Skip to comments.
N.Y. Times to apologize for photo, video of soldier
Houston Chronicle ^
| Feb. 1, 2007,
| MICHAEL HEDGES
Posted on 02/01/2007 9:15:28 AM PST by PurpleMan
WASHINGTON The New York Times will express regret for hurting the feelings of the family of a Texas soldier after publishing a photograph and a video showing him as he lay dying in Baghdad.
The letter is part of an agreement reached Wednesday between the Army and the Times to resolve a controversy about the use of images of Staff Sgt. Hector Leija without his consent.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: antiamericanism; deadsoldier; doublestandard; enemywithin; nyt; nytsupportsenemey; slimes; terroristmedia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
Pigs flying?
A non-apology apology?
1
posted on
02/01/2007 9:15:31 AM PST
by
PurpleMan
To: PurpleMan
Imagine the outrage if the Army had published images of a wounded New York Times reporter....
2
posted on
02/01/2007 9:18:43 AM PST
by
Joe 6-pack
(Voted Free Republic's Most Eligible Bachelor: 2006. Love them Diebold machines.)
To: PurpleMan
In the eyes of the drive by media, the only useful soldier is a dead soldier, or so you would believe from their reporting.
To: PurpleMan
Take the reporter and photographer to an empty field and take care of business. Heck with all this letter writing apologies because the damage is done and it was done in a treasonous way.
4
posted on
02/01/2007 9:21:47 AM PST
by
tobyhill
(The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
To: PurpleMan
I'm sure they'll put the apology on the front page. /s
5
posted on
02/01/2007 9:21:48 AM PST
by
manic4organic
(Send a care package through USO today.)
To: Joe 6-pack
Yeah, the outrage would be that they didn't get a % from using it themselves.
6
posted on
02/01/2007 9:22:23 AM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading the article since 2004)
To: PurpleMan
This is just evidence of the fact that the NY Times does not view soldiers as people. They are statistics to be used to boost circulation and further their own political agenda.
7
posted on
02/01/2007 9:22:37 AM PST
by
T.Smith
To: PurpleMan; All
Never forget:
Quote:
the Times's new publisher, Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr ... was a sixties anti-war activist who famously declared that in a confrontation between an American and a North Vietnamese soldier he'd want to see the American get shot."
Unquote.
Stanley Kurtz (NRO on line, June 5, 2001)
8
posted on
02/01/2007 9:24:01 AM PST
by
aculeus
To: Joe 6-pack
images of a wounded New York Times reporter.... Those scumbags eat their own ... the MSM would try to make a buck or two (along with a few political points) with the video of the wounded New Dork Times reporter.
9
posted on
02/01/2007 9:24:35 AM PST
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: manic4organic
Yeah right....
I look for the lies to harm our soldiers on the front page with the apologies two days later on the very back page in small letters right under the Viagra ads.
10
posted on
02/01/2007 9:25:04 AM PST
by
HOTTIEBOY
(Campers laugh at clowns behind closed doors.)
To: T.Smith
The real story is alot sicker that this Houston Chronicle article shows. The reporter for the NYT called a HS Principal and asked him to show this gory stuff to the dead man's family. Bottom of the article in this link.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1777086/posts
11
posted on
02/01/2007 9:31:38 AM PST
by
ishabibble
(ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
To: Joe 6-pack
Imagine the outrage if the Army had published images of a wounded New York Times reporter....I thought NYT reporters were zombies. And that explains a lot of their actions.
12
posted on
02/01/2007 9:31:55 AM PST
by
pikachu
(Some days I hardly miss my sanity at all!)
To: PurpleMan
The only thing the NYT would understand is a multi-million dollar lawsuit. They're all for John Edwards type ambulance chasers. Let them try some of thier own medicine.
13
posted on
02/01/2007 9:32:30 AM PST
by
albie
To: albie
"The New York Times will express regret for hurting the feelings of the family"
HURTING THE FEELINGS???
How about "offending" or "upsetting" or some term a little less condescending?
TC
To: PurpleMan
A non-apology apology? Oh, yeah. "We're sorry if anyone was stupid enough to be offended by our publication of a baby-killing stormtrooper getting his just deserts but if it weren't for the lying, criminal Bush regime he'd never have been there in the first place." Something along those lines.
To: PurpleMan
What is the average time for an death notification from the military these days? They published only five days after the death. Could they have published it before the family even knew?
I smell a rightful, juicy lawsuit in this one.
To: PurpleMan
Let the soldiers not forget when the times' reporters arrive in Iraq.
To: albie
Too bad it couldn't be a huge class action lawsuit. This was horrible and devastating to the family AND an outrage and insult to all of us who support our troops and have loved ones fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
18
posted on
02/01/2007 9:44:35 AM PST
by
fishergirl
(My warrior, my soldier, my hero - my son. God bless our troops!)
To: PurpleMan
Sue the crap out of the NYT.
It's the ONLY WAY, liberals will feel bad - when you take THEIR money, their god. SUE EM!
That's disgusting. They have NO RESPECT FOR THAT BRAVE MAN.
19
posted on
02/01/2007 9:46:48 AM PST
by
nmh
(Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
To: antiRepublicrat
I hope they sue the h...l out of the NY Slimes!!!
20
posted on
02/01/2007 9:47:10 AM PST
by
Recovering Ex-hippie
(Oprah is a phony money grubbing self centered sleeze ..Now we see how you made your 1.5 Billion!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson