CNN Hid Information

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-04-11 12:15pm

Read this information about CNN hiding information until after the fall of Baghdad. From the article:

I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us.

Thoughts?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-11 12:27pm

I don't doubt that this is true. CNN probably did the right thing by not releasing this information, since doing so may have endangered the lives of the men in question.

paladin · Post by **paladin** » 2003-04-11 12:28pm

More reasons why Hussein is an Ass.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-11 12:28pm

"doing so." Good LORD, I want the edit button back, I make so many fucking typoes in this forum.

fixed

~ CO

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 02:06pm

I don't take this as lightly, why is it ok not to tell the truth. I understand the lives of a handfull of workers my be at risk, but balance that against what they saw and what they knew 12 years ago.. till today..

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-04-11 02:16pm

theski wrote:I don't take this as lightly, why is it ok not to tell the truth. I understand the lives of a handfull of workers my be at risk, but balance that against what they saw and what they knew 12 years ago.. till today..

It's not okay to tell the truth when the people who told it will die horribly if it comes out. There was no realistic chance of that information changing either American or Iraqi policy, so all it would have done was gotten people killed for ratings (and incidently assured nobody ever confided anything with a CNN reported ever again).

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 02:17pm

But isn't that their job, to report the news...

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-04-11 02:19pm

theski wrote:But isn't that their job, to report the news...

Yes, it's their job. But sometimes basic human decency demands that the job's considerations are set aside.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 02:24pm

Who's basic decency? The reporters or the Iraqis hanging in the torture chambers?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-04-11 02:31pm

Do you have problems understanding reality theski? CNN had very good reason not to air what they learned. The news is all fine and dandy, but telling the "truth" when you know the ONLY thing it will do is kill people is not good. Shit man, do you think that CNN should broadcast the locations of people in witness protection program?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-04-11 02:40pm

theski wrote:Who's basic decency? The reporters or the Iraqis hanging in the torture chambers?

The basic decency of the reporters not to get their sources, some of whom are their co-workers and friends, tortured and killed for no good reason! Jesus, man, are you playing devil's advocate or something here?

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 02:48pm

Honestly Red I feel this could have been ended 12 years ago if the world only Knew.. Thats my point.

Ignorant twit · Post by **Ignorant twit** » 2003-04-11 02:55pm

The WORLD FRIKKING NEW AND DIDN'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS.

Seriously have you seen the pictures out of Halabja? Have you seen the pictures for the failed Shi'ite revolt? Did you miss it when Saddam shot two sons-in-laws when they returned from defection? Did you miss it when all those Iraqi exiles told of their experiences? Did you miss the articles where the generals talked about receiving videotapes of female relatives getting raped? Hell we've had the body double describe how he was forced to undergo surgery, take up drinking, participate in torture, and then be tortured himself.

Any compotent government in the world KNEW Saddam was a sick SOB, they simply DIDN'T CARE. Anyone who did a serious investigation of the matter, even if only in print journalism, would have KNOWN about far worse than pulling teeth. The world was either too stupid, too apathetic, or too Machiavellian to care.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-11 03:00pm

We knew that Saddam was shit then just as we do now. We just didn't have the balls to finish the job back then.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-04-11 03:20pm

theski wrote:Honestly Red I feel this could have been ended 12 years ago if the world only Knew.. Thats my point.

The world didn't know?! C'mon... that's the very CAUSE of this war. We knew beforehand that Sadaam slaughtered his people. We knew 12 years ago. But we pulled out because we figured things would right themselves. (Kinda like they did in Iran, only without direct US intervention.) But it didn't work that way, much to our dismay. And we couldn't very well claim that this war was merely an extention of the previous one; we had already pulled out of Iraq, and over a decade had passed without any real military presence there. Still, we knew that bad stuff was going on. We had evidence of it all over the place. Biological and chemical weapons were being used on Iraqis at the order of Sadaam Hussein. We knew about it, but had no proof that the weapons didn't come from Iran, as Iraqi officials claimed (and still claim). Stories began to trickle in about torturings and maimings, but all these stories were laced with heresay, and people often brushed them off as distorted by some extremist political view. But then the stories started mounting up. The UN recognized that Iraq was not complying with their disarmorment regimen. Inspectors could not account for thousands of gallons of chemical weapons. The government-induced death count reached 2 million over a period of 8 years. Rumors of links to terrorism started surfacing. Spy planes showed pictures of convoys moving supplies away from military compounds where the UN Weapons Inspectors were headed.

