Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Songwrks who wrote (6951)	10/23/2001 4:14:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<Rumsfeld was left literally speechless when a reporter asked why journalists couldn't accompany special operations as they parachute in to perform highly complex and delicate operations. Finally, Rumsfeld had to ask if he'd actually heard the question right-which he had. > The answer is a Catch22 one. "You ask the question, which means you are too stupid to take on such a trip". There is also the polite answer "If we take you, you will report on what you see. If you report on what you see, the enemy will get information. If they get information, they will be better able to damage us. You won't help us, you'll be in the way, even if you aren't stupid, so no, you can't come". A British truck driver spent 3 months in a Turkish prison in 1974 after taking photos of Turkish military operations out of curiosity. The British government had to intercede over a period of time to get him released [he was a curious truck driver, not a spy]. Mqurice PS: Personal anecdote follows... One of the frights in my life was when I was driving our VW Van [we were on a long holiday] along a Turkish road, past all the Turkish tanks and army stuff, which the truck driver must have photographed. They were almost at war with Greece at the time over Cyprus. I looked across the van and there was my wife taking a picture of the tanks in the fields. I shouted quite loudly at her to put the camera down. She had no idea that taking photos might not be a good thing to do. We only heard what happened to the British truck driver who did exactly the same thing when we eventually got back to England. Then she understood that maybe it wasn't good. I don't she understood until then. We have some photos! So she did well as it happened. I suppose I'd be no good as a war photographer. I really would not have been surprised if a bullet or shell or something had hit the van. My heart was in my mouth. I explained to her that military people with their lives at risk are not keen on people making their lives more risky. Taking photos might be useful to their opponents and they have no idea who is doing what with what photos so they are better off to stop them all. Anyway, we didn't end up in a Turkish jail. But we did end up with a son, Tarken. We had met a really nice family while there and one of their sons was named after a cartoon character which their father drew, Tarkan. We Anglicized it slightly to Tarken. It was in honour of a nice family [Sezgin, the father, had picked us up at a bus stop and spent the day taking us around Istanbul, to his office and to meet his family].

To: Songwrks who wrote (6951)	10/23/2001 10:08:29 AM
From: Selectric II	Respond to of 281500

Contrary to their protestations, many journalists in the recent war feeding frenzy don't care much at all about "The public's right to know," as exemplified by the distortion and personal commentary added to their stories. If they simply reported, it would be too boring for their busy, creative little minds, they'd lose interest, and there would be no distinction between media XYZ and media ZYX. What they seem most interested in is "The journalist's right to write," and their own self-aggrandizement, patriotically wrapping themselves in the First Amendment. I believe that some of these egoists actually think all the rest of us are here just as potential news stories.