Hotel Chain locks out CNN

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Uh, I don't know, maybe CNN got the video anonymously?

CNN said it obtained the video through contacts with the Islamic Army of Iraq, a Sunni-led insurgent group that has carried out numerous suicide bombings and kidnappings.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/i...9-1n21tape.html

It seems that CNN has contacts with the insurgents. I wonder if withholding these contact would amount to "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"?

I wonder about that too.

It would depend on what the nature of these 'contacts' are, and how the material was passed to the network. None of which appears to be clear at this point.

Edited November 18, 2006 by erekose

[kaydee457 13]

This is the report?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfOy_ul5VWw

Thank you for posting it.

Its certainly guilty of sensationalism - though I don't see as much of a problem with the use of the footage specifically as with how the reporter uses it to ask leading questions of the soldier he interviews off camera.

So, you did not know of the video's content, context, nor who/whom made the subject video, their intent or any other pertinent details whatsoever but you felt obliged to make your presence and (cloaked) opinion known.

You've done no more than disrupt this thread from start to finish having no substantive input other than you wanted to rebuke the premise that a video, one that you never saw, nor had read anything about, had been aired on CNN. You’re naïve, or possibly stupid enough, I don’t know, to believe that such things do not happen. The insurgents didn’t increase the ferocity of their attacks immediately before the elections. I wish I lived in your delusional world!

And now you're pompous enough to declare its content acceptable, given the probative questions asked by the reporter?

Do you wear a tin hat?

"Disruptive". I see. Is that your "mantra of the moment"?

Better take a look at your own post history before you make a claim like that about someone else. And I'm fairly sure a lot of people will agree with me there. Considering of course, that you've peppered almost all of your posts in this thread with personal attacks. I don't believe I have, but please prove me wrong.

BTW - my point was that YOU hadn't seen the video, and were rendering an opinion based on second hand sources. I made no secret of not having seen it - I said that in order to actually discuss the quality of the reporting, it would help to have seen the thing itself in order to comment with any authority about it - otherwise its mere speculation.

And no, I don't think its a particularly good report - . As I said I don't see a problem with the footage itself - just with the way the journalist asks leading questions of a soldier he is interviewing. That is distortive and senationalist.

Not sure quite what else you want me to say. Which I think is actually what this is about - what 'you' want other people to say - Mr "Defender of Liberty". Best wipe the spittle off your lip, and do something about that 'crazy eye'.

Frankly, I simply want you to come down off that high horse you seem to believe you ride.

The premise of the thread is that CNN, or any western news organization, is aiding the enemy by airing such an obvious propagandist video.

We do not wish to air beheadings and we certainly don’t want to see Americans, or British soldiers for that matter, gunned down on camera for the sake of furthering their military aspirations.

It’s a simple concept, prop- a- ganda. It’s bad for a responsible network to air prop-a- ganda. Get it?

It’s not rocket science here.

They (the enemy) record, on video, the assassination of a U.S. soldier as they commit the crime.

What is it that you’ve argued incessantly throughout this thread? Is this a Disney video? Perhaps they’ll submit it for best foreign film at Cann next year?

What’s hard to understand here?

You’re simply one those nits that argues for the sake of arguing…..Get over it already!

I don't know how I can make it any clearer. You hadn't seen the video - you posted and cited a second hand source as your basis for decrying the actual material that you had not seen. You then added that you reached your interpretation based in part on the interpretation of another news network.

Its like if I were to tell you a movie is $hit, but not actually having watched it myself. Would you take my word for it.

In my view, having seen the report, I don't see anything wrong specifically with the footage - but in the presentation of it, which in one particular segment distorts the entire report.

As I said - I find it hard to see what purpose you started this thread when you don't want anything approaching a civilised discussion about the 'actual material'.

That said - the material is available for everyone to view and comment on. So what exactly is your argument?

No you've made it perfectly clear. You're one of those idjits on the internet that wants to argue incessantly over minutia, having no valid argument whatsoever other than wanting to argue......again and again

I suppose my belief that the Pol Pot regime killed millions is invalid because I had not personally witnessed the mass murders.

What about the Holocaust? True or not true? Your answer is respectfully solicited.

I don’t know, but given your absurd rules of “evidence” I would have had to seen it myself.

In your world if one did not see it first hand one cannot be sure, can one, and one cannot have a belief or opinion.....sic

You’re in need of a reality check, so find one.

Just don’t disrupt my thread with this nonsense again, okay?

[mybackpages 0]

Kaydee did you actually watch the CNN report before you commented on it?

No I did not. The article describes its content quite clearly; an enemy camera man (terrorist) filming the sniper killing a U.S. serviceman.

