Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN Allowed to Go on Death Search
CNN | 09/09/05 | Self

Posted on 09/09/2005 5:04:35 PM PDT by RTINSC

Anderson Cooper announced on CNN that a restraining order (1st Amendment) has been issued allowing reporters to meddle in the search for dead bodies.


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS: cnn; cultureofdeath; dncpropagandists; ghouls; katrina; necrophiliac; searchandrescue
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-163 next last
To: frankjr
Image hosted by Photobucket.com tooo funny...
121 posted on 09/09/2005 6:35:23 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: uncitizen
If CNN thought that Americans deserve to see the morbidity of this, why didn't they feel that way about the pics of Americans falling to their death out of the windows of the WTC?

---

It's based on their perception of their own (and the Democrats) interest.

Pictures of the people dying on 9/11 might cause people to feel that something bad happened on that day and might justify a military response, and put the military and George Bush in a favorable light.

Pictures of Katrina-caused dead can be spun as George Bush's fault and used to destroy his presidency.

The Left feels that they have been too sedate and soft-spoken in making their case that George Bush is evil, and the American people haven't heard them. They think this is increasing the volume.

More likely it will disgust the American people.

Hey, while the Left is destroying itself, don't tip the jerks off that this is a bad idea.
122 posted on 09/09/2005 6:38:12 PM PDT by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ARealMothersSonForever

I agree with you that it should not be broadcast live. I hope that CNN does, too. I know the Fox talking head this morning seemed to agree that the media should not accompany the recovery crews. But, if CNN, et al, go, Fox will not have a choice, in business terms.


123 posted on 09/09/2005 6:38:21 PM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

When the media wanted to see Dale Earnhardt's autopsy photos- the FL legislature got busy.
Should we expect something similar from the Louisiana legislature ?

Mar 2001 Florida passes a law forbidding unauthorized disclosure of autopsy photos, as a direct result of the Earnhardt accident. The law is retroactive.

1 Dec 2003 The U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear the University of Florida newspaper Independent Florida Alligator's appeal demanding the right to view and publish autopsy photos.


124 posted on 09/09/2005 6:38:26 PM PDT by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots
Cite the right to bear arms? Are you joking?

That statement (the right to bear arms) does not mean you can own a gun, any more that freedom of the press, means a newspaper can print a photograph.

125 posted on 09/09/2005 6:39:26 PM PDT by Doe Eyes (R)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

Yeah, the more I learn about this area, the more I think they need an external body monitoring their every move. That and rumors of coverups after Andrew. The more open and honest everything is, the faster it is put to rest.


126 posted on 09/09/2005 6:40:44 PM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka
I knew very well why the media wants to show the pics of the dead in N.O. and why they didn't want to show the pics of people jumping out of the WTC. I guess i shoulda added a sarc tag.

Hey, while the Left is destroying itself, don't tip the jerks off that this is a bad idea.

As i've said many many times over the last several days "just let 'em keep talking".
127 posted on 09/09/2005 6:41:04 PM PDT by uncitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Your stance is obvious. I will make a further attempt. At the time, "arms" were considered firearms. Devices that would expel a projectile from the force of a rapidly expanding compound (black powder). A gun is an arm. A pistol is an arm. A rifle is an arm. A thermonuclear device did not get defined (since there were none at that time).
Newspapers did exist at the time. They consisted of words and drawings. Normally printed with Indigo ink on paper. I assert that photographs and video are as much a part of the first amendment, as thermonuclear devices are a part of the second amendment.


128 posted on 09/09/2005 6:42:50 PM PDT by ARealMothersSonForever (Bless those in need this day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Wild Irish Rogue
The media seems to be pathologically obsessed with viewing corpses.

Perhaps because liberalism has become the prime defender of the culture of death. Recall Barney Frank's quip: A conservative is someone who respects life from conception to birth. Well, a liberal is someone who hates life from conception to grave (death tax, anyone?), and seeks to perpetuate poverty, racial animosity, big government dependency, compulsory political correctness and socialist education masquerading as critical thinking/questioning authority, etc... and on and on and on until all bases of the culture war are covered. Misery, murder, mayhem, madness -- the forte of the mainscream media!

129 posted on 09/09/2005 6:43:24 PM PDT by albertp (Malice in Blunderland, The Wizard of Odd, Gullible's Troubles! Steal the wealth, spread the poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Squantos

I heard about this video last night. Thanks for posting the link. I'm speechless right now. I don't care if she had a gun or not... he didn't need to tackle her like that. This is a frail woman and she wasn't holding the gun the right way if she was intending to harm someone (if the revolver could even shoot - looked rather old).


130 posted on 09/09/2005 6:43:46 PM PDT by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

My greatest hope is that the family members of one of these "CNN fiends" photos sues the he$$ out of CNN for showing a picture of their departed loved one on air without a release!


