cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:23 am

5 journalists were apparently killed today in Baghdad.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=5&cid=578&u=/nm/20030408/ts_nm/iraq_baghdad_hotel_dc

Now is it just me, or is your outrage over this dampened a little bit by the fact that these guys wanted to be there? I would be much more upset about the deaths of civilians than journalists.

I mean, the soldiers are there because they were ordered to go. The civilians are there because they live there. But the journalists came looking for "the big scoop" and high ratings. They wanted to be there. A combat zone is a dangerous place, and if you are not willing to take the risk, don't go!

So I say to the news networks that sent these guys, don't spend such a disproportionate time wailing about the deaths of journalists, compared to the time you spend on the deaths of others. It's like whining about a high-wire artist splattering himself on the pavement - If you are not ready to accept the risk of being killed, don't go out on the wire, or don't go someplace where you know there is going to be an awful lot of shooting and explosions.

What do you think?

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
prosa
Posts: 5389
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2001 3:24 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:25 am

I pretty much agree.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
 
erj190
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:42 am


Oh my God, Are you serious?

Well,

The International Federation of Journalists is calling for an international inquiry on what is happening with journalists.

The US has informed AL JAZEERA TELEVISION that they have targeted their installation on Afghanistan, because there were targets in the building, which were considered to be of military importance.

According to international law that was an admission of committing an illegality, because you are not supposed to target civilian buildings.

It is part of the "Rules of Engagement"

Now, again we see a TV station being targeted and it's reporters slaughtered by the Cowboys.

Again the excuse is going to be the same, again an illegal excuse.

The US goons are showing their despicable face. They will lie, they will kill, they will murder, whatever it takes. At this point all non American TV stations are questioning the report of Central Command and their claims. There was no warning shot, nothing just plain deliberate intention of hitting reporters.

It is a shameful day for America. The military really didn't need to do this. The blood in their hands will be very very difficult to clean.

But of course, there is no problem. All American war criminals can murder at will, and slaughter whoever they want. The International Tribunal for War Crimes is not recognized by the Nazis in Washington.

How convenient. I wonder what they were thinking when they decided not to sign...

We should have guessed.

And, don't worry...
...This is just the beginning.
 
Guest

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:53 am

It seems to me that a journalist accepts the risks of living in a war zone by his presence. Injury or death are part of the risks taken.

'Speed
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:55 am

Oh there will be an investigation all right. If the U.S. is involved there's always an investigation.

According to international law that was an admission of committing an illegality, because you are not supposed to target civilian buildings.

It is part of the "Rules of Engagement"


Please show me where it says that along with the exact wording. I would like for you to back up your statement.
Please do!


Shameful day for America? Hardly!

Someone seems to be taking these events rather harsh in Portugal? Why is that??? Success breeds contempt is a phrase I am reminded of.

LOL

Have nice day!


Roll On!

"You Can't Beat The Experience"
 
Andreas
Posts: 5880
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 7:56 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:03 am

I agree. Media seems to be so hot to be in the front row to watch the killing as close as possible, it is just their professional risk to get killed in the battle.
Unfortunately this brings up the question WHY they want to be there: Of course because people want to see this, and the one news channel with the hottest pics is the winner. But I guess this is equal to the question who was first: the hen or the egg...
I know it's only VfB but I like it!
 
sr117
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 2:00 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:18 am

I mean, the soldiers are there because they were ordered to go. The civilians are there because they live there. But the journalists came looking for "the big scoop" and high ratings. They wanted to be there. A combat zone is a dangerous place, and if you are not willing to take the risk, don't go!

I don't know about you guys but I would rather prefer having journalists tell us what happens from another point of view that isn't American or Iraqi, otherwise it would be hard for us to see what's really happening in Iraq.

But indeed, journalists do take a risk when going into a war zone, however, one should expect that a hotel which is known to be occupied by journalists is not fired at for no reason. The americans say there were sniper shots, but the journalists say they weren't any. Obviously, someone is confused or not telling the whole truth.

Let's hope this incident is investigated and not shrugged off as "oh well it's war, shit happens"

People died here, and I think it deserves a bit of respect.