So yeah, we knew. We've always known.

With this in mind, it's safe to say that anti-war protestors are protesting against the wrong war. Sadaam has killed 2,000 times more Iraqi civilians than Americans have since the last war in Iraq. He kills them because they express alternative political views. He kills them because they are Shi'ite Muslims. His soldiers kill them because they don't like the way the civilians look at them. Sadaam tortures them until they claim allegiance. His men rape and pillage as if they were trying to conqor their own homeland. 2 million people are dead. To put that in perspective, if we took every American that is in jail at this very moment, for reasons ranging from public drunkenness to multiple counts of murder 1, and killed them all, we would be on par with Sadaam. If we killed all of the residents of Boston THREE TIMES, we'd be on par with Sadaam. If we killed 1 out of every 4 people on the island of Manhattan, we'd be on par with Sadaam.

So which war is worse? One that kills 1,000 innocents, or one that kills 2,000,000? One that gets rid of a fascist dictator, or one that gets rid of political dissidents? One that gives an entire country some of the basic freedoms that Americans enjoy and take for granted, or one that calls for genocide?

Yes, we knew. And we acted. But perhapse that action was a bit late in coming.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 03:24pm

Queeb, Thats the first thing you've said that I agree with..

Sokar · Post by **Sokar** » 2003-04-11 03:33pm

*applaudes* Kick ass post there Queeb, big thumbs up. I just wish George Bush Sr. hadnt been such a lame ass and had dealt with this back in '91-'92. All it would have taken was some air cover for the rebels and this whole mess would have beeb unnecessary.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-11 03:35pm

See Queeb the right likes you, you just have to say the right things,,

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-04-11 03:47pm

Queeb said something I agree with 100%. Jesus, next thing you know Einhander is going to be caught in flagrante delicto with Jenna Jameson and George Bush is going to be admitted to MENSA.

I can understand the geopolitical reasons for not driving on Baghdad during the Persian Gulf War in 1991. But encouraging the Shiites and Kurds to rise up and then sitting back and watching Saddam crush the revolts was a dispicable act of pure moral and political cowardice. Frankly, it's the worst thing this country has done, IMHO, since we turned away boats full of European Jewish refugees in the 1930s. If for nothing else, we owed American blood and treasure to the Iraqi people for that. I STILL don't think we've repayed what we owe yet--the only way we can achieve anything approaching absolution is to deliver what we promised them for reconstruction.

Post by **Steve** » 2003-04-11 10:56pm

Ignorant twit wrote: The world was either too stupid, too apathetic, or too Machiavellian to care.

I protest the last term. Machiavelli would have argued for us to remove Hussein while the road to Baghdad was open and with his army having been badly embarrassed and crushed. "War is put off only to the advantage of others".

Machiavelli would have understood the very real possibility of the local Arabs hating our guts for having to stay in their "holy land", and the rise of tensions with the Arab governments and terrorism. His policies would have included removed Hussein while we had the chance in '92 and then using our position from there to further our interests in the region, as a comparitively-secular Iraq being protected from Iranian and Syrian aggressions is a better base to stand watch over the Middle East from than Wahhabist-dominated Saudi Arabia.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-04-12 12:17am

As Durron said. It is not the right of a reporter ot his/er organisation to place peoples lives at risk.

StimNeuro · Post by **StimNeuro** » 2003-04-12 01:22am

Stuart Mackey wrote:As Durron said. It is not the right of a reporter [or] his/[h]er organisation to place peoples lives at risk.

Small highjacking bit here. Mackey, are you going to start up an SD.net Press? Maybe as a division of the ASVS Press?

StimNeuro · Post by **StimNeuro** » 2003-04-12 01:25am

StimNeuro wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:As Durron said. It is not the right of a reporter [or] his/[h]er organisation to place peoples lives at risk.
Small highjacking bit here. Mackey, are you going to start up an SD.net Press? Maybe as a division of the ASVS Press?

Alright, maybe I should read the Off-Topic threads before reading these...

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-04-12 02:23am

StimNeuro wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:As Durron said. It is not the right of a reporter [or] his/[h]er organisation to place peoples lives at risk.
Small highjacking bit here. Mackey, are you going to start up an SD.net Press? Maybe as a division of the ASVS Press?

I have..it just hasnt gotten organised yet {translation, I cant be bothered yet}

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-04-12 03:18am

Shit compromising a source & getting them fired is bad, it can get you kicked out of the AP. Do you know the legal liability for what your suggesting IS!