Where are the Bodies? Media blackout continues

"In manipulating the first and often most lasting perception of Desert Storm, the Bush administration produced not a single picture or video of anyone being killed. This sanitized, bloodless presentation by military briefers left the world presuming Desert Storm was a war without death. That image was reinforced by limitations imposed on reporters on the battlefield. Under rules developed by Cheney and Powell, journalists were not allowed to move without military escorts. All interviews had to be monitored by military public affairs escorts. Every line of copy, every still photograph, every strip of film had to be approved � censored � before being filed. And these rules were ruthlessly enforced."

.......

"Journalists such as Applewhite, who played by the rules, fared no better. More than 150 reporters who participated in the Pentagon pool system failed to produce a single eyewitness account of the clash between 300,000 allied troops and an estimated 300,000 Iraqi troops. There was not one photograph, not a strip of film by pool members of a dead body � American or Iraqi. Even if they had recorded the reality of the battlefield, it was unlikely it would have been filed by the military-controlled distribution system. As the ground war began, Cheney declared a press blackout, effectively blocking distribution of battlefield press reports. While Cheney�s action was challenged by Marlin Fitzwater, the White House press secretary, the ban remained in effect. Most news accounts were delayed for days, long enough to make them worthless to their editors."

www.digitaljournalist.org...

Hate to burst your bubble, but there were MANY pictures of people being killed during Desert Storm. Any pictures of bombs hitting buildings, armor, AA sites, etc. were in fact people getting killed. I also seem to remember a video of an A-10 coming up on a moving tank and then lighting it up with it's Gatling gun, thus killing the crew.

Elevate - Concentrate - Differentiate

In this case, Differentiate between what is conspiracy material and what is not.


1- During war, news can and will be blacked out for security reasons.

2- Dozens of Desert Storm accounts (websites, videos, etc.) show more than enough bodies, death, and destruction to satisfy this topic.




[Edited on 19-11-2002 by William]

Do you believe the news blackout at the time was primarily for security reasons?I wouldn't think that photographs of the dead during and just after Desert Storm could be of any use to the Iraqi Gov unless they were hanging from a sign post.
I would imagine domestic reasons were uppermost in the US Gov minds.There has been a definate move towards De-humanising war.I would think the Vietnam War has got something to do with it.

Are you kidding, i think Our government killed enough innocent civilians in Dessert Storm. We with weapons, and they with their rocks and sticks the "war" was over before it even started man...

OrionSirius

Having talked to people that were there,they had more than rocks.All the soldiers were armed,but they didn't want to fight,so the surrendered.

As far as no pictures go,that is nothing new.My Grandfather took hundreds of pictures in WW2.The ones with dead bodies were never given to him.

Was that the enemy dead or allies dead Nyeff?That yor grandfather took photographs of.

So I have told he took both.My Grandfather was in the Navy in the South Pacific.He told me he took several photo's of bodies floating in the water, bodies lying in the streets.He took a series of pictures of Chienese working on some railroad tracks the one picture misssing is one where they were working aroud dead bodies.

He also was very upset when he found out they had been taken,he wanted to bring them back and show his sons what the experince was really like.Now all he has are pictures of his friends,old women and children.

Originally posted by William
Elevate - Concentrate - Differentiate

In this case, Differentiate between what is conspiracy material and what is not.


1- During war, news can and will be blacked out for security reasons.

2- Dozens of Desert Storm accounts (websites, videos, etc.) show more than enough bodies, death, and destruction to satisfy this topic.