Ricardo

 
mhsieh
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2000 2:28 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:23 am

When the Iraqi military decided to use civilian compounds to shoot and kill US/ UK troops, doesn't that make the compounds a legitimate target? It is the Iraqi's action that is criminal.
Maybe the journalist's should mount an uprising against their Iraqi captors. The Iraqis are putting their lives in jeopardy by using their offices to mount attacks.
 
silverfox
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 8:39 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:57 am

I have just sen a report on the BBC where aUS convoy way hit by a US plane.Graphic stuff, the camera had blood on the lens.
Irrespective of whether or not journos are supposed to be where they are, and lets face it they have been in the front line since reoprting started, it was a rather irrational thing to do.
Yes i know that its ok to say after the event, 'we thought we saw sniper fire', but surely there is some intelligence somewhere that MIGHT have told that crew that the building was used by the press?
The number of 'friendly fire' incidents is getting far too commonplace. Someone somewhere should be able to tell these guys to ease up a bit.Trigger Happy is not the way to win over the people, as we are continually being told by Bush.
There was a quote by one of the soldiers of D squadron of the Household Cavalry (yes our cavalry still uses horses!!) that was attacked and lost one guy to a A10 tankbuster

'I am trained for combat. I can command my vehicle. What i am not trained to do is look over my soldier and see if an American is firing at me'.

The last question also provokes some thought

How many Americans or non Iraqis have been killed by British friendly fire?

Is it

a) something less than one

b) 0

c) a number between -1 and 1

Must be something to do with the training.


As i said it is worth thinking about
 
radarbeam
Posts: 998
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 9:00 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:59 am

I for one, don't agree with Cfalk,

I think journalist in the heat of a combat zone are doing an extremely important and courageous job to bring the latest developments to us, ordinary people who at 100 or 1000 miles away from the war. If journalists weren't doing what they are doing, in Baghdad or all over Iraq for that matter, we'd only have infos from what Centcom or the Iraqi minister of disinformation and what they are willing to let us know.

Radarbeam

Note that I'm not comparing Centcom to the Iraqi minister of information, there's a huge difference between both of them.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 5:37 am

Erj190,

Sorry, but you are wrong. Any building, even a hospital, becomes a legitimate target if that building is used by the enemy.

Just a few exerpts from the Geneva Convention concerning the Protection of Civilians:

Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.

That takes care of the human shields issue. If military assets are placed in civilian areas, or, as in this case (according to the U.S. Army), Iraqis were shooting from the hotel, the hotel becomes a valid military target, and can be fired upon.

Reinforcing this, an excert from Annex I:

Art. 2. No persons residing, in whatever capacity, in a hospital and safety zone shall perform any work, either within or without the zone, directly connected with military operations or the production of war material.

Art. 3. The Power establishing a hospital and safety zone shall take all necessary measures to prohibit access to all persons who have no right of residence or entry therein.

Art. 4. Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:

(a) they shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power which has established them
(b) they shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of accommodation
(c) they shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large industrial or administrative establishments
(d) they shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability, may become important for the conduct of the war.

Art. 5. Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
(a) the lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in transit
(b) they shall in no case be defended by military means.



In other words, even a hospital can become a legitimate target if people start shooting from its windows.

As described at length in the Conventions, it is up to the power controlling the area to ensure that its troops do not use protected areas from which to mount any sort of military activity, which might result in the summary revokation of its protected status by the enemy. Thus, if Iraqi soldiers shoot from a hospital, and the U.S. responds by blowing up the hospital, the Iraqi Army is responsible for the deaths of protected persons inside.

Knowing how Saddam and his followers have always "fought dirty", breaking laws left right and center, is it any surprise to anyone here that they would shoot from a hospital, or from similarly protected places, hoping that either the American troops won't shoot, or that if they do, the U.S. would suffer in the eyes of the world press, especially if it the press was housed in this supposedly protected area.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:16 am

Since I'm a journalist, I'll weigh into this.

