RANGER AGAINST WAR: Muzzling the Watchdogs <

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Muzzling the Watchdogs


The New York Times reported yesterday that reportage from the front lines in Iraq is in jeopardy (''Not to See the Fallen is No Favor.''):

“Many of the journalists who are in Iraq have been backed into fortified corners, rarely venturing out to see what soldiers confront. And the remaining journalists who are embedded with the troops in Iraq — the number dropped to 92 in May from 126 in April — are risking more and more for less and less.”

The military has severely tightened restrictions on what images are allowable, disallowing any pictures with clear name, unit designation or facial recognition. ''And memorials for the fallen in Iraq can no longer be shown, even when the unit in question invites coverage.” In addition,


“If Joseph Heller were still around, he might appreciate the bureaucratic elegance of paragraph 11(a) of IAW Change 3, DoD Directive 5122.5:

“'Names, video, identifiable written/oral descriptions or identifiable photographs of wounded service members will not be released without the service member’s prior written consent.'”

“James Glanz, a Baghdad correspondent. . . (said) some military leaders seem determined to protect something besides the privacy of their troops.

“'As the number of reporters there dwindles. . . the kind of work they are able to publish becomes very important,' Mr. Glanz said. 'This tiny remaining corps of reporters becomes a greater and greater problem for the military brass because we are the only people preventing them from telling the story the way they want it told.'

“Capturing the brutal realities of war is a tradition in this country dating back at least to Matthew Brady, and it is undoubtedly part of why Americans, regardless of their politics, have come to know and revere the sacrifices that generations of soldiers have made on their behalf.”

“When this war began, the government attempted to manage images by banning photographs of coffins returning to United States soil. If the government chooses to overmanage the wages of war in Iraq, there is a real danger that when this new generation of veterans, whose ranks grow every day, could come home to a place where their fellow Americans have little idea what they have gone through.”


Let us hope that enough Americans back home have the stomach and inclination for a reality which is not quite as pretty as those they are fed via Hollywood's un-reality show circuit.


--Lisa


Labels:

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Apparently, the only thing this administration learned from Viet Nam (aside from how to avoid serving there!) is that images of the hell that is war makes it unpopular with anyone with more than two brain cells. We can't have the people actually making the decisions in this alleged democratic republic, now can we?

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 11:43:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

labrys,

I wonder what it would be like if the people actually did take back their republic from their disobedient public servants?

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 2:39:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From that response it sounds like you may have a plan workin'. Sign me up Ranger-man.

..anon.

Friday, June 1, 2007 at 12:14:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

anon,

These were my thoughts; the Ranger tends to remain apolitical.

I'm glad you're on the flanks. I would follow leadership here, and I know Rangers Lead the Way. . .

I shall have to consult with Jim on this one.

Lisa

Friday, June 1, 2007 at 1:46:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's an interesting question to ponder idnit? Talking purely hypothetical here, understand. I mean, overlook what's said *about* people like Tom Paine and Tom Jefferson by folks bless their hearts who either, on one hand, want to water 'em down for the high school history books or on t'other to cuss 'em for ownin' slaves and having the gall to be white Anglo-Saxons who killed Indians...I'm sorry "First Americans." Overlook that stuff and really *read* what those ole boys had to say and...man...there's pure dynamite and revolution there. They was to say them things today, I believe they'd be a-earnin' themselves a one way, all taxpayer-financed Cuban vacation. But I'm about those old-timers like the preacher sez about his Good Book, "It says it, I believe it, that settles it." It can lead to some tantalizin' fantasizin' even among us peace-lovin', broke down old sojurs when you stand on tiptoes and look up front and see nobody on point for this country but greedheads, gull-artists and rabid True Believers.

..anon.

Friday, June 1, 2007 at 3:15:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

anon,

Yes, the Founding Fathers were truly firebrands. What passion and conviction, and desire to forge a truly new democracy. Not ambivalent sneaks--those men were leaders.

''Greedheads, gull-artists and rabid True Believers''--that about sums the new lot up nicely. And I presume you're talking the Eric Hoffer variety.

Friday, June 1, 2007 at 5:04:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

<< Home