"This is the first war in history where all the images on American television are provided by the enemy."
--COL Oliver North
[This from a post at @ Large aptly titled, 'Sleeping with the Enemy']
It's common knowledge that much of the reporting being done in Iraq and Baghdad is done from the safety of 'The Green Zone', and yet it never occurred to me that the images, as well, would come from stringers. I am both surprised and nonplussed by this revelation.
19 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Oh, wait ... Never mind.
Especially amusing since you think so lowly of U.S. media, doubly especailly amusing since you, EL, as I do, work for the U.S. media! It's a bitch, ain't it?
Seriously... Is that all you got?
I may work in media... albeit small market media, but at least I don't drink the Kool Aid. I have my own beliefs and opinions, and I don't mind voicing them.
Same as you. Same as Dan... to each their own, but try not to be offended if I choose to hold my nose.
Ollie North may or may not be a Christian, I know nothing about the man except the facts surrounding his involvement in war crimes in Nicaragua.
Well, that and he is unrepentant for his part in selling weapons illegally to Iran so that he could take those profits and give them illegally to terrorists in Nicaragua.
I don't hate the man. I don't know him.
But anyone - claiming Christ or not - who has participated in such horrendous crimes and who is unrepentant about it - who in fact is PROUD of what he did - that man will always have my opposition as an American and a Christian.
Would you give much heed to an unrepentant rapist who was speaking on women's issue? Would you give much heed to an unrepentant pedophile speaking on children's issues?
The man has no credibility as a Christian or as an American (I'm not saying he's NOT a Christian or an American, mind you).
Seriously, what does it take for you to be appalled by the sin of someone who happens to agree with you? You question my Christianity and mock my faith ("sold your soul to liberal propagandists") regularly here because I have a different interpretation of the Bible on a few issues and yet this man supports the killing of tens of thousands of Nicaraguans and you appear to venerate him?!
What gives? Is it possible you don't know his part in infamy or do you know about his crimes and yet still consider him a brother over me, merely because he believes the "right" way on homosexuality and supporting war?
The contra army attacking Nicaragua, organized, funded, and advised by the United States, specialized in attacking “soft targets,” the “selective but systematic killing of persons they perceive as representing the government,” and “indiscriminate attacks on civilians” (Human Rights Watch, 1987).
But I know: HRW is a "leftist" organization not to be trusted, right? But Ollie North is a Christian who believes the right way therefore he IS to be trusted.
Lord have mercy.
Is it merely because we disagree with your interpretation of the Bible on the point of homosexuality, peacemaking and to some degree, economics? Do you treat everyone who disagrees with you on these topics so harshly? Do you treat others who disagree with you on other topics as harshly as well?
I mean, if someone disagreed with your interpretation of OSAS, are they hell-bound and enemies of the church and, for that reason you must stand opposed belligerantly to them?
Or is there something deeper than mere disagreement? Do you suspect that we are lying about our faith and deliberately trying to undermine True Believers? Do you suspect that we secretly are terrorist-supporters?
There is no disdain in this query - these are just honest questions I have.
If you aren't interested in talking about it here where it's off-topic, you can always email me: paynehollow at yahoo.
Regarding your comments on Oliver North:
"I know nothing about the man except the facts surrounding his involvement in war crimes in Nicaragua."
If this was a genuine statement of truth, how then can you say North is 'unrepentant'? What do you honestly know about him besides 'the facts surrounding his involvement in war crimes in Nicaragua'?
As for my self, I read what he writes, I've heard him speak of his faith... publically; on radio AND television. And whatever his past crimes, he is still a retired Colonel in the Marine Corp with an understanding of war-- fair AND foul --political situations, AND, since he's spent months on the ground embedded with troops, longer than any other reporter I'm aware of, his opinion carries great weight on what's going on on the ground in Iraq, and within the ranks of Media' bunkered in "The Green Zone."
Whether or not he's repentant is between God and Oliver North. Will you judge him to his and your dying breath for what he may have done wrong twenty years ago? Or will you, like God, forget his crimes... since they weren't the least bit sexual in nature... and judge the tree by the fruit it currently bears? For I tell you this: If he HAS repented, and since you don't know anything 'about the man except the facts surrounding his involvement in war crimes in Nicaragua', what will Jesus say to
when you're face to face with Him and you have to give account for every idle word you spoke against COL North, who is your fellow laborer in Christ? We can both be thankful that COL North, and everyone else we have wronged with our tongues will not hold in their hearts ANY resentment toward us, and will instead love us with an intimacy that cannot be matched here on earth.
As for the rest, we can discuss that later. I'm going to be late for work if I keep going.
They can not say that I will not change my opinions - I already have. I grew up thinking the Democrat party was the poor peoples party and I was poor. I stayed with that party through one term of Jimmy Carter and then when Bill Clinton got elected, I just got my eyes opened wider. I now realize that even Republicans have more scoundrels than I like, but the platform of the party has at least some decency.
