SwiftVets.com

[Tex]

This is a really hot story in the "blogosphere", originating at Forum Blog, which covered the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Here's the meat of the controversy:

[PhantomSgt]

cNN Al Jazeera showing their true colors again. Does anyone watch this network of bias anymore? Just listen to the drool coming from Ted Turner's mouth of the south and you can tell who he hired in the first place. If your traveling overseas watch cNN International one time and you will boycott the network as I do into oblivion.


_________________
Retired AF E-8

Independent that leans right of center.

[kate]

that would be the same Easton Jordon that slept with Saddam’s government in order to maintain CNN’s Bagdad bureau

Reporting some of what we know
Rich Tucker
April 12, 2003
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/richtucker/rt20030412.shtml
~~snips

[Tom Poole]

[Uisguex Jack]

I'm gonna give this story some time before I come to any conclusion at all.

Well except I am allready very suspicious of the nature and wagging spin thus far.

I've heard over and over this story referenced as being a 'big deal on the 'new media'' Blah, blah, blah..... blogosphere. This reference coming from near Icons of the 'old media'.

My first guess is this could be a attempt by CNN or who ever has got this dog by the tail and is shaking vigoursly enough to make the odd splash.... they may be attempting to discredit 'bloggers' in general.

Make not mistake about it there will be retribution for the exposure of Dan Rather, and this story could be a shot at that. Time will tell.

However there are a few opportunities which come up from time to time where I know I might 'target' a jounalist. Like when they are orginizing the enemy to fight against you:

http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=17587&highlight=i+led+iraqi+army

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/23/iraq_adventure/index.html

[Beatrice1000]

Washington Times editorial: “CNN’s Line of Fire” (2/4/05)

In war, mistakes happen and innocents are often killed. For journalists covering the action, the risk is extremely high. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 36 were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2004, some unfortunately as a result of U.S. fire. But were any of these journalists targeted for death, as CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan recently suggested?

(excerpts)
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, during a discussion on media and democracy, Mr. Jordan apparently told the audience that "he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted,"…..

In November, as reported in the London Guardian, Mr. Jordan said, "The reality is that at least 10 journalists have been killed by the U.S. military, and according to reports I believe to be true journalists have been arrested and tortured by U.S. forces." This is very serious stuff, if true. Yet aside from Mr. Jordan's occasional comments, there's no evidence to support it.

Mr. Jordan's almost immediate backpedaling seems to confirm this. In a statement to blogger Carol Platt Liebau, Mr. Jordan said, "To be clear, I do not believe the U.S. military is trying to kill journalists in Iraq. I said so during the forum panel discussion. But, nonetheless, the U.S. military has killed several journalists in Iraq in cases of mistaken identity." He added, "three of my CNN colleagues and many other journalists have been killed on purpose in Iraq." He didn't elaborate by whom. ..…

Doubtlessly, Mr. Jordan's unsubstantiated comments play well for CNN's international anti-American audience, who grasp at anything damaging to America's reputation. If the CPJ information is wrong, however, we'd like to see the evidence from Mr. Jordan. Otherwise, how can CNN justify keeping on staff someone who maligns our troops with rumor and innuendo?

-----------------------------

[redleg2]

I can understand US journalists may have been targetted by US forces if the journalists were covering the war from the aspect of the terrorists, that is, if the journalists were actually in terrorist battle positions. I understand that there may be a few western journalists who are turncoats covering the war from the "other side".

[GM Strong]

Scott Ott gets it right at Scrappleface.com


Pentagon Sets Rules of Engagement for Journalists
by Scott Ott
(2005-05-0 -- Spurred by CNN executive Eason Jordan's accusations that U.S. troops have targetted journalists in Iraq, the Pentagon today issued revised rules of engagement for encounters between U.S. forces and the members of the news media.

Under the new guidelines, U.S. troops will first offer journalists an opportunity to throw down their cameras and notebooks and approach with hands raised.

"We're there to kill terrorists, not journalists," said an unnamed Pentagon official. "The new rules are designed to make it easier for our personnel to distinguish between the two, since they're often found together and have similar objectives."

Once in captivity, the so-called Prisoners Of Undetermined Loyalty Embedded with Terrorists (POULET), will be treated according to the Geneva Conventions, although the Justice Department has yet to rule on their official status.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[DLI78]

[Tex]

Eason Jordan resigns
_________________
"If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness." -- Theodore Roosevelt

[kate]

! yes he did resign ...here's his statement , and links
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2005/02/11/esn_res.html

[DADESID]

[Slednfool]

Bloggers 2
MSM 0

Who's next?

[kate]

[GM Strong]