Reporters who wade into front line coverage don't expect any special consideration when the bullets start flying. They know the risks and they accept them. Lots have been killed or hurt in this war, and lots have been killed or injured throughout history. Not every journalist is prepared to take that risk -- I'm not. But the ones who do aren't coerced into it, and it does take a degree of courage to get in harms way when you have no training, and no way to defend yourself if someone starts shooting at you. I admire the wretches who are over there now -- even the CNN cheerleaders.

If they are staying in a hotel that gets fired on by "friendly fire" or through someone's mistake, they expect that to be an issue for investigation -- nothing more, nothing less. The fact that they are reporters who chose to be there doesn't lessen the impact.

The media always pays more attention to its own people getting killed than anyone else. That's human nature. It doesn't mean they are special.

Take away all those front-line reporters -- and you'll know bugger-all about what's going on over there. That would not be a good thing.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:28 am

The media always pays more attention to its own people getting killed than anyone else. That's human nature. It doesn't mean they are special.

It's a bit annoying though when the media makes a meal out of a specific journalist dying.....the media does not do the same for each specific soldier killed.

This suggests that the media values journalists' lives higher than soldiers.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:35 am

It's a bit annoying though when the media makes a meal out of a specific journalist dying.....the media does not do the same for each specific soldier killed.

I agree with you; they should be more professionally restrained. All I'm saying is they react to their own feelings. They're not machines.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:42 am

Arrow, if you don't mind my asking, in what publications are you a financial journalist? If you don't want to say on anet, that's cool.

Regards
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:44 am

I wonder how many people up here who are condemming this could tell the differenc between say a Milan Launcher and a minicam at a half mile while being shot at from a simular general direction.

I am willing to be not a lot.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
9V-SVE
Posts: 1953
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 7:51 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:00 am

Sure, it is legal to fire upon targets when fired upon from there, but many surviving journalists have said that they saw no Iraqi troops firing from there.
 
Glenn
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:33 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:06 am

Centcom reports sniper fire was coming from the lobby of the building. Has the lobby been placed in a higher floor in Iraq as the impact zone looked reasonably high up.
 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:46 am

The lobby doesn't even point into the direction of the bridge from where the Abrams fired.
 
Hamfist
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 9:40 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:56 am

The last question also provokes some thought

How many Americans or non Iraqis have been killed by British friendly fire?

Is it
a) something less than one
b) 0
c) a number between -1 and 1

Must be something to do with the training.

As i said it is worth thinking about


Yeah, it provokes some thought, but not in the slanted direction you would probably like everyone to believe. When you consider U.S. forces probably comprise over 90% of the operations, wouldn't you expect the numbers of friendly-fire incidents to be more likely caused by the Americans? And you're fighting an uphill battle to argue who's better trained. Top-to-bottom, all forces considered, nobody is better trained or equipped than American forces!
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 10:30 am

For anybody who is wonder what the question is that I am asking.

Can you tell me from this distance.



If this is a reporter or a spotter for the guys shooting at you hanging over the balcony.

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 11:56 am

L-188 That is a compelling photo you posted of the Palestine Hotel. In the fog of war where it is kill or be killed your post of that photo proves that nothing is easy for the coalition in keeping civilian deaths to a minimum.

I hope they try harder.

Roll On!

Clipperhawaii

"You Can't Beat The Experience"
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 3:00 pm

I don't have any photo's but I can see very easily where a minicam could be mistaken for a Milan or a Hot missle or a laser target designator.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
teva
Posts: 1764
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 12:31 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:35 pm

L-188,
The only problems are
1) This hotel was known to be the residence of the western journalists. (Decision by Saddam to group them in one single location)

2) A France 3 team has been filming continuously for 15 minutes, from the room next to the one of the Spannish journalist killed. The sound was on. The only noise you have is when the tank is shooting at the hotel. There was no combat at all.

Then, if it was not a deliberate shooting on journalists and civilians, what was it ?
Is it the way Bush has instructed the troops to install democracy in Irak? (killing all non US journalists, because they are not under control?)
Unfortunately for this strategy and very sadly (because every death is sad) one of them was working for a Brittish agency (Reuters), and the other one was Spannish. The 2 strongest allies of Bush.

