The
New York Times, once again, publishes a piece, on Memorial Day no less, that leaves me shaking my head in disgust.
It seems that as far as this writer is concerned, a soldiers right to privacy and families right to be notified of their family members death before having the soldier's picture splashed all over the front pages, comes after the medias right to capitalize on said soldiers wounding or death.
On this Memorial Day, thousands of United States men and women are engaged in untold acts of bravery and drudgery on behalf of what our leaders have defined as vital American interests in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But even as the flags wave to honor soldiers past, much of the current campaigns go on without notice, because while troop numbers are surging, the media that cover them are leaking away, worn out by the danger and expense of covering a war that refuses to end.
Yes, this war on terror, specifically when the fighting is being done in Iraq is sooooooooo tiring to....THE MEDIA!!!!!
Many of the journalists who are in Iraq have been backed into fortified corners, rarely venturing out to see what soldiers confront. And the remaining journalists who are embedded with the troops in Iraq — the number dropped to 92 in May from 126 in April — are risking more and more for less and less.
Since last year, the military’s embedding rules require that journalists obtain a signed consent from a wounded soldier before the image can be published. Images that put a face on the dead, that make them identifiable, are simply prohibited.
[...]
Ashley Gilbertson, a veteran freelance photographer who has been to Iraq seven times and has worked for The New York Times, (along with Time and Newsweek among others), said the policy, as enforced, is coercive and unworkable.
“They are basically asking me to stand in front of a unit before I go out with them and say that in the event that they are wounded, I would like their consent,” he said. “We are already viewed by some as bloodsucking vultures, and making that kind of announcement would make you an immediate bad luck charm.”
Maybe, just perhaps, possibly, they are being seen as vultures because they are acting like vultures!!!
So they are complaining that they have to ask and get consent before publishing a soldiers face, wounded, perhaps dying, for the world to see.
Poor babies.
Remember now, this is the paper that published a piece showing a soldier (U.S. Army SSGT Hector Leija) dying, and they did this
BEFORE his family had been notified.
Lets not forget that they often ignore what the soldiers tell them if it doesn't match their anti-war, anti-American philosophy, and these reporters want to complain about the rules?
“They are not letting us cover the reality of war,” he added. “I think this has got little to do with the families or the soldiers and everything to do with politics.”
Now THAT is the pot calling the kettle black.
Maybe if they would cover the "reality" of the war, instead of cherry picking just the bad, skipping over the good and ignoring what our troops say, they wouldn't have this problem of being seen as a bad luck charm or a vulture.
Maybe.
Vulture is too good a word for the likes of them.
Lt. Col. Josslyn L. Aberle, chief of media operations for the Multi-National Corps in Iraq, said that the regulations are a matter of common sense and decency, not message management.
“The last thing that we want to do is to contribute to the grief and anguish of the family members,” she said by phone from Iraq. “We don’t want the last image that the family has of their soldier to be a photo of him dying on a battlefield. You have to ask how much value is added.”
Exactly, but that, of course, isn't something the media, specifically the New York Times is worried about.
The families be damned, their headlines comes first.
This is how the paper cleans up what they did to SSGT Hector Leija's family.
There are some people stateside who would agree. In February, a story and accompanying video by The New York Times reporter Damien Cave — and a photo taken by Robert Nickelsberg — that depicted the grievous wounding and eventual death of a soldier on Haifa Street, drew both praise and condemnation on Web logs and in the military about what constitutes appropriate imagery for the breakfast table. What some readers see as a gratuitous display of carnage, others view as important homage to the boots on the ground.
Oooooops? They "forgot" to mention that the picture was shown before the family was notified?
I doubt it, they simply try to rewrite history and downright lie by omission here. No mention of the "reality" of what they did.
Unbelievable that they have the nerve to complain about this type of trivial bullshit while our soldiers are risking their lives to protect, not only us, but the reporters that are embedded!!!
Amy Proctor has a wonderful piece up about the Good news From Iraq, video and other news releases showing some words from our commanders on the ground.
Obviously there are problems. Iraq is, after all, a war zone. But for every bomb that goes off in downtown Baghdad, there are 10 areas of improvement ignored by the MSM. I’m here to bring them to you.
Amazing how a blogger, a military wife can get these stories, yet we don't see them printed in the New York Times and they are physically THERE.
They are treated like the enemy because they are acting like the enemy and becoming the enemies mouth pieces....so they need to quit complaining, start actually supporting our troops, telling their stories, dealing with the whole picture instead of just the Bleed and Lead articles and perhaps, then, they will stop being seen as a "bad luck charm" or a "vulture.
I doubt they are capable of it though.
They are vultures and they
can be replaced.
Here is some good news from Iraq that you aren't seeing from our dinosaur media.
5/29/07-
BOMBS DESTROYED, 18 SUSPECTS DETAINEDBAGHDAD, Iraq - Coalition Forces detained 18 suspected terrorists and destroyed a cache of weapons and bomb-making materials during operations against al-Qaeda in Iraq Sunday.
Based on information gained from successful operations May 21, Coalition Forces raided a suspected meeting place for al-Qaeda operatives. Inside the two targeted buildings, ground forces detained five individuals with suspected ties to the al-Qaeda network. One individual said he had attended an IED-making class in a building nearby.
Coalition Forces moved on to the nearby building and found a cache of weapons, explosives and improvised explosive device-making materials.
The cache contained three fully assembled IEDs, two artillery rounds, multiple IED triggers, eight rifles and assorted IED components. A trained explosives team safely destroyed the materials on site.
In Mosul, Coalition Forces detained six individuals in two separate raids targeting al-Qaeda cell leaders in the city. At the first location, Coalition Forces detained three individuals, including a suspected IED cell leader responsible for attacks on Iraqi and Coalition Forces. At the second site, Coalition Forces detained three more suspected terrorists, including an alleged al-Qaeda in Iraq cell leader who is known for distributing media and propaganda, including videos showing attacks on Iraqi Forces.
Intelligence reports led Coalition Forces to two buildings southeast of Fallujah, where they searched for associates of an al-Qaeda in Iraq senior leader. Four suspected terrorists were detained.
Coalition Forces raided a building searching for a cell leader within a Baghdad vehicle-borne IED network, where they detained three suspected terrorists for their involvement in the cell and destroyed two vehicles used in the VBIED network.
"Every day, we are chipping away al-Qaeda in Iraq's ability to operate and threaten the people of Iraq," said Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, MNF-I spokesperson.
5/26/07-
SECRET CELL KEY LEADER DETAINED, AIR STRIKE IN SADR CITYOr this one:
5/26/07-
TWO TERRORISTS KILLED, 23 SUSPECTS DETAINED, EXPLOSIVES DESTROYEDOr dozens of others found at Centcom. These are daily releases and papers like the NYT have access, just as we do, but they don't find good news important enough to tell the American people.
Vultures, indeed.
Related articles today:
David Patten from the
Middle East Quarterly explains the realities of Iraq, he doesn't sugar coat things, but he gives a good lesson on the differences between political posturing and the truth.
Bottom line here folks is this: If you want the truth, the whole truth, you cannot get it these days by watching the news or picking up the paper, you must open your search engine and look for yourself, visit Centcom daily, read the military blogs our soldiers are writing and speaking to us, but some are too lazy to look and listen, they prefer to be told what to think.
Those like that, deserve to be called ignorant, because they choose to be ignorant.
The news is out there.... do you care to see it all?
.
