Posted on 07/14/2008 12:50:13 PM PDT by Bill Dupray
Hey, at least he got the shot, right? Isn't that all that matters? I mean come on, he's a photo-journalist for goodness sake. He can't inject himself into the story. That would be a breach of journalistic ethics. A real credit to his profession, this guy. Photos, but no video.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotroom.com ...
Swords and guns beat camera.
I’m really not sure what he could have done. At least by getting out the video, people may be reminded, anew, the nature of our enemy.
How about leaving the assignment and calling in the friggin’ Marines?
Prayers their souls find peace and the murders souls NEVER find peace.
I don’t know if it has been edited or not, but this is the video:
http://broadband.indiatimes.com/showvideo/3230424.cms
Taliban kills two Afghan prostitutes
It’s difficult for me to generate any feelings of sympathy for members of the media that get killed over there. Sure, some aren’t MSM slime, but so many are that it’s difficult to keep track (like there’s some kind of 50/50 balance). Not wishing violent death on ‘journalists’ you understand, just not bothered by it when they become the victims.
>> AP Photographer Shoots Photos and Snuff Video of Taliban Executing Two Women. And Does Nothing.
This isn’t Jack Bauer, federal government super-ninja — he’s a freaking camera man.
If he’d done anything, he’d have certainly died with them.
H
Mike Wallace: Journalist First, American Second (with Vintage Video)
http://newsbusters.org/node/4479
on an edition of the PBS panel series Ethics in America, devoted to war coverage, which was taped at Harvard in late 1987, Mike Wallace proclaimed that if he were traveling with enemy soldiers he would not warn U.S. soldiers of an impending ambush. “Don’t you have a higher duty as an American citizen to do all you can to save the lives of soldiers rather than this journalistic ethic of reporting fact?”, moderator Charles Ogletree Jr. suggested. Without hesitating, Wallace responded: “No, you don’t have higher duty...you’re a reporter.” When Brent Scrowcroft, the then-future National Security Adviser, argued that “you’re Americans first, and you’re journalists second,” Wallace was mystified by the concept, wondering “what in the world is wrong with photographing this attack by [the imaginary] North Kosanese on American soldiers?”
Y’all need to see this one.
Ping
Exactly. I fail to see what the camera guy could have done except get himself killed.
The important thing is that his pics and video have alerted the world anew to the Taliban's barbarity. That awareness may end up saving lives.
Things don't work that way. There was no reasonable chance that an AP photographer could have prevented these murders, but perhaps he got the pictures of the assailants that can be used to apprehend them.
Other than the Taliban were using the AP as propaganda agents. You can be sure he wouldn’t have been taking the pic if the murderers didn’t want him to.
I couldn't tell you if any murder happened at all.....
Are we sure Dan Rather didn't "film" this?
Exactly.
Reminds me of the photo of a collapsed African toddler and a vulture a few feet away. The photographer was so traumatized that he didn’t do more to help her, that he killed himself.
He’s a photo-journalist. Not a man.
I am not sure that the unarmed camera man could do anything to help these women. But by ensuring their murders were caught on tape, perhaps some good can come from this.
What would you have done? Criticizing the photographer on a blog and pimping the post on FR are not exactly heroic acts either, you know.
>> It’s difficult for me to generate any feelings of sympathy for members of the media that get killed over there. Sure, some aren’t MSM slime, but so many are that it’s difficult to keep track (like there’s some kind of 50/50 balance). Not wishing violent death on ‘journalists’ you understand, just not bothered by it when they become the victims.
I see it a little bit as an “assumption of risk”. Military men put themselves in the line of fire out of patriotism, duty, and honor. They fight for a cause ... and when they die, they die with honor and the respect of a grateful nation who realizes that their sacrifice will save the lives of many American civilians. They toil in anonymity for the betterment of their country.
Journalists assume the same risk as a soldier. They voluntarily go into a war-zone with the knowledge that they could very well not return. But, generally speaking, they do so for no higher cause ... they serve only the interests of fame and fortune. They want to be loved, known and given awards. They are self-aggrandizing, rather than serving their country.
There are exceptions, of course — like Tony Snow, for instance. Brit Hume. Bret Baier. Tim Russert. These are honorable men who understand that they owe their very “freedom of the press” to the soldiers they cover.
Those journalists who would equate their sacrifice with that of a soldier, simply because of the known danger, misunderstand the sacrifice of a soldier.
H
How about leaving the assignment and calling in the friggin’ Marines?
________
The military must have changed. I was unaware that Marines would set up a fire mission in response to an AP photog on assignment.
It’s quite easy to get up in arms over this kind of stuff. It is an outrage. But getting all hysterical over it is a bit unbecoming. Anything the camera guy would have done to try to stop would have ensured only that there would be a third body (his) next to the 2 women.
Throwing his camera wouldn’t have done much. He was fairly brave for covering this as they could have killed him for recording it had they decided.
Next line of inquiry is whether the photog is a Taliban sympathizer.
bump
Same reply as to Dangus. How about leaving the assignment and calling in the friggin’ Marines? It is, after all, only a job. And that is a double murder. And if you want to say he’s a journalist, then it looks like good propaganda to remind all the women in the Muslim world what will happen to them if they do not obey their lords and masters.