I'll ask you these questions.

Who/whom is the targeted audience of a filmed killing of a U.S. seviceman? Is this an Al Quada training film or one meant to migrate into the U.S. evening news? How did CNN get it? Why would they show it?

They show it because it gets them rating. The goal is money making not liberal propagandda. And if anyone thinks CNN is liberal, then they have not seen nor read liberal media.

[kaydee457 13]

Uh, I don't know, maybe CNN got the video anonymously?

CNN said it obtained the video through contacts with the Islamic Army of Iraq, a Sunni-led insurgent group that has carried out numerous suicide bombings and kidnappings.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/i...9-1n21tape.html

It seems that CNN has contacts with the insurgents. I wonder if withholding these contact would amount to "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"?

Amen, and they should be banned from the battlefield as well as these hotels!

Kaydee did you actually watch the CNN report before you commented on it?

No I did not. The article describes its content quite clearly; an enemy camera man (terrorist) filming the sniper killing a U.S. serviceman.

I'll ask you these questions.

Who/whom is the targeted audience of a filmed killing of a U.S. seviceman? Is this an Al Quada training film or one meant to migrate into the U.S. evening news? How did CNN get it? Why would they show it?

They show it because it gets them rating. The goal is money making not liberal propagandda. And if anyone thinks CNN is liberal, then they have not seen nor read liberal media.

No "responsible" western news organization should, or would broadcast such a video.......

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

This is the report?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfOy_ul5VWw

Thank you for posting it.

Its certainly guilty of sensationalism - though I don't see as much of a problem with the use of the footage specifically as with how the reporter uses it to ask leading questions of the soldier he interviews off camera.

So, you did not know of the video's content, context, nor who/whom made the subject video, their intent or any other pertinent details whatsoever but you felt obliged to make your presence and (cloaked) opinion known.

You've done no more than disrupt this thread from start to finish having no substantive input other than you wanted to rebuke the premise that a video, one that you never saw, nor had read anything about, had been aired on CNN. You’re naïve, or possibly stupid enough, I don’t know, to believe that such things do not happen. The insurgents didn’t increase the ferocity of their attacks immediately before the elections. I wish I lived in your delusional world!

And now you're pompous enough to declare its content acceptable, given the probative questions asked by the reporter?

Do you wear a tin hat?

"Disruptive". I see. Is that your "mantra of the moment"?

Better take a look at your own post history before you make a claim like that about someone else. And I'm fairly sure a lot of people will agree with me there. Considering of course, that you've peppered almost all of your posts in this thread with personal attacks. I don't believe I have, but please prove me wrong.

BTW - my point was that YOU hadn't seen the video, and were rendering an opinion based on second hand sources. I made no secret of not having seen it - I said that in order to actually discuss the quality of the reporting, it would help to have seen the thing itself in order to comment with any authority about it - otherwise its mere speculation.

And no, I don't think its a particularly good report - . As I said I don't see a problem with the footage itself - just with the way the journalist asks leading questions of a soldier he is interviewing. That is distortive and senationalist.

Not sure quite what else you want me to say. Which I think is actually what this is about - what 'you' want other people to say - Mr "Defender of Liberty". Best wipe the spittle off your lip, and do something about that 'crazy eye'.

Frankly, I simply want you to come down off that high horse you seem to believe you ride.

The premise of the thread is that CNN, or any western news organization, is aiding the enemy by airing such an obvious propagandist video.

We do not wish to air beheadings and we certainly don’t want to see Americans, or British soldiers for that matter, gunned down on camera for the sake of furthering their military aspirations.

It’s a simple concept, prop- a- ganda. It’s bad for a responsible network to air prop-a- ganda. Get it?

It’s not rocket science here.

They (the enemy) record, on video, the assassination of a U.S. soldier as they commit the crime.

What is it that you’ve argued incessantly throughout this thread? Is this a Disney video? Perhaps they’ll submit it for best foreign film at Cann next year?

What’s hard to understand here?

You’re simply one those nits that argues for the sake of arguing…..Get over it already!

I don't know how I can make it any clearer. You hadn't seen the video - you posted and cited a second hand source as your basis for decrying the actual material that you had not seen. You then added that you reached your interpretation based in part on the interpretation of another news network.

Its like if I were to tell you a movie is $hit, but not actually having watched it myself. Would you take my word for it.

In my view, having seen the report, I don't see anything wrong specifically with the footage - but in the presentation of it, which in one particular segment distorts the entire report.

As I said - I find it hard to see what purpose you started this thread when you don't want anything approaching a civilised discussion about the 'actual material'.

That said - the material is available for everyone to view and comment on. So what exactly is your argument?

