MaiLuk Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Great post CS. >>A lot of people though would not want to see it frankly, that's just my opinion of course. People don't want to see dead U.S. soldiers or dead people on the television.<< This may be true. As an american it gives me an indescribable feeling. We are waging war in far away places but refuse to look at what we are doing. Its surreal. The people on the wrong end of US bombs must really hate the idea of americans going about their safe lives in the US not even knowing what the other side is experiencing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Lets assume the supposition of the 'subtle' censorship in the U.S. or even overt as some contend. What country has the most free media then? What country is the yardstick to be measured by? There are about 280 million of us in this country. One person can't representa that many people. There are people here who can't even tell you who is vice president of the U.S. (really, I dated such a girl once won a $10 bet from a friend over that same question...granted she had other 'strengths' that's why I dated her.. : and there are those that can tell you leader of Ubekistan. I think the underlying allegation in the thread is that the populace of a country with the miitary, political and economic power of the U.S. needs to be better informed of the 'truth' so that the country will better use (according to those who don't like how its used now) its power. If the same alleged censorship was happening in Grenada in the Carribbean there wouldn't be nearly as much concern. Its a valid concern, but that is just the 'feel' of the thread that I gather from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALHOLK Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Hi! There are people here who can't even tell you who is vice president of the U.S. In the 80:ies I read about a survey in the US that found out that only 20% of the school children knew the name of the president. I foun this rather odd as I'm sure that more than 20% of Swedish school children know the name of the president of the US. If the same alleged censorship was happening in Grenada in the Carribbean there wouldn't be nearly as much concern. Grenada doesn't have the power, either millitary or economically to affect other countries, so not much cause for concern. As a side note there is a lot of concern all over Europe about the recent election in Ukaraine and even though it is the second lagest country in Europe it wont affect the other countries much. regards ALHOLK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 An interesting article from the Guardian which highlights the type of censorship going on in Iraq. US Eliminates Those Who Dare to Count the Dead Naomi Klein, The Guardian David T. Johnson, Acting Ambassador, US Embassy, London Dear Mr. Johnson, On November 26, your press counselor sent a letter to the Guardian taking strong exception to a sentence in my column of the same day. The sentence read: ?In Iraq, US forces and their Iraqi surrogates are no longer bothering to conceal attacks on civilian targets and are openly eliminating anyone ? doctors, clerics, journalists ? who dares to count the bodies.? Of particular concern was the word ?eliminating?. The letter suggested that my charge was ?baseless? and asked the Guardian either to withdraw it, or provide ?evidence of this extremely grave accusation?. It is quite rare for US Embassy officials to openly involve themselves in the free press of a foreign country, so I took the letter extremely seriously. But while I agree that the accusation is grave, I have no intention of withdrawing it. Here, instead, is the evidence you requested. In April, US forces laid siege to Fallujah in retaliation for the gruesome killings of four Blackwater employees. The operation was a failure, with US troops eventually handing the city back to resistance forces. The reason for the withdrawal was that the siege had sparked uprisings across the country, triggered by reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed. This information came from three main sources: 1) Doctors. USA Today reported on April 11 that ?Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Fallujah general hospital?. 2) Arab TV journalists. While doctors reported the numbers of dead, it was Al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya that put a human face on those statistics. With unembedded camera crews in Fallujah, both networks beamed footage of mutilated women and children throughout Iraq and the Arab-speaking world. 3) Clerics. The reports of high civilian casualties coming from journalists and doctors were seized upon by prominent clerics in Iraq. Many delivered fiery sermons condemning the attack, turning their congregants against US forces and igniting the uprising that forced US troops to withdraw. US authorities have denied that hundreds of civilians were killed during last April?s siege, and have lashed out at the sources of these reports. ... Last month, US troops once again laid siege to Fallujah ? but this time the attack included a new tactic: Eliminating the doctors, journalists and clerics who focused public attention on civilian casualties last time around. The first major operation by US Marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Fallujah General Hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that ?the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumors about heavy casualties?, noting that ?this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents? most potent weapons?. The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers ?stole the mobile phones? at the hospital ? preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world. But this was not the worst of the attacks on health workers. Two days earlier, a crucial emergency health clinic was bombed to rubble, as well as a medical supplies dispensary next door. Dr. Sami Al-Jumaili, who was working in the clinic, says the bombs took the lives of 15 medics, four nurses and 35 patients. The Los Angeles Times reported that the manager of Fallujah General Hospital ?had told a US general the location of the downtown makeshift medical center? before it was hit. Whether the clinic was targeted or destroyed accidentally, the effect was the same: To eliminate many of Fallujah?s doctors from the war zone. As Dr. Jumaili told the Independent on Nov. 14: ?There is not a single surgeon in Fallujah.? When fighting moved to Mosul, a similar tactic was used: On entering the city, US and Iraqi forces immediately seized control of the Al-Zaharawi hospital. The images from last month?s siege on Fallujah came almost exclusively from reporters embedded with US troops. This is because Arab journalists who had covered April?s siege from the civilian perspective had effectively been eliminated. Al-Jazeera had no cameras on the ground because it has been banned from reporting in Iraq indefinitely. Al-Arabiya did have an unembedded reporter, Abdel Kader Al-Saadi, in Fallujah, but on Nov. 11 US forces arrested him and held him for the length of the siege. Al-Saadi?s detention has been condemned by Reporters Without Borders and the International Federation of Journalists. ?We cannot ignore the possibility that he is being intimidated for just trying to do his job,? the IFJ stated. It?s not the first time journalists in Iraq have faced this kind of intimidation. When US forces invaded Baghdad in April 2003, US Central Command urged all unembedded journalists to leave the city. Some insisted on staying and at least three paid with their lives. On April 8, a US aircraft bombed Al-Jazeera?s Baghdad offices, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub. Al-Jazeera has documentation proving it gave the coordinates of its location to US forces. On the same day, a US tank fired on the Palestine Hotel, killing José Couso, of the Spanish network Telecinco, and Taras Protsiuk, of Reuters. Three US soldiers are facing a criminal lawsuit from Couso?s family, which alleges that US forces were well aware that journalists were in the Palestine Hotel and that they committed a war crime.... ?We don?t do body counts,? said Gen. Tommy Franks of US Central Command. The question is: What happens to the people who insist on counting the bodies ? the doctors who must pronounce their patients dead, the journalists who document these losses, the clerics who denounce them? In Iraq, evidence is mounting that these voices are being systematically silenced through a variety of means, from mass arrests, to raids on hospitals, media bans, and overt and unexplained physical attacks. Mr. Ambassador, I believe that your government and its Iraqi surrogates are waging two wars in Iraq. One war is against the Iraqi people, and it has claimed an estimated 100,000 lives. The other is a war on witnesses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayjann Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 interesting article.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iuytrede Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 I remember that i couldn't understand why the Americans attacked the hospitals in Fallujah. The article explains it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick256 Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 The biggest distortion of news coming out of Iraq is the lack of coverage of positive events. Only bombs and bodies get reported. It gives a distorted picture of what is really going on. Check out the link for some of the events that don't make the news. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005986 Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 "Much is positive in Iraq today. . . . Universities are operating, schools are open, people go out onto the streets normally. . . . " So, all of that did not happen BEFORE the invasion... euhhhh .....freeing of Iraq ??????? Remind me how many people died just the last year ? On both sides ?????? Talk about distorting the news BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 All, Have a look here : http://fallujahinpictures.com/ at what war is all about. Warning : some pics are really gruesome. BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 Nick256 said 'T'he biggest distortion of news coming out of Iraq is the lack of coverage of positive events. Only bombs and bodies get reported. It gives a distorted picture of what is really going on. Check out the link for some of the events that don't make the news' Believe it or not a lot of people don't like the fact that law and order is non existant in Iraq. The fear of being bombed or shot for the average Iraqi is not something to be taken lightly. You see they cop it from both ends. The US military will shoot at anything that moves and the insurgents don't care who gets caught in their crossfire. A lot of people also don't like the fact that they don't have access to basic facilities like water, electricity, health care etc. For most people being able to vote is pretty far down on the list of priorities given the circumstances many Iraqis are living under. What is the use of getting the vote when the very basics for human subsistence are not available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.