why were only the Fallujah images shown and not others?

[Mari333]

Ill try this again. Could the WH have so much pull they allowed the Fallujah images to be shown and not others//
not the body bags of soldiers,
not the dead soldiers
not the dying soldiers
not the dead civilians or wounded civilians
these images can be found on the net
why were the Fallujah images the only ones shown?
to drum up the war drums again and take the heat off of Clarke's statements?
Im wondering if this is a Rove/Hughes PR idea in showing only the images of the mercenaries dead in Fallujah.
and yes, I think Rove had tons of pull at corporate news media outlets.
remember..Fox showed it first.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mari333]

2. Discuss the issue dont attack the messenger.

I am stating that those particular images were allowed to get onto US TV. no others have been.
Now either discuss the issue, or not.
ad hominems are not discussing the issue.
Ill wait for your apology, because I refuse to sink to being as mean as you are being right now. read what I said.
PR images of Fallujah are the only ones being allowed to be shown on USA TV.
and the right wing is using them to beat the war drums.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

4. This is an "issue"?

Uh okay.
You know, Karl Rove doesn't control everything you see on television, whether you like it or not. Karl Rove does not control the media.

[pnorman]

3. The idea that Rove was behind this is laughable,

but the following is right on:

they dont show the caskets from Dover.
they dont show the dead and wounded civilians.
they dont show the dying children.
they dont show the battles or the dead soldiers.
they just allow some images from Fallujah to get thru to Pravda TV USA.
all this while Clarke is saying the war on terror is undermined by attacking Iraq.

Keep HAMMERING on these points, especially the first one.

pnorman

[Mari333]

5. I didn t say HE was behind the attack I said

he allowed it to be shown on US TV. Yes, I think the WH has a lot of pull as to whats allowed to be shown on US TV.

[Virginian]

7. Who do you think is controlling

Who do you think is controlling what the press is allowed to show the public?
We all know the White House has said they don't want the caskets shown. Who in the White House made that decision?

They also have some pull in what is shown on local programming in the DC area. DC was one of the first stations to pull Politically Incorrect. Before that, they wouldn't let it air in it's national time slot. There was a silly little Hollywood gossip show between Night Line and PI.

This would have been a ripe audience for Martha Stewart Living, but the people of DC can't tune in to see the Domestic Diva. That has hurt her Magazine sales in this region, because it is just like any other woman's mag without the companion TV show.
(Is this possibly because she contributes to the campaigns of Democrats and for that she must be punished?)

[Qanisqineq]

6. they only show

what they think will make the American public shout, "nuke 'em all!"

[Mari333]

8. Thats what Im thinking..appealing to the chickenhawk chest thumping

base out there...gads.
even Paul Begala fell for it today and called the Iraqi insurgents "animals".
he did.
on Crossfire.
He didnt even say, we shouldnt even BE in Iraq.
I was shocked.

[leftchick]

9. I do think there is a logical explanation mari..

I came across a news report earlier today about it. I have read so much today I can't remember if it was reuters or AP. The event unfolded with an AP photographer who happened to be right where the SUVs were attacked and started filming as they were set on fire. Apparently there are NO US Military in Fallujah any more. It is known as a "No-Go" Zone. They have a base several miles away and supposedly heard of the attack after the four were dead from the news.

Now anytime US military personel are killed or wounded the media and camera people are immediately suffled away. I am sure their film is confiscated too, which really pisses me off. I agree it NEEDs to be seen.

The point I am making is I really don't think the US wanted those pictures to be shown. Had they been near enough I am pretty sure they would have stopped the filming and destroyed the film as they usually do.

Does this make sense?

[Mari333]

10. k and to a point its just that I dont trust one thing on the news

and see everything thru a cynical eye now as to whats being presented.

[pnorman]

12. I can't seem to access Truth Out at present,

but they mentioned that a US military base wasn't too far away. The sound and smoke would have been clearly visible there, but there seems to have been NO response until much later. Apparently, they don't enter that city without taking elaborate precautions.

Also, the men slain weren't just "civilian contractors"; they were from an armed security group. That would have been from Rummy's "privatising out" as much of the military as he can get away with. In the past, such practice provided "plausible deniability", as well as pretext for "stiffing" the next of kin. Perhaps not from here on.

pnorman

[Ksec]

11. I was shocked when I heard the average number of attacks on our guys

is 26. 26 attacks a day. I was shocked at the high number because from media all you see is maybe one a day. They really are cleaning up this war, arent they?