Censorship by death

[Ned]

With the news that the Saddam regime paid al Jazeera, killed CNN staffers, threatened CNN and other media, threatened any who cooperated with Blix with death or worse, threatened to kill the King of Jordan and others who cooperated against the regime, should we also not at least assume that he did the same with anyone who dealt with the regime?

Censorship by death and intimidation. I wonder of other news outlets will reveal the level of intimidation they were subjected to. I wonder if Blix and his team were bribed and/or intimidated.

If Saddam did this, I think similar intimidation/censorship happens in other Arab totalitarian states, such as Syria. What do you think? Are we getting the full, complete and accurate story about Syria and other Arab states even from Western media?

Here is just one link on this topic:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/11/spr...lot/index.html

[Velociryx]

Ned, as you well know, the ONLY media on the planet that has any sort of bias is the US media. This is obviously propaganda....never happened!

-=Vel=-

[SlowwHand]

Absolutely, is my belief, Ned.

Syria is another problem child, looking to get spanked.

[PLATO]

Bah! Just more American Propoganda.

We all know Saddam spent his time making sure that the baby milk factories were working efficiently.

Just like the Saudis are helping us in the war on terror!

[chequita guevara]

In further news, the sky is blue.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In further news, the sky is blue.

What does this mean Che? That you're not in favor of a Free Press, or that you knew all along that we were being fed propaganda by every news outlet covering Iraq -- even our own?

[chequita guevara]

You act like censorship in Iraq is news. Everyone new that. The media itself said as much every snigle time they reported from Ba'athist Iraq.

I'm more concerned with the self-censorship of America's media.

[Kropotkin]

Oh well, this was a pointless thread.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I'm more concerned with the self-censorship of America's media.

Good, because that is the news here. CNN has admitted to censoring its reports because of intimidation by Iraq. Can we not assume that ALL media operating in Iraq were similarly censored.

Cannot we not go one step further and assume that the UN inspectors were intimidated as well to avoid looking where they should and to tip the Iraqi's off to their plans so that sites could be cleaned up.

I will never understand why Blix never insisted that scientists and their entire families be removed from Iraq and be protected before they were interviewed. Blix had to be under intimidation or the influence of bribery.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
Oh well, this was a pointless thread.

Sure -- you knew all along that all news out the Arabia was censored even by Western media?

[Sandman]

I will never understand why Blix never insisted that scientists and their entire families be removed from Iraq and be protected before they were interviewed.

Because it's kidnapping?

[Kropotkin]

With all fairness you're really jumping to conclutions here. There's quite a difference between threatening to kill a couple of journalists without permits that's in the region illegally and to kill of a number of weapons inspectors. Not that it's not quite possible they did try the same methods but this is hardly good enough a indication for that.

[Ned]

For those of you who do not live in the United States, you should understand that CNN's confession is the major story of the day. The US press has long prided itself on being free and willing to tell the truth even despite government intimidation. Many of us believe that a free press is essential to freedom itself.

So, when we find that our own press has be censoring the news it gives us due to Arab intimidation, we are SHOCKED!

[General Ludd]

Are you trying to tell us that CNN is biased towards Iraq?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sandman


Because it's kidnapping?

Insisting and kidnapping are two different things. If he insisted and Saddam did not comply - that may have been enough for the UN Security Council. But, he did not insist.

[Kropotkin]

A authoritarian regime uses threats to get its will though. Nothing new under the sun. That's why I thought it was a pointless threat.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Osweld
Are you trying to tell us that CNN is biased towards Iraq?

The head of CNN stated that he has not been reporting on Iraqi intimidation of CNN and others for the last twelve years. He has admitted that they have indeed biased the news. More than that, he has admitted to not reporting the truth.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Ned


The head of CNN stated that he has not been reporting on Iraqi intimidation of CNN and others for the last twelve years. He has admitted that they have indeed biased the news. More than that, he has admitted to not reporting the truth.

Saddam must really be a masochist if he is telling them what to report.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
A authoritarian regime uses threats to get its will though. Nothing new under the sun. That's why I thought it was a pointless threat.

I'm sorry, Kropotkin, but I did not know about the extent of Saddam's crimes against his own people until Bush spoke out at the UN. CNN and others knew about them, but convered them up.

To say that a police state uses intimidation is one thing. To say that they can successfully use it against the American press is another.

[Kropotkin]

You didn't? I thought that was public knowledge.

[Ned]

Kropotkin, no it was not public knowledge. We did not know that CNN was censoring the news and covering up Iraqi crimes and intimidation until today.

The head of CNN News is named Jordan. I expect his head will roll for this.

[Sandman]

Insisting and kidnapping are two different things. If he insisted and Saddam did not comply - that may have been enough for the UN Security Council. But, he did not insist.

What if the scientists didn't want to go? And they're hardly likely to leave Iraq only to tell their interrogators that there was no 'weapons of mass destruction'; they'd be under a huge amount of pressure to make something up.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sandman


What if the scientists didn't want to go? And they're hardly likely to leave Iraq only to tell their interrogators that there was no 'weapons of mass destruction'; they'd be under a huge amount of pressure to make something up.

Of course, the UN would have been obligated to allow the scientists and their families to return, and perhaps even compensate them for the inconvenience and damage they may have been caused, but it is clear that the Iraqi scientists refusal to leave Iraq probably was motivated more by fear of Saddam than an unwillingness to spend some qualtity time in Cyprus.

[gsmoove23]

Ned, what source are you using for this? The link that you gave doesn't seem to indicate censorship on the levels you're talking about and I haven't seen this CNN "confession" as the major news stories in any media in the states, unless you're talking about Fox which I don't watch.

If you weren't informed of Saddam's crimes before Bush then you're severely misinformed. CNN talked a hell of alot about it.

The link you gave indicates that specific stories of intimidation of Iraqis who helped CNN were not aired in order not to further endanger anyone. This is a common practise used by any media source involved in any number of situations throughout the world and the fact that those who helped CNN were being intimidated seems to suggest that they were airing stories that were inconvenient to Saddam.

By the way, your reference to Al-Jazeera being paid by Saddam is taken from one interview with a dude dancing in the street the other day and has not been backed up. For cryin out loud, stop watching Fox.

[MichaeltheGreat]

And in other news, it's been discovered that Saddam isn't a nice guy after all.

[gsmoove23]

As to the inspections, the intimidation was placed on the scientists, not Blix. Blix knew that making such demands would have been pointless and didn't find them absolutely necessary to completing the inspections. The demand on Blix to make the demand of the Iraqi government was a ploy the pro-war camp used to sabotage and discredit the inspections.

[BeBro]

Originally posted by Ned

The head of CNN News is named Jordan. I expect his head will roll for this.

So you expect that CNN rather let some journalists killed before they show some sense for reality? What should they do when their guys are treatened by dictators like Saddam?

Everyone knows there´s no free media in Iraq under Saddam, and you expect he would have treatened western media in another way than his own?

[Ned]

Gsmoove, apparently Jordan published an op-ed piece in the NY times. He also consented to an interview. I listened to portions of that interview on the way into work this morning. I don't know who was conducting it or where it might be published since I did not hear the beginning or the end.

As to al Jazeera being paid, I and many others were very surprised that they covered the fall of Baghdad in a relatively straight forward manner, when up until that time they had reported only pro-Saddam stories and propaganda. This seems to confirm that they were either being paid or they were being censored in some fashion. Once the regime was gone, they were free to report accurately, and they did.

[Ned]

Originally posted by BeBro


So you expect that CNN rather let some journalists killed before they show some sense for reality? What should they do when their guys are treatened by dictators like Saddam?

Everyone knows there´s no free media in Iraq under Saddam, and you expect he would have treatened western media in another way than his own?

I'm sorry, BeBro, but we expect the American press to stand up to attempts at censorship even at the cost of lives of reporters. We Americans are very funny about freedom of the press.

[BeBro]

Originally posted by Ned


I'm sorry, BeBro, but we expect the American press to stand up to attempts at censorship even at the cost of lives of reporters. We Americans are very funny about freedom of the press.

Very easy to say that when one sits safe at home, isn´t it?