131 posted on 09/09/2005 6:44:00 PM PDT by jtill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ARealMothersSonForever
I assert that photographs and video are as much a part of the first amendment, as thermonuclear devices are a part of the second amendment.

I'm not sure where you are headed with this.

You either (1) think we have the right to own thermonuclear weapons, or (2) think television is not covered by the 1st Amendment.

132 posted on 09/09/2005 6:45:50 PM PDT by Doe Eyes (R)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: RTINSC
Remember how the dems didn't want 9-11 pictures shown? They said it would enflame hatred of Arabs? Well, the reason they want to show bodies now is they want to enflame hatred for Bush.

It's nice to know the MSM/Dems protected the sensitivities of the folks living in countries who danced in the streets when Americans were forced to jump out of buildings. They put the lid on it.

Now they happily use the bodies of the dead as a way to gin up hatred of our President. Some of the dead shown on TV will also be seen by their family members for the first time. But the MSM has no shame when it comes to hurting Bush. Or thinking they might be hurting Bush.

If a grieving family gets in the way, well, F'em. They have no shame.

133 posted on 09/09/2005 6:48:47 PM PDT by GOPJ (A person who will lie for you will lie against you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r

" Anderson Cooper....I must be cool because I two last names.

Anderson's mother wrote a book about her experience losing her son- " A Mother's Story."
His insensitivity to other mothers is appalling.

" In 1988, Gloria Vanderbilt's 23-year-old son Carter Vanderbilt Cooper committed suicide. As Vanderbilt looked on, Carter swung away from the terrace wall of her 14th-floor New York apartment and, in Vanderbilt's words, "He let go."
In this poignant memoir, Vanderbilt reflects on her own painful history and what she describes as "the final loss, the fatal loss that stripped me bare."

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/people/features/4258/ links to an article about Cooper.

"... an incident that most shaped Cooper: the suicide of his brother, Carter. Two years Anderson's senior, he leapt from his mother's penthouse in 1988."


134 posted on 09/09/2005 6:51:33 PM PDT by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: RTINSC

Perhaps for swelling the dems voter registration?


135 posted on 09/09/2005 6:56:50 PM PDT by vger (freeping since '97!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RTINSC

Ok...so can I pay someone to take pictures at Anderson Cooper's bathhouse or circle party and distribute them on the Internet? After all, it is my 1st Amendment right.


136 posted on 09/09/2005 6:58:49 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

Note the accent of the LEO.....I think he's from a state that panics around firearms......


137 posted on 09/09/2005 7:06:13 PM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Great! I appears that you are considering this situation in a broad perspective. The Federal Communications Commission rulebooks are very thick. The giudelines set forth require that a broadcaster or cablecaster may not discriminate against an individual or a non-violent idealogy. Based upon the first amendment. These rules also prohibit the broadcasting or cablecasting of patently offensive, obscene, or pornographic images and speech.
You have the ability and right to make a snuff film, in the name of free speech. You could (in theory and fact) utilize public airwaves to broadcast that same snuff film. There would likely be some repercussions from you exercising that specific manner of "free speech".
Same as somebody building a thermonuclear weapon. It can be done in theory and fact. There would be repercussions.


138 posted on 09/09/2005 7:08:01 PM PDT by ARealMothersSonForever (Bless those in need this day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

"Cite the right to bear arms? Are you joking?

That statement (the right to bear arms) does not mean you can own a gun, any more that freedom of the press, means a newspaper can print a photograph."

Thomas Jefferson and his peers had such great experience with photographs.

That was sarcasm.

They did, however, intimately know about guns and shooting. Owning a musket and a revolver was a necessity, and, a responsiblity.

It still is.


139 posted on 09/09/2005 7:11:06 PM PDT by combat_boots (Dug in and not budging an inch. NOT to be schiavoed, greered, or felosed as a patient)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: RTINSC

To quote Zappa:

Well you can cool it,
You can heat it...
'cause, baby, i don't need it...
Take your tv tube and eat it
'n all that phony stuff on sports
'n all the unconfirmed reports
You know i watched that rotten box
Until my head began to hurt
From checkin' out the way
The newsmen say they get the dirt
Before the guys on channel so-and-so
And further they assert
That any show they'll interrupt
To bring you news if it comes up
They say that if the place blows up
They'll be the first to tell
Because the boys they got downtown
Are workin' hard and doin' swell,
And if anybody gets the news
Before it hits the street,
They say that no one blabs it faster
Their coverage can't be beat
And if another woman driver
Gets machine-gunned from her seat
They'll send some joker with a brownie
And you'll see it all complete


140 posted on 09/09/2005 7:11:19 PM PDT by P.O.E. (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-163 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson