American hostage decapitated by al-Qaida--I hope Dan Rather is happy

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]

Everything in Alger's post was moronic. Usually his posts are just filled with lies and anti-American, anti-Israel propoganda, but today's was just moronic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alger's mind is warped, roughly like the stairs in an Escher woodcut. No further explanation needed.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
Dan Rather is taking concrete steps which have the obvious effect of inflaming emotions. Do you seriously dispute that the repeated, gratuitous broadcasting of the prison photos is going to inflame emotions over there?


[/ QUOTE ]

The exact same thing can be said about the CONTENT of the pictures. Do you think that the military (or at least those who were involved with these prisoners) were attempting to inflame the enemy? You are spending more time worrying about the distribution of the photos instead of worrying about the content of them. I'm full of cliches today, but Don't Shoot The Messenger --- Dan Rather (and the rest of the liberal media) wouldn't have jack to report on if those idiots didn't behave in the way they did.


I've said this before, but conservatives are always talking about personal responsibility (or at least they were during the Clinton years). Why deflect from the real issue(s) here? There's plenty of things to be pissed off about in this whole fiasco --- the media handling of it is about 756th on the list.

Was it media bias when over and over again we heard that Clinton bombed an aspirin factory? Why not? Why was saying that Clinton "wagged the dog" not unpatriotic but similar criticisms of Bush are? Why the double standard?

[B-Man]

Have you read my posts? I condemned the humiliation/abuse of the prisoners, and said we have to hold responsible the people who committed these acts.

That doesn't mean we need to broadcast the pictures every 30 seconds. That's unnecessary and inflamatory. It's clearly politically motivated.

[ QUOTE ]
Was it media bias when over and over again we heard that Clinton bombed an aspirin factory?

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I don't think we heard nearly enough about the fact that it was allegedly just an aspirin factory, especially on a timely basis, and second, I have no problem with reporting on the prisoner abuse, it's the manner in which the reporting is being done that is outrageous. We should be reporting on the scandal; we should not be showing the photos over and over again.

Finally, I never said anything close to the things you seem to be attributing to me.

[elwoodblues]

I guess I really don't understand your position (I'm probably just being thick). Is this your position: It is okay to report on the prisoner abuse, but not put that report into context by showing the photos upon which your report is based because that might inflame people.

Is it news when new photos surface? Should those new photos be shown or just a description? "New photos surfaced today. They depict a man being sodomized by a glow stick with a female US soldier looking on..."

[MaxPower]

Can you honestly blame the Media for this?

Certainly these terrorists are using the media to try to turn opinions against the war/occupation. However, atrocities like these were bound to happen whether or not CBS broadcasts this story.

[B-Man]

OK, let me try to clarify.

1. It is definitely o.k. to [/b] report [/b] the abuse story. Hell, it's more than ok, it's the media's duty.

2. I'm not sure if the photos should have been shown at all. Personally, I think the benefit of keeping them under wraps while we have hostages in the hands of lunatics outweighs the benefit of broadcasting the photos, but I also see that there is an argument to be made that the initial showing was newsworthy and outweighed any inflamatory effects.

3. What I have a problem with is the gratuitous, repeated showings of these photos. There is no need for them to be continually rebroadcast. Even if an initial showing was appropriate, there is no need to constantly rebroadcast them; this is inflamatory and is increasing the risk to our hostages (it's also clearly politically motivated; that's not the biggest reason the rebroadcast is wrong, it's just the primary motivation behind the broadcasts, IMO).

[Chris Alger]

[ QUOTE ]
Arabs and Islamic fanatics commit atrocities against Americans and Israelis all the time. They did this before the war, and they continue to do this.

[/ QUOTE ]
If I understood the point of the thread you started, it was that persistent media images about the war in Iraq bore some responsibility for this atrocity. Now you're implying that the war has nothing to do with it.

This is the sort of contradictory nonsense that war supporters often spew out, a perfect example of how they lack of any moral compass and why their moral condemnations of others can't be taken seriously.

[elwoodblues]

Okay --- So, your position (as I understand it) is that the cause of the problem is clearly the idiots in the photos, but the media is exacerbating the problem by continuing to cover it in the way that they do. I can understand that position (though I disagree with it).

To me, the only the problem is only enhanced by the media because it is so eggregious. If they showed photos over and over again of a prisoner with a hood on (fully clothed) and a smiling female officer, there wouldn't be a problem. There are still people who want the news to show the 9/11 planes flying into the twin towers every night (I'm not exaggerating, a local talk radio show made that claim the other day). There's certainly a point at which it becomes too much --- I don't think we're there yet.

[elwoodblues]

I think the point is that the media should only show pictures of Arab attrocities once [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
If I understood the point of the thread you started, it was that persistent media images about the war in Iraq bore some responsibility for this atrocity. Now you're implying that the war has nothing to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point of the thread is that the media is unnecessarily inflaming emotions in the Arab world by gratuitously rebroadcasting the photos. There is no moral purpose to the continuing rebroadcast of the photos; everyone has had a chance to see them, everyone knows the abuse happened, and that people need to be held accountable.

According to a report I heard on the radio this morning, there are approximately 80 western hostages in Iraq (I don't know if that number is accurate). The broadcasting of these photos can not help them, and there is a very good chance it could harm them. It is not doing anyone any good*, but it may cause a great deal of harm.

* The broadcasting may be making an incremental profit for the media outlets, and is probably beneficial to the democratic party.