Posted on 04/22/2006 1:55:09 PM PDT by jmc1969
The future of television, or so we are so often told, is about video on demand, movies on cell phones and full integration with the Internet.
Well, it seems to see that future we need to look no further than Baghdad.
An Iraqi friend of mine today showed off his new cell phone, with a slick two-inch screen and full video capability. He showed me his home movies.
Video one: Severed head of a suicide bomber
The head was intact except for a few front teeth that were missing. The head was on the ground, surrounded by a huddle of Iraqi national guards.
Each one of them had video-cell phones out, looking down at the head and filming their combat boots crush the bombers face like they were putting out smoldering cigarette. Others kicked the head like a soccer-ball.
Then, the Iraqi troops didn’t bury the head, but tossed it in a trash container. The national guards all thought that was very appropriate and very funny. They laughed a lot.
Video two: Severed bust of suicide bomber
This was a study in anatomy and explosive ordinance. The bomber had been wearing an explosives belt that sliced his torso in half. His head and shoulders were perfectly intact and, believe it or not, sat perfectly upright on the ground.
It looked like the bomber was buried in the pavement up to his shoulders, until the Iraqi troops kicked him over, toppling the bloody stump like a piano bust.
"Why do you have this on your phone?" I asked. He just shrugged his shoulders and gave me a look that said, ‘I dunno.’
(Excerpt) Read more at onthescene.msnbc.com ...
Clearly, the NBC guy has more reverence for terrs than the Iraqis do.
FWIW, I think this says more about Engel than it does Iraq :)
It's interesting that he would comment on the "mistreatment" of the remains of a bomber but not the victims.
To our military people: don't talk to the media! They don't get it, they don't want to get it, and they will use anything you say or do against you.
And I should believe this propagandist, why?
C'mon, Richard Engel! Sounds like these Iraqis are doing an excellent job of following the MSM's "journalistic" example. How many car bombings, suicide bombings, etc., do you suppose have been covered by the MSM at the expense of coverage of the whole picture in Iraq? Now THAT'S pornographic!
"The national guards all thought that was very appropriate and very funny. They laughed a lot."
How dare they laugh!
It's a good thing the holy angels of the press corps are around to monitor these kinds of things.
Its probably true, but so what. Anyone who blows themself up to kill innocent people doesn't deserve anything better. I think its funny.
Did you read the article? He asked the Iraqi why the Iraqi had a video of Americans dying.
Is it the pornography of war or the pornography of Islam and 'the way of the prophet'?
I thought Engel's question pertained to all three scenes.
My question for Engel's "friend" would be about the circumstances surrounding his having the picture on his cell phone of the Americans being bombed.
I can easily understand the possibility of having the other pictures of one who is dead already. But, I'm more curious about the likelihood of catching a bombing actually occurring. Was he was part of the group that was checking out that area - either as press or participant in the search? How did he come to have the picture on his cell phone - not why did he save it on his cell phone. The least of my interest would be the so-called "war porn" angle. Just goes to show the flawed focus of the war coverage by members of the MSM, imo. But, I guess that's what a "journalist" does when he wants to "retain objectivity".
"Engel is the worst Baghdad reporter, and that's saying something."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't that the truth!!!
Having video of IED attacks could be useful from an intelligence perspective, though I think the intel guys would benefit from higher resolution than a typical phone camera would provide. Examination of such a video might reveal clues immediately before the explosion took place, which future missions would then be able to use to their advantage.
Shooting video continuously for the purpose of having a record of any IED events would seem a reasonable policy, even if 99% of the video shot would be pretty boring and useless.
Thanks, I read it. You're right. The excerpt mixes parts of the story that don't go together. That should teach me to pontificate without reading the whole thing (actually, it won't, I'm sure this isn't the last time I'll make this mistake)...
I can see that video could be useful, but the question still remains how he came to record it.
I had asked in my earlier post - "Was he was part of the group that was checking out that area - either as press or participant in the search?"
The thought occurred that he could have known the explosive device was there, even could have helped plant it, and was there to take a picture of the explosion. As I said, my curiosity tends more toward how he came to have it on his phone. He may have just "been in the right place at the right time" to get the pic and not be hurt in the explosion. If he was doing it for intelligence purposes to help our guys that would be great.
"He showed me his home movies. "
On election day in Iraq, I saw on the TV news people making real "home movies" of their families entering the polling stations, including their children.
Interesting that this jerk has "a friend" with movies of dead suicide bombers, and the reporter CHOOSES to refer to them as "home movies".
That right there says AGENDA. He wants to make it seem like that is all there is in Iraq and that is BS. Just two days ago the military reported that suicide bombings are down over 50%.
If you went to Iraq how many days, weeks or months would it take to find such "home movies" in Iraq, if ever? Yet this jerk "has a friend" with "home movies".
He has nothing but spin.
Savages.. Islam frys you're grits...
Now he didn't, he asked why the Iraqi had a video of Americans...
that fighting to get their comrades after an attack
Perhaps it was to remind the Iraqi of what he could expect from the Americans he was with. The news critter only saw the negative.
Guess I'm just seeing this from a different angle.
Just asked hubby what he thought, and he said - "If someone other than a MSM type had asked the question, I might have thought he was wanting only to know why the Iraqi had the video of Americans dying, but he included all three videos in the story and focused on the connection between the new technology and what he termed "war porn", so that indicates to me that he was curious why he had all of it on his phone."
That doesn't tell me anything except that we've come to think alike after all of these years of marriage. lol.
A group of American soldiers or Marines (the video was not clear enough for me to recognize their uniforms) patrolling what looked like a farm. A bomb explodes and the troops disappear from view, until a new group of what looked like more American troops run in to drag away the dead and injured.
"Why do you have this on your phone?" I asked. He said, ‘I dunno, they are my heros I guess'
The original answer was "lost during transmission".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.