Teva

Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:43 pm

Can anyone give a valid reason why the U.S. would want to intentionally target journalists?

Either there WAS shooting from the hotel, or a mistake was made as to where the shots came from.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
teva
Posts: 1764
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 12:31 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:58 pm

Charles, I am sorry, but there was an absolute silence for 15 minutes.
Teva
Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:08 pm

Perhaps the shooting was earlier. But there was definately shooting. It may well turn out to be a mistake. But answer the question: WHY would the Army suddenly decide that it needs to take out a few reporters (especially knowing of course the howls of outrage that would result)?

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
teva
Posts: 1764
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 12:31 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:18 pm

Chalres, I don't know.
Maybe our sons will know in 50 years, when they will open the secret archives?

I find strange to see the same day to see journalist buildings targeted twice.
Maybe is it because they show all the truth,including the suffering kids and women, and not only the part of the truth the US generals want the press to show.

BTW, to avoid another so-called "mistake", do you know that the Chinese have given the US a recent map with the location of their ambassy in Bagdad....

Teva
Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:33 pm

Maybe is it because they show all the truth,including the suffering kids and women, and not only the part of the truth the US generals want the press to show.

Oh, please...

Those kinds of pictures have been airing for the last 3 weeks, and right when they will soon end, to be replaced with scenes of Iraqis glad to see the tail of Saddam's regime go, THEN you attack the media?

Sorry, but that does not hold water.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
erj190
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:02 am


Well, it would be very interesting to scare the journalists out.

Then we have the situation with Al-Jazeera. For the second time the US goes to war, the military hit the TV station that is less favorable to them.

At the same time TV stations are/were the last effective communication mean of the Iraqi government.

Shutting Al-Jazeera up takes them out of the loop, avoiding the Iraqis to deliver tapes of Saddam speeches, being broadcasted via Al-Jazeera.

It is really quite simple. But of course, although very sophisticated, some time the childish and deep-America style of doing things is so naive, that it is easy to uncover.

That's what you get when you have a Cowboy in Washington, a Nazi in the pentagon and a bunch of adrenaline-addicted kids driving tanks.

Just sad.
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:15 am

Wow, you are all over the place with this are you not Erj190? You are getting quite emotional over this and people are starting to wonder.

Why the insults directed to people? You seem to hurl the Nazi tag often. Quite inappropriate.

Have a nice day...I guess.
"You Can't Beat The Experience"
 
erj190
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:35 am

I am sorry.

I consider it to be a fact that the so called "hawks" and "new-right" are American Neo-Nazis. I am not hiding that.

Actually, although I may think that Mr. Bush is an irresponsible Cowboy, I am not including him in the "New-Right"

Even today, a videoclip of the US armed forces recruiting offices was shown of the Portuguese TV. It was incredible. Everything there, the appeal to violence, to ultra-nationalism, is a copy of the messages the Nazis passed to young people in Germany in the 1930's.

It is disguised, of course, it looks better, of course, it is in technicolour. Of course, it uses all the latest techniques of any good advertising agency, of course, but the basic message is the same.

It is really not my problem. It is just what America is showing.

I have not invented that. The new-right exists.
America is invading nations without caring for the consequences, using feeble arguments, and changing the arguments for the invasion as things progress.

America is proudly showing it's strength to the world, basically saying DO WHAT WE SAY OR ELSE. (Of course in this case the argument - a very good one - is the liberation of Iraq)

I have seen that in Afghanistan

I have seen that in Panama

I have seen that in Chile

I have seen that in Somalia

I have seen that in Vietnam

I have seen that in Korea

I am seeing that on this very forum, where many arguments are countered by a simple "No it is not", "SADDAM is a dictator and we will win", "Where are the nay-sayers now that the WMD have been found"

Do you really want me to go on?

As the German foreign minister said in the face of Heirich Rumsfeld some days before the war started, "YOU MUST HAVE A CASE"

The Dictator is falling, Iraq may even have WMD's, but whatever happens, America insists in not having a case, going on with the Bullish behavior that is turning the country into the most hated nation in the world.