Then again maybe the Marines will find them anyway and the journalist might accidentally be on the receiving end of a JDAM. Maybe he can send that shot back to AP. Or not.
yes we will punish all those who disobey sharia law after my inauguration...I may beat the dhimmis myself with this stick....
“journalistic ethics” is a contradiction in terms.
He probably would have been killed... maybe the film will help the world understand the horror...
Whenever I hear of this it sickens me. OTOH, if any journalist were to interfere it would be open season on journalists and none would ever be allowed the access needed to show the world the true nature of our enemy. I couldn’t be a journalist.
If it bleeds, it leads... barf
Perhaps this is true of TV news journalist maybe even news paper journalist.
I can not however see how this would be true of photo and TV Camera journalist.
Awards and public acclaim is rare for photo journalist today and even more rare for TV camera men.
There is the Pulitzer Prize for photo journalism but I can not think of one for TV cameramen.
The only famous TV camera man I can remember is the one that died with that Senator that got gunned down by the Jimmy Jones Cult. But I can’t remember his name.
So I don’t think I can agree with you on this fame and fortune motive for camera men.
And for what ever they are getting paid it isn’t likely to be enough in my opinion. But then I don’t think soldiers are paid enough either.
And after photo..
Clear enough?
Is this a trick?
They are posting for me......I can see them.
The question came up, if you were with the NVA and they had planned an ambush on American troops would you warn the soldiers.
I think it was Peter Jennings who first said he probably would. After being castigated for his view, he apologized for his view.
So let’s see, you could throw your camera at them. Or, if you’re as fast as the Flash AND you have the authority of a Marine commander, you could maybe go get the Marines (do you have any idea exactly how far away they were?). Wait, wait, you can can threaten to use that handy-dandy suitcase nuke you just happened to pick up on the black market. Or he could have thrown himself in front of the bullets in hopes the Taliban killers would have been so impressed they would have spared the women.
Those are the best ideas I can come up with. I can’t believe he didn’t try any of them.
"AP photographer" now clearly means members of the Taliban itself, working "for" the AP, and often using the AP as cover to gather intelligence against US and allied troops to attack them later.
So what's new?
Unless that is independently confirmed somewhere, I refuse to believe it.
It's a cute "progressive" myth though.
Cool, now the BBC can do a docudrama on all those radical Christians who execute women.
Well obviously it wasn’t just that single thing and no one kills themselves who doesn’t already have some issues, but supposedly the criticism he received for the photo and the fact that he felt like he should have done more drove him over the edge. But here’s his suicide note, interpret it how you will.
“I am depressed ... without phone ... money for rent ... money for child support ... money for debts ... money!!! ... I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings and corpses and anger and pain ... of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners...I have gone to join Ken if I am that lucky.”
It is not disinterested journalistic “professionalism.” AP, along with the rest of MSM is actively partisan in these matters.They are on the other side.
Yeah, that's it......suicide.
Run along, now. Nothing to see here. Just a desert mirage. Crusader agitprop.
Agitprop.
The Taliban are defenders of the people, the faith.
Uh huh.
/ s
What a great idea! All he needed to do was pull out his cell phone, dial 1-800-SEMPER-FI and call in an air strike. The Marines would've responded in seconds and those women would be alive today.
Yeah, it couldn't have been any more difficult than ordering a pizza from Dominos, could it?
1. Journalist do not accept the same risk as active military personnel involved in combat. The reason? Military people are engaging the enemy in active fashion and have to take risks far higher in direct exposure to hostile fire. Journalists, OTOH, if at the direct front, for the most part monitor action from cover. Occasionally some do take the same risks (i.e., riding in a Hummer) but on the whole act as passive observers from the relative luxury of cover not possible for men in assault situations.
2. Journalists often act to aid the enemy and to hinder or subvert the advantages of our military. We all can remember the slimebag that shot video of the Marine that shot the Taliban creep that presented a possible threat even though he was down and wounded. Marine ruling - justified. The videographer deliberately filmed the Marine and used the film to smear the Marines and the military in general. Secondly, there have been numerous ‘journalists’ that gleefully sought out and aired film, interviews and combat documentation with our nation's enemies in this war and others. Let's not forget Mike Wallace and his hypocritical stance that he wouldn't interfere with a Viet Cong ambush of American soldiers if he could get the scoop. Many other scumbag MSM types have done just that in this war.
3. Complete agreement on the pity of the untimely deaths of numerous, genuine, AMERICANS involved in the journalistic trade. They will be missed. Guys like Dan Rather, Mike Wallace, Walter Cronkite and others will not. In fact, their demise (careerwise and in body) is reason to be heartened that one more enemy of freedom no longer needs to be contended with.
If a reporter whose presence was accepted by the enemy was forwarding his reports through the U.S. military so they could ensure that they were not not being used for enemy propaganda, I would see no particular reason why the reporter should feel a need to jeopardize his position by relaying information in such fashion as to get himself ejected or killed. Bolting from one's post to try to save a particular batch of troops might seem like a noble thing, but in the long run it may be better to hope the enemy allows the publication of information that is more harmful to them than they realize.
BTW, I would suggest that deciding to bolt could be not only dangerous but futile as well if the 'ambush' was in fact a setup to test the reporter.
“Criticizing the photographer on a blog and pimping the post on FR are not exactly heroic acts either, you know”
Look up the keyword fauxtography and get back to me on that one, will you? Also check rathergate sometime...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.