No you've made it perfectly clear. You're one of those idjits on the internet that wants to argue incessantly over minutia, having no valid argument whatsoever other than wanting to argue......again and again

I suppose my belief that the Pol Pot regime killed millions is invalid because I had not personally witnessed the mass murders.

What about the Holocaust? True or not true? Your answer is respectfully solicited.

I don’t know, but given your absurd rules of “evidence” I would have had to seen it myself.

In your world if one did not see it first hand one cannot be sure, can one, and one cannot have a belief or opinion.....sic

You’re in need of a reality check, so find one.

Just don’t disrupt my thread with this nonsense again, okay?

Kaydee what exactly are you trying to achieve here? Is it just about screaming and shouting or do you actually want to talk about the footage. The footage that you had an opinion on before you'd actually seen it?

BTW - feel free to deny the Holocaust whenever you like. You'll be buried with specific documentary evidence - the one thing that Holocaust Deniers have no answer for. Its easier to deny things when you have no first hand experience isn't it?

With every post you prove not only increasingly ridiculous you are, but make me wonder if you have some sort of psychological disorder. And you complain that the press gives the armed forces a bad rep. With mad dogs like you in the ranks - I'm not surprised.

And no - I will post whatever I like in whatever thread I like. So kindly, with respect, up yours Guv'nor

No "responsible" western news organization should, or would broadcast such a video.......

BTW - what do you consider to be a "responsible" western news organization?

[Ban Hammer 13,622]

And no - I will post whatever I like in whatever thread I like. So kindly, with respect, up yours Guv'nor

strange, i remember thinking that and i was called about every name in the book by you

Edited November 18, 2006 by charlesandnessa

[kaydee457 13]

This is the report?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfOy_ul5VWw

Thank you for posting it.

Its certainly guilty of sensationalism - though I don't see as much of a problem with the use of the footage specifically as with how the reporter uses it to ask leading questions of the soldier he interviews off camera.

So, you did not know of the video's content, context, nor who/whom made the subject video, their intent or any other pertinent details whatsoever but you felt obliged to make your presence and (cloaked) opinion known.

You've done no more than disrupt this thread from start to finish having no substantive input other than you wanted to rebuke the premise that a video, one that you never saw, nor had read anything about, had been aired on CNN. You’re naïve, or possibly stupid enough, I don’t know, to believe that such things do not happen. The insurgents didn’t increase the ferocity of their attacks immediately before the elections. I wish I lived in your delusional world!

And now you're pompous enough to declare its content acceptable, given the probative questions asked by the reporter?

Do you wear a tin hat?

"Disruptive". I see. Is that your "mantra of the moment"?

Better take a look at your own post history before you make a claim like that about someone else. And I'm fairly sure a lot of people will agree with me there. Considering of course, that you've peppered almost all of your posts in this thread with personal attacks. I don't believe I have, but please prove me wrong.

BTW - my point was that YOU hadn't seen the video, and were rendering an opinion based on second hand sources. I made no secret of not having seen it - I said that in order to actually discuss the quality of the reporting, it would help to have seen the thing itself in order to comment with any authority about it - otherwise its mere speculation.

And no, I don't think its a particularly good report - . As I said I don't see a problem with the footage itself - just with the way the journalist asks leading questions of a soldier he is interviewing. That is distortive and senationalist.

Not sure quite what else you want me to say. Which I think is actually what this is about - what 'you' want other people to say - Mr "Defender of Liberty". Best wipe the spittle off your lip, and do something about that 'crazy eye'.

Frankly, I simply want you to come down off that high horse you seem to believe you ride.

The premise of the thread is that CNN, or any western news organization, is aiding the enemy by airing such an obvious propagandist video.

We do not wish to air beheadings and we certainly don’t want to see Americans, or British soldiers for that matter, gunned down on camera for the sake of furthering their military aspirations.

It’s a simple concept, prop- a- ganda. It’s bad for a responsible network to air prop-a- ganda. Get it?

It’s not rocket science here.

They (the enemy) record, on video, the assassination of a U.S. soldier as they commit the crime.

What is it that you’ve argued incessantly throughout this thread? Is this a Disney video? Perhaps they’ll submit it for best foreign film at Cann next year?

What’s hard to understand here?

You’re simply one those nits that argues for the sake of arguing…..Get over it already!

I don't know how I can make it any clearer. You hadn't seen the video - you posted and cited a second hand source as your basis for decrying the actual material that you had not seen. You then added that you reached your interpretation based in part on the interpretation of another news network.

Its like if I were to tell you a movie is $hit, but not actually having watched it myself. Would you take my word for it.

