Where are the Bodies? Media blackout continues, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 19-11-2002 @ 09:23 AM by Bout Time
"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 ñ censored ñ 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 ñ 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 Cheneyís 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...


reply posted on 19-11-2002 @ 09:46 AM 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]



reply posted on 19-11-2002 @ 12:06 PM by Bout Time
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


reply posted on 19-11-2002 @ 02:12 PM by Bout Time
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.


reply posted on 19-11-2002 @ 04:35 PM by Bout Time
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.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



ALL ATS`ers are terrorists
  Posted 2 days ago with 9 member flags
CNN Endorsing Terrorism
  Posted 5 days ago with 7 member flags
Obama\'s terror Drones.
  Posted 3 days ago with 6 member flags
Pair Detained in Twitter Homeland Threat Mix-Up
  Posted 10 days ago with 5 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Alien Grey caught in photo ?
  Aliens and UFOs, Posted 6 hours ago, 57 replies
Santorum wants more fracking!!!
  US Political Madness, Posted 14 hours ago, 53 replies
Pass Me My Rifle
  World War Three, Posted 10 hours ago, 52 replies