Comments on I'm probably posting this too quickly, but it really pissed me off.

Go to Adventures in PsychosisAdd a commentGo to I'm probably posting this too quickly, but it really pissed me off.

a man with a camera, at least the proffesional kind used by TV networks can easily be mistaken by a man with an RPG

posted by michael_pilarte on June 8, 2005 at 10:16 AM | link to this | reply

mary, on the jurisdiction thing, the answer is nope...

I'm not sure what is going on with that.  Maybe it's just a showing of good faith by Bush?  I haven't read the full story.  It's in Iraq, so it would have to be an international war tribunal, the Iraqi police, or the US military.  Spain is an ally so, they are probably requesting to talk to the people involved, but it would have to be unofficial. 

posted by Temple on June 8, 2005 at 1:52 AM | link to this | reply

Hacker,

I'm tryiing to really get my mind around what happened in that incident.  A tank fired after I'm told they claimed they had been fired on from the hotel.  That's their story.  A tank is not vulnerable to snipers if they're enclosed. It was common knowledge, as Temple pointed out, that the hotel was a base for journalists. 

Was it justified? Combat journalism is risky, but were they targeted?  Targeting journalists specifically wouldn't be just a battle hazard, it would be inexcusable.  Was it possible the military was not happy with the press they'd been getting?  As Michael, my boyfriend, who was in the 82nd Army Airborne, luckily before Iraq I or II, said, "Maybe they had a big gun and they want to shoot it." 

Do the Spanish have the jurisdiction to indict American soldiers for acts during this war?  It's an indication of the world's view of the war and US handling of it. 

posted by Blanche. on June 7, 2005 at 11:43 PM | link to this | reply

I hear what you are saying, but there is something you didn't say.

This hotel has been known to everyone around the world since the Gulf war as being sort of a safe haven, off limits.  Saddam's men didn't even go in there during the Gulf war except to interview and meet with press.  They wanted their story out also.  It was something of a neutral zone.  It was the same this war....remember in the beginning, before the Iraqi gov't fell, all the press conferences?  They wanted us there so they could get their messages out.  It was good for them also.  The military knows this.  In the Gulf war, everyone left that hotel except CNN and a skeleton staff, which is how they got so big.  This time round, no one left.  But neither side attacked the hotel until insurgents started bombing it. I can see how they might think it's a sniper, but they could have confirmed....taken cover.....gone into the hotel and got them that way.   A tank was excessive knowing the history of the hotel, but still I don't think they should be questioned AT ALL.  I would never judge what a soldier does if he believes his life is in danger, but we've taken out a shitload of friendlies in this war....Canadians, Kurds, our own guys (all soldiers).....because someone didn't take the time to confirm properly or the proper communication wasn't given.  And there was time.  That is why they killed the reporters from Al Jazeera as well, they were filming from THEIR OWN office across the street and they took them out even knowing that was where they were.  No body cared.  We had to put one of our own reporters in the Al Jazeera office as a liaison to help build good will on that one between our gov't and the Iraqi people.  She's still there.

Of COURSE you want media in a war zone, UH, don't be absurd.  They need to show us what's really going on, tell the real story.  I don't want some sanitized propaganda from the Bush administration.  They don't tell the truth as it is about the number of dead over there, the real cost.  A war correspondent does take their chances over there, that's true, but most of them want to go....they were not forced.  And they do it for us, so we know the real story.  The story the White House won't tell us.  To allow us to be more educated.  They are necessary, and their work and their lives...not to mention their deaths demand just as much respect as any soldier.  They put their lives on the line to make sure the the real story is told, to make sure that the government is in check and that we, sitting here in safe houses know what our military is up to.  They are brave and honorable.  Weapon or camera, they are there to make sure that justice is served by telling the story.  I live in a navy/marine city.  Every night they run the faces of the dead.  Just as I write, a navy helicopter rattles my windows.  Every week, someone in my building gets deployed to Iraq.  I have friends there now, my ex-boyfriend (who was my boyfriend at the time) was there working with the CPA.  There are things he told me....things I know from other people....things the gov't doesn't tell us.  The only people at fault here are the commanding officer who did not allow for other precautions, to be more cautious, and for Bush who put us where we didn't belong in the first place.

posted by Temple on June 7, 2005 at 9:46 PM | link to this | reply

It's just one of the dangers of the job, and they should accept that. I'm
with you.

posted by Renigade on June 7, 2005 at 9:09 PM | link to this | reply