In my view, having seen the report, I don't see anything wrong specifically with the footage - but in the presentation of it, which in one particular segment distorts the entire report.

As I said - I find it hard to see what purpose you started this thread when you don't want anything approaching a civilised discussion about the 'actual material'.

That said - the material is available for everyone to view and comment on. So what exactly is your argument?

No you've made it perfectly clear. You're one of those idjits on the internet that wants to argue incessantly over minutia, having no valid argument whatsoever other than wanting to argue......again and again

I suppose my belief that the Pol Pot regime killed millions is invalid because I had not personally witnessed the mass murders.

What about the Holocaust? True or not true? Your answer is respectfully solicited.

I don’t know, but given your absurd rules of “evidence” I would have had to seen it myself.

In your world if one did not see it first hand one cannot be sure, can one, and one cannot have a belief or opinion.....sic

You’re in need of a reality check, so find one.

Just don’t disrupt my thread with this nonsense again, okay?

BTW - feel free to deny the Holocaust whenever you like. You'll be buried with specific documentary evidence - the one thing that Holocaust Deniers have no answer for. Its easier to deny things when you have no first hand experience isn't it?

With every post you prove not only increasingly ridiculous you are, but make me wonder if you have some sort of psychological disorder. And you complain that the press gives the armed forces a bad rep. With mad dogs like you in the ranks - I'm not surprised.

And no - I will post whatever I like in whatever thread I like. So kindly, with respect, up yours Guv'nor

No "responsible" western news organization should, or would broadcast such a video.......

BTW - what do you consider to be a "responsible" western news organization?

erekose. I asked you time and again to stop disrupting this thread. Please do not attack me personally.

If you find political threads difficult to deal with perhaps you should participate in the "movie pong" or "change a letter" thread....

You're certainly making the horses ####### of yourself in this thread!

Edited November 18, 2006 by kaydee457

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And no - I will post whatever I like in whatever thread I like. So kindly, with respect, up yours Guv'nor

strange, i remember thinking that and i was called about every name in the book by you

We're none of us saints are we Charles? Perhaps time to stop taking things so personally.

[kaydee457 13]

erekose. GOOD NIGHT.

Take my advice and get over this. You're obsessing....NOT COOL!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

erekose. I asked you time and again to stop disrupting this thread. Please do not attack me personally.

If you find political threads difficult to deal with perhaps you should participate in the "movie pong" or "change a letter" thread....

You're certainly making the horses ####### of yourself in this thread!

Sure Kaydee. I watched the report and rendered an opinion based on it - you took someone else's word for it. As far as this thread goes you've not discussed the actual report once - have you?

And as for personal attacks - read back. You started them

erekose. GOOD NIGHT.

Take my advice and get over this. You're obsessing....NOT COOL!

That's ok Kaydee - you've proved you can shout the loudest. Unfortunately you don't have anything to say.

[kaydee457 13]

erekose. I asked you time and again to stop disrupting this thread. Please do not attack me personally.

If you find political threads difficult to deal with perhaps you should participate in the "movie pong" or "change a letter" thread....

You're certainly making the horses ####### of yourself in this thread!

Sure Kaydee. I watched the report and rendered an opinion based on it - you took someone else's word for it. As far as this thread goes you've not discussed the actual report once - have you?

And as for personal attacks - read back. You started them

erekose. GOOD NIGHT.

Take my advice and get over this. You're obsessing....NOT COOL!

That's ok Kaydee - you've proved you can shout the loudest. Unfortunately you don't have anything to say.

And you've proved that you always have to have the last word, eh?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

erekose. I asked you time and again to stop disrupting this thread. Please do not attack me personally.

If you find political threads difficult to deal with perhaps you should participate in the "movie pong" or "change a letter" thread....

You're certainly making the horses ####### of yourself in this thread!

Sure Kaydee. I watched the report and rendered an opinion based on it - you took someone else's word for it. As far as this thread goes you've not discussed the actual report once - have you?

And as for personal attacks - read back. You started them

erekose. GOOD NIGHT.

Take my advice and get over this. You're obsessing....NOT COOL!

That's ok Kaydee - you've proved you can shout the loudest. Unfortunately you don't have anything to say.

And you've proved that you always have to have the last word, eh?

Just for you.

This is the report?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfOy_ul5VWw

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'll bump this in case anyone actually wants to talk about the CNN report, but I think I know what the answer will be.

LIBERAL MEDIA!! RARGH! RARGH! RARGH! HERE BE DRAGONS! RARGH!

[~Jess~ 0]

i dunno what to say. on one hand i can see why they took it out but on the other, that is not the ONLY thing they show on CNN