To: Renfield
"There is something profoundly amoral about this. A newsman who interviewed a state killer at his convenience later revisits a now liberated city and complains of the disorder there. A journalist who paid bribe money to fascists and whose dispatches aired from Baghdad in wartime only because the Baathist party felt that they served their own terrorist purposes is disturbed about the chaos of liberation. Now is the time for CNN, NPR, and other news organizations to state publicly what their relationships were in ensuring their reporters presence in wartime Iraq and to explain their policies about bribing state officials, allowing censorship of their news releases, and keeping quiet about atrocities to ensure access."Amen. (And this should include holding networks accountable for paying cash to those providing Osama tapes for airing.)
To: anniegetyourgun
"There is something profoundly amoral about this. A newsman who interviewed a state killer at his convenience later revisits a now liberated city and complains of the disorder there. A journalist who paid bribe money to fascists and whose dispatches aired from Baghdad in wartime only because the Baathist party felt that they served their own terrorist purposes is disturbed about the chaos of liberation. Now is the time for CNN, NPR, and other news organizations to state publicly what their relationships were in ensuring their reporters presence in wartime Iraq and to explain their policies about bribing state officials, allowing censorship of their news releases, and keeping quiet about atrocities to ensure access."some relevant words here:
Mt 7:3-5-AND WHY BEHOLDEST THOU THE MOTE THAT IS IN THY BROTHER'S EYE, BUT CONSIDEREST NOT THE BEAM THAT IS IN THINE OWN EYE?
16 posted on
04/14/2003 6:43:12 AM PDT by
philomath
(from the state of franklin)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson