It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Abduction of American Reporter in Iraq Blacked Out By U.S. News Outlets

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Editor & Publisher



The abduction of a Christian Science Monitor reporter in Iraq on Saturday was not disclosed by major U.S. media outlets for nearly two days after the Monitor requested that the incident, and the reporter's name and affiliation, be withheld. A translator was killed in the incident and the reporter, now identified by the Monitor as Jill Carroll, is still being held.

Numerous foreign news outlets and several leading wire services disclosed the incident -- and in a few cases, the reporter's name. Such stories did not appear in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and other U.S. papers and their Web sites.

The Associated Press ran at least one story out of Baghdad, but without the newspaper or reporter's name, and it did not appear in any major newspapers Sunday or Monday. The AP held off all further reports at the request of the Monitor, which did not release the information until this afternoon.

"Jill is an established journalist who has been reporting from the Middle East for Jordanian, Italian, and other news organizations over the past three years," the Monitor reported in a story to be published on Tuesday. "In recent months, The Monitor has tapped into her professionalism, energy, and fair reporting on the Iraq scene. It was her drive to gather direct and accurate views from political leaders that took her into western Baghdad's Adil neighborhood on Saturday morning."

I didn't notice this News on ATS either.

Well, I guess if a Journalist from Wall Street Journal was Missing, there would be lots of writing in the News.

But since she was a Christian-Science-Monitor Journalist...




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:19 AM
link   
I posted this two days ago .... but it makes sense to keep the fact hidden if they actually did, what leverage for the Terrorists to have an American journo captured.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
I posted this two days ago .... but it makes sense to keep the fact hidden if they actually did, what leverage for the Terrorists to have an American journo captured.

You have?

I am sorry, I must have Missed it - can you please provide the Link?

Thanks!




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
I posted this two days ago .... but it makes sense to keep the fact hidden if they actually did, what leverage for the Terrorists to have an American journo captured.


Indeed it does, the more press she gets the more valuable she becomes to the terrorists, making her release through negotiation that much harder.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Indeed it does, the more press she gets the more valuable she becomes to the terrorists, making her release through negotiation that much harder.

So Basicly the IDEAL situation would be if NO-ONE knew about it, therefore nobody would bother to rescue her.

Still nobody knows who Abducted her anyway.

Must be the Evil Terrorists.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
I posted this two days ago .... but it makes sense to keep the fact hidden if they actually did, what leverage for the Terrorists to have an American journo captured.

You have?

I am sorry, I must have Missed it - can you please provide the Link?

Thanks!



Sure thing, was on a Scottish news site, so i cant speak for how much press it did/didnt get in the USA.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Sure thing, was on a Scottish news site, so i cant speak for how much press it did/didnt get in the USA.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks again!


Maybe she was ON to Something, and had to be Removed?



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   
it was all over the news last night...blackout over !!



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   
souljah, read your quote again. The Christian Science Monitor (her employer) requested the blackout for two days.


for obvious reasons, the other media outlets respected this request.

what reasons you ask?
1. time to alert family perhaps.
2. time to gather a plan perhaps
3. time to work a deal before the kidnapping gets press and makes this woman's life more of a tool for the nappers?

dunno. I do know that this was a request from the company that employs the woman, not a matter of "let's not talk about this reporter from a paper with less circulation than the journal"



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   
You know, for all that talk about Bush propoganda, this would have been a perfect attmept for our Adminsitration to come out and use this as a tool to drum up support for the war in Iraq. Manywould think that the heartbreak felt across the nation for a poor young girl who was kidnapped in another country would be used by the GOP, but alas, it was not.

Her own newspapaer asked for silence, and there is no media black out as I read about this a few days ago when it happened. I hope that she is returned safely and unharmed.

and yes, I would think it was the 'evil terrorists' that took her. Pretty sad to trivialize this girls and families pain.

Maybe she was on to something, such as a something to report about Iraq and the insturgency. I REALLY, REALLY hope that you are not implying the US did this Souljah. Personal opinion is one thing, accusing the US of kidnapping a CSM reporter is quite another. You are going out of bounds on that commment.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Maybe she was on to something, such as a something to report about Iraq and the insturgency. I REALLY, REALLY hope that you are not implying the US did this Souljah. Personal opinion is one thing, accusing the US of kidnapping a CSM reporter is quite another. You are going out of bounds on that commment.

I am not IMPLYING anything - I just mentioned, that she was maybe ON to something, and maybe that was the Reason behind her Abduction.

These Statements mentioned above, were made by YOU and none other.




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
souljah, read your quote again. The Christian Science Monitor (her employer) requested the blackout for two days.




Good catch
Crakeur

It actually makes a lot of sense when you think about it. I mean who wouold want the family to learn about it from main stream media first?



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   
My god, al least have the balls to own up to your own statements, anyone who has been on here for more than a week knows your views.

So you deny, through your comments, your were not implying anything of the sort. If that is the case, accept my humble apology, but I don't think this is the case.

Also, we are doing something about it and recieving international had slaps...

www.editorandpublisher.com...




Carroll was seized by gunmen Saturday while reporting on efforts by Iraqi politicians to form a new government. She was leaving the headquarters of a Sunni political party by car when she was confronted in one of the city's most dangerous neighborhoods. Her Iraqi interpreter, Allan Enwiyah, 32, was killed in the attack, but her driver escaped without injury.




Taken in a Sunni area, and then protests by he Sunni's themselves. Her interpreter was shot and killed, and she was kidnapped.

Even Time is reporting it now..

www.time.com...

I hope this women is bought home safely, no matter how many mosques are entered and serached, or private homes.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   


There was fear that her affiliation with a paper with the word “Christian” in the title might cause her captors to treat her harshly. After two days however, the Monitor ran a story of its own and other media organizations followed suit. “Jill worked for a lot of newspapers and media from many countries,” Ingwerson told E&P. “She is not a Monitor staffer.”


And here is an explanation about the blackout, make a little more sense now?



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71



There was fear that her affiliation with a paper with the word “Christian” in the title might cause her captors to treat her harshly. After two days however, the Monitor ran a story of its own and other media organizations followed suit. “Jill worked for a lot of newspapers and media from many countries,” Ingwerson told E&P. “She is not a Monitor staffer.”


And here is an explanation about the blackout, make a little more sense now?


She was a freelance reporter that wrote a lot of stories for that Christian paper. I think she was set up but that is just me.

I do know that there are Spec Ops teams looking for her day and night and she will most likely be released unharmed in a month or so.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

I am not IMPLYING anything - I just mentioned, that she was maybe ON to something, and maybe that was the Reason behind her Abduction.
:




Imply

2 : to involve or indicate by inference, association, or necessary consequence rather than by direct statement


By saying she might have been up to something you are indicating by inference that she was abducted by coalition forces and typical of your posting you do not use direct statement. So by the definition you are implying something.

If you didn't have an agenda to pull you would'nt have continued to post here on this thread seeing as there is already an ATSNN thread concerning her abduction.


Just a crazy thought.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join