As a Christian, I will try to find the candidate that most nearly represents my morals and has the spine to stand for them. I'm afraid it is a sign of the times, in that they are getting fewer. Underneath it all though, God is in control and when we have dishonored and embarrassed Him too much, I think He will again bring judgment and we best be getting ready.
As NORTH himself testified about his involvement: "I never considered myself a fall guy. I know what I did. I know why I did it. I'm not ashamed of it."
He is proud of his part in actions that led to the deaths of thousands of Nicaraguans. He thinks he was doing the right thing and therefore, all those deaths were a acceptable to him.
I take that to be unrepentant.
How do you take it?
I, too, wonder what will Jesus say when you're face to face with Him and you have to give account for every idle word you spoke against Dan Trabue and ER, who are your fellow laborers in Christ?
As to my comments about North, I think he'd say "Well done." Because I spoke the truth against evil action (and that's what I think war crimes/supporting the killing of thousands of people are - evil), even though that truth is unpopular amongst many of my fellow Christians.
"I said I was generally unfamiliar with North except 'his involvement in war crimes in Nicaragua.'"
When anyone can go up five comments and read EXACTLY what you said, and the word 'generally' appears nowhere.
What you said was "I know nothing about the man except..." And yet knowing nothing you cast doubt on his word as a Marine and a journalist? That's rich coming from a man who demands the rest of us be more 'Christian' toward people you defend.
Furthermore, you continue to castigate a man who 20 years ago saw no reason to feel guilty for what he was ordered to do, conveniently forgetting that the man today is 20 years removed from the man who testified before congress.
Jesus admonished Peter and the others to forgive 'seventy times seven', but you can't pull your head out of the eighties to see if anything might have changed.
But you, all pious and self-righteous in the very first comment you made, call the man a war criminal. What you conventiently forget-- or intentionally leave out --is that while he was found guilty on May 4, 1989 on three counts (out of 12), his convictions were vacated on July 20, 1990, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been 'impermissibly affected' by his immunized congressional testimony.
Is he a criminal? According to the Appeals Court, no; the convictions were vacated. Ergo, he is not a war criminal.
You can cling to the label all you wish. But by doing so you demonstrate to everyone on my side of the fence that you a hypocrite, in that you'll willing call Bush a war criminal (and you have) without the benefit of a trial, but Clinton, Reid, Jefferson, Berger, et al, are afforded extenuating circumstances.
Oh, I know, you don't think much of Clinton. We've all heard that. But you defend him and the others every chance you get.
I say, pull the beam out of your own eye first, then you'll see clearly enough to help your brother pull the beam out of HIS eye.
I DO know nothing of the man beyond that. I'm relatively sure if he had made an admission of guilt and a plea for forgiveness we would have heard about it.
How is that a reflection on MY credibility?
Tell me - Suppose a Black Panther 30 years ago killed a man he believed to be racist, and the killer did so gladly. He hasn't repented of that, instead saying he was guilty and he was glad he did it.
How credible would you find that man to be today? Honestly.
But tangential to your hypothetical... Stanley "Tookie" Williams went to his execution unrepentant, and his actions while in prison (aside from writing a book) showed no inward change from the man he was when he committed the murder that put him on death row.
Carla Faye Tucker, on the other hand, guilty of a brutal double homocide, genuinely changed in prison. She went to her execution in the sure knowledge that she would shortly be with the Lord. And I expect to meet her in heaven.
The change in her was so profound that had, by some miracle, she been given a full pardon I would have been quite comfortable with her as my next door neighbor.
But Stanley "Tookie" Williams? I'd buy a gun and learn to use it.
I'm not as hung up as you appear on the sins of others. Clinton committed adultery, lied under oath, lied on camera to the American people.... and then apologized. Was it sincere? Only God knows. But my objection to Clinton is not so much his seemingly complete lack of moral character, it's the way you and others hold equally fallable men on my side of the aisle to a much higher standard than those on your side.
Clinton will never hold another public office that will directly impact my life. He's free to be as incorrigible as he wishes, and Mrs. Clinton will allow. But what get's my goat up is you and every other hypocritical liberal looking down your noses at 'war criminals' while praising the great and many morally just and upright on your side of the aisle.
Do you at least understand how amazed and dismayed I and many others are with being told that I'm hypocritical for being displeased with WAR CRIMINALS!!??
And which people on "my" side of the aisle have I praised to earn this disdain? Dennis Kucinich? Martin Luther King, Jr? Wendell Berry?
Dan, you can be exasperating.
EL, you've stooped to plain meanness lately.
My own sins are plain, as usual, for all to see.
Speaking of beams and motes, EL, don't act all offended at rhetorical excess when you are as guilty of it as the next partisan.
That's beautiful English ER. Love it! Gonna use it myself!
I can be exasperating when I ask not to be called hypocritical for taking that position and I can't figure out where the hypocrisy is. Sorry about that.