CNN says its silence on Iraq atrocities had nothing to do with maintaining access

AP ^ | Monday, April 14, 2003

[DannyTN]

A top CNN executive kept quiet about some atrocities in Iraq not because the network wanted to protect access but because it worried about putting lives in danger, CNN said Monday.

Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, revealed the incidents in an op-ed piece in The New York Times Friday headlined "The News We Kept to Ourselves."

[OldFriend]

CNN is the enemy of America. It was ever thus. Just listen to Turner and now all the other people who have been execs of this operation.

[Mr. K]

HEY CNN- YOU ARE EITHER REPORTING NEWS AND FACTS OR YOU ARE REPORTING PROPOGANDA- WHICH IS IT?

[Maigrey]

I guess the Clymer News Network subscribes to the "needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many..." and "It's all about the benjamins..."

[Maigrey]

Anyone notice that they've been running ads about being the most trusted since this news broke? Talk about throwing money down the toilet.

[NCC-1701]

"...I think any journalist that suffered from torture after CNN"s experience should be able to file a lawsuit against CNN for not warning the world that Iraq tortures journalists..

I think any Iraqi that suffered from torture after CNN"s experience should be able to file a lawsuit against CNN for not warning the world that Iraq tortures innocent Iraqis. For those who can't sue, their surviving relatives should. Break CNN all the way down. The Clinochio News Network should be no more.

[The Old Hoosier]

The world knows Saddam has threatened to kill the guy. Guy is killed. World knows Saddam did it. World opinion swings against Saddam.

You're just wrong. No way world opinion would have saved that guy. Saddam killed his own son-in-law after inviting him back--EVERYBODY knew about that one, but it didn't stop him from doing it.

[The Old Hoosier]

What a load of self-serving crapola. CNN's silence to protect one man and his family (if true) - was it worth the ten's of thousands that were brutally raped, tortured and murdered for over a decade?

Your post makes no sense. Everyone already knew Saddam raped, tortured and killed. The only consequence of reporting that story would have been that that cameraman and his family would now be dead.

[The Old Hoosier]

You're right, they should have reported it and just gotten that guy's whole extended family murdered, fingernails pulled out, eyes gouged out, tongues cut out, testicles cut off, bodies shredded, etc. At least then they would have been able to live with a clean conscience, knowing that they had done their job.

The American people were just dying to know that Saddam Hussein had this guy tortured--at the time we all thought he was a choir boy. What is a cameraman and his family's life worth, anyway? Let the truth be told, and human life be damned!

The American people deserve to know, so the next time a reporter from CNN finds out sensitive inteligence from North Korea, they should also run that story. Who cares if it leads to CIA assets getting killed?

[Howlin]

You're right, they should have reported it and just gotten that guy's whole extended family murdered, fingernails pulled out, eyes gouged out, tongues cut out, testicles cut off, bodies shredded, etc.

I guess you prefer the thousands who died because CNN was untruthful and prolonged the debate and the war.

I can see your point: one CNN guy for thousands of Iraqis.

Do you work for CNN?

[legman]

Once you lose your virginity, CNN, you can't get it back.

Now the whole world knows you are a journalistic slut.

[The Old Hoosier]

I guess you prefer the thousands who died because CNN was untruthful and prolonged the debate and the war.

You have no evidence to show that such people even exist, or that this guy's story would have brought the war's start even one minute sooner.

No, I do not work for CNN, and I don't even like CNN. It's just that unlike you, I'm partly rational. I can't go around assigning the blame for a sadistic murderer's actions on just anyone I don't like or agree with, just because I don't like or agree with them.

[jwalsh07]

It isn't about ideology, it is about honesty and decency, and hewing to reasonable standards of journalism.

Actually, it's about all those but the driving force is ideology.

CNN has for years selected their news with leftist bias. I give you the Peter Arnett liarmentary concerning American specops using VX on our own troops.

I give you the coverage of the "election" in Iraq where CNN's reprterette actually regarde the 99.99% number as indicative of something.

I give you Christiane Amanpour and her reports from the ME biased in Iraq's favor while her boss knew of the atrocities and deception for the last decade.

And finally, I give it to you from a horses mouth. More Corruption at CNN

[Howlin]

Your arguments are preposterously inane and specious.

Of course we KNOW thousands of people were killed and murdered in Iraq in the last 12 years.

I suggest you read this post

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/890515/posts?page=744#744

From somebody who actually KNOWS what they are talking about.

Then you can continue your defense of CNN, in spite of the facts in front of your face.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Oh really CNN? What about this article?

FRegards, Vets
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peter Collins

Mr. Eason Jordan's admission that CNN had to suppress the news from Baghdad in order to report it brought back memories for me.

In January 1993, I was in Baghdad as a reporter for CNN on a probationary, three-month contract. Previously, I had been a war reporter for CBS News in Vietnam and East Asia and in Central America for ABC News. I had also made three trips to Baghdad for ABC News before the Gulf War.

Now, Bill Clinton was about to be inaugurated and there was speculation that Saddam Hussein might "test" the new American president. Would the new administration be willing to enforce the "no-fly" zones set up in northern and southern Iraq after the Gulf War?

