CNN says its silence on Iraq ... ( a little late isn't it?)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/04/14/entertainment1432EDT0624.DTL ^

[snooker]

A top CNN executive kept quiet about some atrocities in Iraq not because the network wanted to protect access but because it worried about putting lives in danger, CNN said Monday.

Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, revealed the incidents in an op-ed piece in The New York Times Friday headlined "The News We Kept to Ourselves."

[snooker]

The toast network trys to weasel out.

Sorry but it's already well done. All of CNNs future credibility is lost.

[Support Free Republic]

---

PRETTY IN PINK
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[sarasota]

This is intolerable. Absolutely intolerable.

[jimkress]

A top CNN executive kept quiet about some atrocities in Iraq not because the network wanted to protect access but because it worried about putting lives in danger, CNN said Monday.

CNN doesn't care about lives. CNN didn't give a damn about the Iraqis who died because CNN refused to expose the evil of the Saddam regieme.

[zerosix]

Since Jordan only saw fit to warn Jordan's King and not Saddams's sons-in-law, it shows that like most liberals, all human lives are equal, just some more than others.

[Hugin]

He said that in the mid-1990s, an Iraqi cameraman working for CNN was tortured because the government believed Jordan worked for the CIA. Reporting the story "would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk," Jordan wrote.

Ok, so why then did they keep operating in Iraq knowing that their mere presence there was putting the Iraqis who worked for them in mortal danger? If their concern was their employees safety, the best way to protect them would be to not have any employees.

Of course their admission also begs the question as to what other stories they are covering up in coutntreis run by desposts. Are they not reporting what's going on under the rule of Arafat, Mugabe, and Castro for fear of reprisals against their staff there? They have just sent a message to every despot on earth that if you want to muzzle CNN just torture a couple of their local employees.

[TomGuy]

A top CNN executive kept quiet about some atrocities in Iraq not because the network wanted to protect access but because it worried about putting lives in danger, CNN said Monday.

Ok, now we know where Bagdad Bob went. He's now the apologist for CNN.

We didn't believe him in Bagdad. We don't believe CNN's rationale now.

[peeve23]

You don't have to report on specifics to set the proper tone. Since they knew it was a murderous regime the tone should have reflected that.

CNN always portrayed Iraq as a people friendly paradise governed by Uncle Saddam.

It should have accurately portrayed it as "Return of the Gulag."

[steve in DC]

Might we not consider where else in the world CNN's selective and inaccurate reporting has "... nothing to do with access, and everything to do with keeping people from being killed as a result of our reporting..."

Of course, we must also look to the past to see CNN's reporting on the Clinton administration to see them reporting inaccurately for access. Or were they "...keeping people from being killed as a result of our reporting..." then, too?

Arkencide happens!

[Righter-than-Rush]

CNN is on it's way out. They know it.

[kcvl]

I wonder if Christa could explain why Ambassador "Combover" was kissing Richard from CNN before he left New York. That seems a little close for a "reporter", don't you think?

[kcvl]

Let's make sure that we help them...

cnn@cnn.com

[onedoug]

Accessories to murder, torure, rape...which they they simply let go on and on.

I don't know how anyone could overcome what should be absolutely the horrid shame to appear on that...network.

[djpg]

Why should we believe them?

Do they take President Bush's word for anything? Do they automatically believe Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the administration? If CNN is skeptical of the leaders of this country, we should be equally skeptical of CNN.

[Diddley]

CNN - RIP
CNN - We bury (articles). You dig.