Saturday, March 05, 2005

Bullets vs. Speeding Journalists

I am grinding my teeth on this one, so this will be short and to the point.

I was livid today as I read the top headline for the Oregonian today (Patrick Quinn, AP)..."US bullets greet freed hostage." In the fifth paragraph, about a quarter inch from being sent to page A6, the article finally says..."The US military said the car was speeding as it approached a coalition checkpoint in western Baghdad at 8:55pm, It said soldiers shot into the engine block only after trying to warn the driver to stop by 'hand and arm signals, flashing white lights, and firing warning shots'." It would seem to me, that a "fair" presentation of the story would be to carry part of this clarification in the first paragraph and mitigate the headline somewhat with something like..."Checkpoint incident under investigation, freed journalist injured." Oh, I am sorry, that doesn't sell enough newspapers.

I must also report, in all fairness that the O did run a story today about a large weapons cache that a local NG unit uncovered with some great work...oh, I forgot to mention...below the fold with a header that was a yawner, and the font size was about 1/2 that of the one at the top of the page.

Here's the issue...I want all reporter types to get this...I do not want ONE GI injured because they take any "extra" precautions because of, or for, journalists. I would not be sending one of my Marines home in a body bag...a Marine who might be your son, daughter, neighbor, brother, friend, etc...because they hesitated for one second, while a car rushed their checkpoint in the dark. My Marines would not take a car bomb in the lips because some journalist felt that established procedures do not apply to those who carry pencils.

Now the press will dredge up every friendly fire incident of the war, they will dredge up the EA-6B incident of ten years ago...all for what? To add perspective to a story that they have already chosen to slant? I cannot make this more clear...the bottom half of today's O was designed to sell papers to moms and dads of soldiers...the top half was to slander them and their efforts. We need to quit buying their papers, and quit giving them access. They have chosen to side with a communist journalist that was putting our troops in danger....could it be any more clear?

Carrying a pencil does not make you special or bulletproof. I am not listening to the belly-aching about this incident. Our guys used their guns because they HAD to...they had no idea who was in the car...no apologies necessary. And certainly, none coming from me.

6 comments:

David A said...

I think that since the incident concerning Eason Jordan, the MSM is out to prove something. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a set up that went bad on them. My personal opinion, is that they would stoop low enough to do something like this.

Sus said...

Personally, I think this chic should hear what my Vietnam vet dad used to say to me when I whined about something: "Silly, if you play with fire, you're gonna get burned. Get smart!"

Seems to me that if someone wants to be a reporter in a war zone, there's a better than average chance that something bad is gonna happen to them. No whiners!

MM, I also live in a particularly extremist blue zone a few hundred miles north of you. The paperrag here just reprinted the original AP article - I'm surprised. (I'm also surprised that it ran on Saturday and not today - that would actually be the norm, but that's another story)

sueb/mn said...

The chances are good that this reporter and her crew were so happy to be free that they ignored all warnings....our guys were absolutely correct with the action they took.

Also,reporters seem to think they are immune to the usual rules of war and other problems. And I agree, the whole thing of the kidnapping, release, etc. seems kind of phoney - or maybe it's because I have come to distrust the MSM so much.

Carry on, Major Mike, you have a good blog.

Barb said...

I'm with you MM, I would hate to see any of our Soldiers, Marines, and other troops coming back in body bags because they started worrying about how the dang MSM was goint to view their actions. They followed their procedures, and did exactly what they had to do.
I enjoyed the documentary "A Company of Soldiers" recently for showing this kind of reality - although in their case the car stopped when the warning shots were fired and reversed course. The Italians failed to do so - and the result was predictable.

Mike said...

Just an fyi, Ms. Communist Reporter has stated that she cannot rule out the possibility of the shooting being intentional.

Because you all know how those crazy U.S. warmongers-I mean soldiers-get.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4323361.stm

Anonymous said...

A better course of action, rather than, or as well as not buying the papers, is to directly confront the folks who advertise in the rag, and ask them, "Do you know that this is what your add $$$ buys? Do you agree with this?!" They take stuff like that REAL serious....that is where their $$ comes from.

Great blog, dude. Came from a recomendation from Mudville.

Freddfish

Site Visits
Blog Roll