory to cover it.
Quite a way to resign.
Feb 2, 2005 - 4:11 pm 49. addison:scalefree is also, perhaps, thought-free.
He wrote “…where a journalist or cameraman in Iraq did or said something that the Right disapproved of.”
First off, is he commenting without even knowing what he is commenting about? Is this a purely knee-jerk contrarian [sic] action?
Secondly, the ‘thing’ the “journalist or cameraman” (would it be too much to ask that you find out?) did was to accuse the US military of targetting journalists for assassination. That, scalefree, should bother anyone, independent of Left/Right politics.
But you, in your righteous sanctimony and on-the-sleave ignorance, have come here to combat those hideous Right-wingers when you do not even know what the story is about, displaying for all to see that you were more concerned with getting in your punches at “the Right” than even having the foggiest notion of the issue.
Feb 2, 2005 - 4:13 pm 50. scalefree:Please spare me the outrage. “How dare he suggest that some of our soldiers actually did what so many of us loudly wished they’d do?”
Anyone care to offer me an over/under on how many comments I can find explicitly wishing harm to come to a journalist, cameraman or photographer in Iraq at the hands of American soldiers? I’ll limit myself to here, LGF & Freep.
Words have meaning & consequences. Be men, take responsibility for yours.
Tim
Feb 3, 2005 - 9:30 am 51. scalefree:Which is more treasonous? To suggest that US soldiers have targeted journalists? Or to encourage them to do so? Just askin’.
Tim
Feb 3, 2005 - 2:52 pm 52. Bostonian:Tim/scalefree,
By all means, work yourself up into a frothy rage over what a bunch of random commenters said on a weblog. And go ahead & conflate this blog with Freep, if that makes it easier to be angry at the commenters here.
I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say… you think the troops DID shoot journalists and drew inspiration for that from blogs??? If so, come out and say it already.
For my part, I’ll stick with being angry at what CNN’s news executive said in a highly public forum, when speaking directly and deliberately to leaders of the world.
Feb 3, 2005 - 3:15 pm