CNN had made its reputation during the war with its exclusive reports from Baghdad. Shortly after my arrival, I was surprised to see CNN President Tom Johnson and Eason Jordan, then chief of international news gathering, stride into the al-Rasheed Hotel in Baghdad. They were there to help CNN bid for an exclusive interview with Saddam Hussein, timed to coincide with the coming inauguration of President Clinton.

I took part in meetings between the CNN executives and various officials purported to be close to Saddam. We met with his personal translator; with a foreign affairs adviser; with Information Minister Latif Jassim; and with Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz.

In each of these meetings, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan made their pitch: Saddam Hussein would have an hour's time on CNN's worldwide network; there would be no interruptions, no commercials. I was astonished. From both the tone and the content of these conversations, it seemed to me that CNN was virtually groveling for the interview.

The day after one such meeting, I was on the roof of the Ministry of Information, preparing for my first "live shot" on CNN. A producer came up and handed me a sheet of paper with handwritten notes. "Tom Johnson wants you to read this on camera," he said. I glanced at the paper. It was an item-by-item summary of points made by Information Minister Latif Jassim in an interview that morning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan.

The list was so long that there was no time during the live shot to provide context. I read the information minister's points verbatim. Moments later, I was downstairs in the newsroom on the first floor of the Information Ministry. Mr. Johnson approached, having seen my performance on a TV monitor. "You were a bit flat there, Peter," he said. Again, I was astonished. The president of CNN was telling me I seemed less-than-enthusiastic reading Saddam Hussein's propaganda.

The next day, I was CNN's reporter on a trip organized by the Ministry of Information to the northern city of Mosul. "Minders" from the ministry accompanied two busloads of news people to an open, plowed field outside Mosul. The purpose was to show us that American warplanes were bombing "innocent Iraqi farmers." Bits of American ordinance were scattered on the field. One large piece was marked "CBU." I recognized it as the canister for a Cluster Bomb Unit, a weapon effective against troops in the open, or against "thin-skinned" armor. I was puzzled. Why would U.S. aircraft launch CBUs against what appeared to be an open field? Was it really to kill "innocent Iraqi farmers?" The minders showed us no victims, no witnesses. I looked around. About 2000 yards distant on a ridgeline, two radar dishes were just visible against the sky. The ground was freshly plowed. Now, I understood. The radars were probably linked to Soviet-made SA-6 surface-to-air missiles mounted on tracks, armored vehicles, parked in the field at some distance from the dishes to keep them safe. After the bombing, the Iraqis had removed the missile launchers and had plowed the field to cover the tracks.

On the way back to Baghdad, I explained to other reporters what I thought had happened, and wrote a report that was broadcast on CNN that night.

The next day, Brent Sadler, CNN's chief reporter at the time in Baghdad (he is now in northern Iraq), came up to me in a hallway of the al Rasheed Hotel. He had been pushing for the interview with Saddam and had urged Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan to come to Baghdad to help seal the deal. "Petah," he said to me in his English accent, "you know we're trying to get an interview with Saddam. That piece last night was not helpful."

So, we were supposed to shade the news to get an interview with Saddam?

As it happens, CNN never did get that interview. A few months later, I had passed my probationary period and was contemplating my future with CNN. I thought long and hard; could I be comfortable with a news organization that played those kinds of games? I decided, no, I could not, and resigned.

In my brief acquaintance with Mr. Jordan at CNN, I formed the impression of a decent man, someone with a conscience. On the day Mr. Jordan published his piece in the New York Times, a panel on Fox News was discussing his astonishing admissions. Brit Hume wondered, "Why would he ever write such a thing?" Another panelist suggested, "Perhaps his conscience is bothering him." Mr. Eason, it should be.

Peter Collins has more than 30 years of experience in broadcast news, including outlets such as the Voice of America, BBC, CBS, ABC and CNN.

[The Old Hoosier]

Of course we KNOW thousands of people were killed and murdered in Iraq in the last 12 years.

Yes, that's right. And we've known that for all 12 years. Hell, they even tortured our POWs during Desert Storm.

You are making my point exactly. So what are you trying to say?

Why do I get the feeling you just enjoy being difficult, and you don't care how the argument goes? This isn't the first time I've argued with you here.

[Howlin]

I see you didn't read the link I provided.

And I am not the one being difficult. It's amazing that of almost 200 posts, you seem to be the only one having trouble understanding what is wrong with what they did.

I'd have to say that's because you don't want to.

[The Old Hoosier]

I read the link. Unlike you, I agree with the author of the post (see his #2) that CNN could have simply emphasized other reports on torture and other abuses by the regime, "indirectly referring" to such incidents in general without directly reporting on what they knew to have happened.

You, on the other hand, in opposition to me and the author of that post, are insisting that they had to get their cameraman killed, or else they were committing some sin against journalism.

But I can't agree with the poster entirely. Publicity did not stop Saddam's son-in-law from being killed, and you can bet it wouldn't have saved this poor schmuck. Publicity also did not stop people from being killed in Stalin's Soviet Union, although it did have an effect there later on, post-Kruschev.

[demosthenes the elder]

"CNN says its silence on Iraq atrocities had nothing to do with maintaining access"

Riiiiiiiiight...

[anniegetyourgun]

Bob is turning into a middle-eastern "Tourist Guy".....

[Aquinasfan]

They are only reporting it now, because we have Iraq's secret service files and will find out eventually.

Exactly. It's all about them.