[Edited on 19-11-2002 by William]

Interesting. Being as I negotiate for a living, I always try to anticipate potential platforms of discussion and then target counters to those. After, of course, satiating the first rule of engagement, which is to make sure MY platforms are not easily countered.
I had gotten through the first four pages of links, 12 pages returned in all, on my Google search for pictures of the dead from the Gulf War, when I had given up. Found plenty of buddy photos, plenty of photos on Apache helicopters - but no dead bodies.
I did find some good links to pages that were corroborating this topic, however, and how the scrub was in.
I am sympathetic to your rightful crusade for raising the content bar, as my post in the 'UP for Moderator' indicates, I'm no fan of forums on Eminem's butt. That being said, a knee jerk reaction to cover all new threads where you might be of a different opinion as failing one of your trifecta of spurious content Litmus tests, is not serving anyone, and throwing a rather soaked blanket on a subject of very valid debate; in this case, the reality that perceptions of war are being willfully manipulated by the forced void of photo journalism.

I implore you to do the same you asked of me: Differentiate

"rocks and sticks"

OrionSirius where you there..i am guessing you where not from your post..I was in Marine Corp during the Gulf War..Aviation Ordance....and i recall our Super Corbas comeing back to relaod many times with holes in them..pretty damn powerful rocks and sticks..

Boomslang

[Edited on 19-11-2002 by Boomslang]

OS - With regards to killing civilians, Iraq has NO ONE TO BLAME BUT THEMSELVES. They put ZU-23-2s and other similar AA weapons on schools, hospitals, offices, and retirement homes. These weapons pose a threat to US and other allied airmen, and, as such will be destroyed. Bombs don't differentiate between friend and foe, and as such, the Iraqi government indeed killed thier own civilians by putting thier AA on those buildings. I'm sure that Boomslang will be able to back me up on this one as he was there.

Well... since Desert Storm was a pre-Internet war, certainly photos are hard to find online.

Given the new technologies (at the time) for instant news feed to the 24 hour networks, I would expect the military would enforce limited coverage of events for security reasons. It's not surprising freely available photos of the action are rare.

However, I recall watching the news at the time. Do you? There were daily casualty estimates from the breifings, I can't imagine how you would surmise anyone would think: "Desert Storm was a war without death."

I've seen several documentaries, and especially the photos a friend took of a Gulf War Museum while in Kuwait (which, no surprise, has almost no mention of U.S. involvement). Video footage and stills do exist, but the quantity is not what we expect with today's instant highly-digital society.

Is there mystery? Sure, there always will be in war. But what's your point? Are you simply copying and pasting someone else's statement, or are you attempting to make a point here? If you are, please help us understand. Which, after all, was my point.



[Edited on 19-11-2002 by William]

While i did not deal with fixed wing aircraft Grashopper...i do recall a A-10 (USAF ground attack aircraft) crash landing on our runway as it could not make it back to his base..the only reason the pilot survived was becasue of that awesome aircraft..he had one engine and missing 1/3 of his left side wing..(hats off to that pilot)...The Iraqies used every trick in the book..and i mean all of them..

I think there might be a reluctance to talk about the US deaths as a full 1/3 of them where friendly fire caused!

Boomslang

[Edited on 19-11-2002 by Boomslang]

[Edited on 19-11-2002 by Boomslang]

Well, true that the ability for immediate digital upload ( or anyplace to load it to) was not a thought outside of the Kodak labs back during Bush the 1st's war; but many old photos get up via scanning these days. I would think they'd be out there.
We're now at the point where Barbie playsets include digital cameras, the tech is so ubiquitous, so where are the photos of the dead from the Afghan campaign? Same place as the Desert Storm ones, I suppose.
I don't think anyone surmised that there was no deaths from Desert Storm, to the contrary, I remember it sometimes being the equivalent of holding up a buck rack for all to see, the we went-we-saw-we triumphed show. But I remember those were from briefings and those were numbers, not photos. I was still more focused on my active duty brother who was finishing up his TDY tour of the Banana Republics in support of the War on Drugs marketing campaign, and how I was pissed that my godfather voucher could be called in over nothing more than political misdirection.
But William, I've been to your site ( real nice stuff) and can postulate you to be a Graphic Artist by trade or hobby; you more than most should understand the veracity of " A Picture tells a Thousand Words", and as it relates to the shaping of opinion. The opinion drives policy, policy drives actions, and you know.
That's my point. I thought folks would connect the dots from the article as to the relevancy of today and how so many arguments on these boards about the pros & cons of going to war are carried out by people in the 'pro' not visualizing or actually seeing bodies blown asunder, so I thought no fleshing out was necessary. I will next time.

Thanks for the comment on my site.

Pictures. Valuable assets or damaging evidence. I think it's safe to say Dessert Storm resulted in many dead, and an evolving attitude toward instant news coverage has influenced the availability of "official" photos. Many of us remember the images of the day... but finding them now is difficult.


Pictures.

Not wanting to introduce thread drift, but here's something for you to track down.

Corbis. An image archive firm that owns a massive number of one-of-a-kind historical images.

Who owns Corbis?

What is Corbis currently doing with their massive cache of irreplaceable negatives and photos?

How does Palladium DRM factor in?


Pictures are indeed very valuable assets... as are the lack of pictures.

Originally posted by William
Well... since Desert Storm was a pre-Internet war, certainly photos are hard to find online.

If that war was before internet, then how was I able to get online internet access *before* I went into the Navy? I finished my own term just before Desert Sheild turned into Desert Storm...And yet had internet access *before* that time?


So it would seem more likely that people who had such photos haven't really thought about posting them...And making their links well-known. Maybe they're too little-known enough to be listed on most "web search" services?


[Edited on 19-11-2002 by MidnightDStroyer]

Not really, the dividing line in time is late 1994 when Netscape released it's first version. From that point forward, people began becoming serious about being online, and creating their own space on line.

Certainly, "Internet Access" was possible for the home user as early as 1989, but there was little you could actually do with it until early 1992.

I was active with CompuServe up until 1993, and they had several forums dedicated to uploading Gulf War pictures from solidiers and news people. I wonder what happened to them all?

There are many pics of dead bodies. They did not show many of it on news channels because it would simply be too graphic.

Originally posted by William
Thanks for the comment on my site.

Pictures. Valuable assets or damaging evidence. I think it's safe to say Dessert Storm resulted in many dead, and an evolving attitude toward instant news coverage has influenced the availability of "official" photos. Many of us remember the images of the day... but finding them now is difficult.


Pictures.

Not wanting to introduce thread drift, but here's something for you to track down.

Corbis. An image archive firm that owns a massive number of one-of-a-kind historical images.

Who owns Corbis?

What is Corbis currently doing with their massive cache of irreplaceable negatives and photos?

How does Palladium DRM factor in?


Pictures are indeed very valuable assets... as are the lack of pictures.

Hoovers say Bill Gates owns this image company that is at the top of the pile in that category, more images than the AP & Reuters.
You being a Graphics guy, means you're a Mac guy, so hmmm?.......I know you think Gates is Little Nicky a.k.a. Satan jr.!
But, if you own 70 million images and the operating system and most likely the application as well, who is to say that you AREN'T an evil-world-domination-through-charging-for-what-should-be-free BASTARD? Especialy with that nice little 'trusted' application feature that, if crossed, will shut down your system & force the never ending upgrade purchase cycle.
I still put Disney as the EVIL EMPIRE, but MS is gaining momentum!
I wonder if the offspring of Palladium will factor in when implants for phones & computing become the norm......will it stop your kidney if you're running an older version & haven't paid for the upgrade yet?


Not thread drift but a complimentary example of the 'Industrial' portion of the Military Industrial complex acting like their brothers in the military on a related topic.

You're getting hot!

Actually, the Palladium aspect is scary. I'll need to find the release, but about 3 months ago, it was announced that by late-2004, all Corbis images will be available ONLY as digital files with limited time use Digital Rights Management through Palladium.

Interesting development from Mr. Gates.

I call him, Grove, and Allen the Digi-Bergs. Watch these boys closely.

Pictures. In our current and future society, he who owns the pictures, owns history.