A part of America already understood that. Another part of America, supports the troops (whatever that may be) but still is not ready to start an exercise of introspection.

It's not really my problem.

I wish it was.
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 9:20 am

I consider it to be a fact that the so called "hawks" and "new-right" are American Neo-Nazis. I am not hiding that.

And that is why your opinions cannot be taken seriously. You throw names and terms out there are meant to fan hatred against those individuals but in reality do not apply.


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Glenn
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:33 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 9:38 am

Oh, please...

Those kinds of pictures have been airing for the last 3 weeks, and right when they will soon end, to be replaced with scenes of Iraqis glad to see the tail of Saddam's regime go, THEN you attack the media?

Sorry, but that does not hold water.

Charles


Charles there are watered down casuaty shots on Fox and CNN. The more depressing stuff is on the non aligned American channels.

What I am seeing now apart from the few Iraqis jubilant in Baghdad, is a hole lot of looting going on which a Senior UK defence member is not concerned about. Seems freeing the people doesn't continue to policing. And as one reporter showed on CNN (yep the american channel) there are still plenty of Iraqis who are NOT happy with teh American presence. Now of about 5 million people in Baghdad alone, how many really are happy with teh presence. If there is a million that's 4 million that aint. If it's 4 million, theats 1 million that aint. what ever the figure, there is a lot of Iraqis not happy.

Now after every political election I have seen, there has always been parties thrown by the winning voters. A few months later, it's "Those Aresholes broke their promises" what will the Iraqi attitude be when they are no longer riding the wave of Euphoria and life is still no better for them. We'll see then I guess. What will the Iraqies do, when their unemployment is so high becasue all their buildings are rubble and then they see the Oil going to America.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Or an AMerican building contractor getting preference over an Iraqi one.



Or so many other variables.

 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 9:42 am

A few months later, it's "Those Aresholes broke their promises" what will the Iraqi attitude be when they are no longer riding the wave of Euphoria and life is still no better for them

And that is exactly why the UN can have no role in rebuilding Iraq, despite what Annan, France, Germany and Russia say.

They tend to screw things up.

It took the US Marines to stop the UN screwup in Somalia for example, When they withdrew and handed things back to the UN all hell broke loose again and we had the whole Blackhawk Down thing.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
erj190
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 10:18 am

Well L-188, you are an unfortunate victim of a country where sophisticated night vision goggles have been supplied to the population.

You are using them, and you actually like what you are being shown.

And as usual you are absolutely incapable of making a comment other than (and that's because...)
(Yes, because I say)
(No your are not right because you are not right)

I have in many, many posts explained my opinion, and shown my arguments. I have never seen one single argument be contested in an organized or logical way.

I am just listening to the same "no you are not"; "yes it is", "I am sure it is"; "you are not right", and in the end of all of this I am greeted with : "...you see... All this arguments... You can't be right see?, you are wrong wrong wrong!..."

Again, It's a pity, and a shame
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: Journalists In Combat Zones

Thu Apr 10, 2003 3:50 pm

Erj190, I don't know where you have derived such opinions but I dare say they were probably derived from people who have a total disgust against the United States and it's true core values.

I would love to show you America and all that is good, along with all that is bad. You will find that our countries heart is in the right place but we have to do better in many areas. The good far outweighs the bad and it is a constant struggle to make what is bad, good.

You take what is wrong with the United States and inflate it to your own feelings and agenda. You skew the process of understanding by doing that.

Have you ever been to the United States? Have you studied our Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights, The Constitution? These documents hold what is the essence of America and provide the cornerstone of our country. To understand America, is to understand these documents.

We hold these words close to ours hearts but we do not come close to realizing their true meanings, but we as a nation try very hard to do so.
We as citizens love our country and for all it stands, and hopes to stand for.

I am sorry that you feel the way you do. Perhaps we as citizens and as a nation must do a better job in telling the world what we believe in is so very good, not just for us but the rest of the freedom loving world.

Kind Regards Sir.

ClipperHawaii
"You Can't Beat The Experience"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hillis, jpetekyxmd80, wingman and 11 guests