cnn---the news we kept to ourselves

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I thought this was an interesting read:




The News We Kept to Ourselves
By EASON JORDAN


TLANTA ? Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard ? awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff.

For example, in the mid-1990's one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government's ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency's Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk.

Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers.

We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein's eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails).

Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan's monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman's rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed.

I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us.

Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad.

Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family's home.

I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely.

Eason Jordan is chief news executive at CNN.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
on thing you neglected to say

on thing you neglected to say

was that if cnn told the truth,they would have lost their baghdad bureau and been kicked out....that probably had much more to do with their decisions than anybody`s safety......they were more concerned with keeping their sources intact than "saving anybody"...they needed to report this stuff....rip the facade off of the iraqi regime...this eason guy probably knew some of this stuff would come out...maybe he had a guilty conscience..maybe he`s covering his ass.....you give them way to much head room on this story...al jazeera west.....cnn sucks...they make me sick...
 

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,459
532
113
Boston, MA
Garden, ok you want to gut CNN for sitting on their sources, ok have at it . But if CNN was aware, surely Washington knew what Saddam was up to. Saddam could have been history in 91, Bush senior called Norman off. Game set match was easily attainable. All this shit could completely have been avoided. Actually we should probably take some blame for propping up Saddam in the first place, surely that wasn't CNN s doing. after all Bernie Shaw wasn't in that Embassy in Cairo in the late 70s, that was the CIA.

Sham
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I think cnn should have come forward & reveal what they knew. As gardenweasel said they probably were worried about losing their bureau.This guy also probably was guilt ridden.On the other hand I think other media outlets probably knew also & they too should have come forward.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
shamrock-get the facts straight

shamrock-get the facts straight

the invasion was based on u.n, resolution 660...and 678...this invasion,although led militarily by the u.s.(who else),was authorized by the u.n......that`s why france and the rest of the duplicitous s.o.b.`s went along....it was to expel saddam from kuwait only.....not to undertake the removal of saddam from iraq...

RESOLUTION 678 (1990)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 2963rd meeting on 29 November 1990
The Security Council,

Recalling, and reaffirming its resolutions 660 (1990) of 2 August (1990), 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 662 (1990) of 9 August 1990, 664 (1990) of 18 August 1990, 665 (1990) of 25 August 1990, 666 (1990) of 13 September 1990, 667 (1990) of 16 September 1990, 669 (1990) of 24 September 1990, 670 (1990) of 25 September 1990, 674 (1990) of of 29 October 1990 and 677 (1990) of 28 November 1990.

Noting that, despite all efforts by the United Nations, Iraq refuses to comply with its obligation to implement resolution 660 (1990) and the above-mentioned subsequent relevant resolutions, in flagrant contempt of the Security Council,

Mindful of its duties and responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance and preservation of internationalnd peace and security,

Determined to secure full compliance with its decisions,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter,

1. Demands that Iraq comply fully with resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions, and decides, while maintaining all its decisions, to allow Iraq one final opportunity, as a pause of goodwil, to do so;

2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless Iraq "on or before 15 January 1991" fully implements, as set forth in paragraph 1 above, the foregoing resolutions," to use all necessary means" to uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;

3. Requests all States to provide appropriate support for the actions undertaken in pursuance of paragraph 2 of the present resolution;

4. Requests the States concerned to keep the Security Council regularly informed on the progress of actions undertaken pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the present resolution;

5. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

all that stuff about the u.s. and GEORGE BUSH blowing it in 1991 is all b.s.......removing saddam from iraq was never the issue or an option....then as now,the france`s and the iraqi silent partners were intent on keeping saddam in power...
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
more

more

After consulting with U. S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney in early August 1990, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia invited American troops onto Saudi soil. He had seen Kuwait's destiny; therefore, he wanted protection. It was also the interest of the USA to stop any further advantage of the Iraqi army. The deployment was called "Operation Desert Shield." These troops were armed with light, defensive weaponry.

Finally, in January 1991, the U. S. Congress voted to support Security Council resolution 660. It authorized using "all necessary means" if Iraq did not withdraw from Kuwait by January 15. Shrugging off this final warning, Saddam Hussein resolutely maintained the occupation of Kuwait.

A broad-based coalition was established to confront Iraq militarily and diplomatically. The military coalition consisted of Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Honduras, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Korea, Spain, Syria, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The war also was financed by countries which were unable to send in troops. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait were the main donors. More than $53 billion was pledged and received.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
oh...and btw

oh...and btw

did anybody see cnn reporter richard roth and iraqi u.n. representative muhammad al dhourri hug and kiss before al dhourri left for syria..al dhourri is a despicable piece of s-it.....that spoke volumes....again,cnn sucks...judy woodruff....paula zahn...wolf blitzer....aaron brown......despicable....
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
gardenweasel quote....."that spoke volumes....again,cnn sucks...judy woodruff....paula zahn...wolf blitzer....aaron brown......despicable."

She may be despicable, but since I find her attractive I am willing to overlook that minor flaw in Paula(LOL).
 

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
gardenweasel- good retort w/facts, but again seems like some are never satisfied IMHO. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion til it disagrees w/theirs. I don't remember questioning anyone's patriotism because they were against this war. I just remember questioning their rationale. Then again these are the same people that run the US down for all the terrible acts of the PAST, but don't call them on it cause only they are the True Americans. Same song & dance w/the PRESENT and FUTURE.
AR182-Think I'm gonna find that "FREE" thread and start from the beginning.:)
 
Last edited:

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,459
532
113
Boston, MA
Garden, in principle you are correct my friend. Everything you cut & pasted regarding 660 & 678 is exactly correct. Facts are facts and history is indeed history, can't be changed.

I would however take issue with your idea "removing Saddam was never a issue or option".

Just exactly what resolution are we under removing him now? And which number was it we used removing the Taliban??

And believe me I'm of the belief they both outlived any usefulness if indeed they ever possessed any originally. After studying extensively everything I can find regarding Saddam & the Taliban ,personally I think they were both questionable at best, reprehensible more likely, choices to support back & install ,
financially and otherwise;)

granted who knows what the alternatives would have brought.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
shamrock

shamrock

you are correct regarding our current action.....and i apologize if i came off negatively....not taking a shot at you,bud.....i think all the u.s. negativity is getting to me......appreciate the debate...but,i don`t believe we could ever get u.n. approval to remove saddam....we are taking hits from all over the world....almost all press is negative....the arab press is absolutely unbelievable....we have to find an alternative energy source and extract ourselves from the middle east....
 
Last edited:

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,459
532
113
Boston, MA
Garden, no need to apologize brother, I always enjoy the talk & debate also. Mighty frustrating & complicated world we live in today, no easy answers, that's for sure. And I believe your correct, despite all the present inclination that Iraq loves us, I don't think we have many Arab friends. Other than for business & financial reasons that is.

On a lighter note, enjoy the fights tonight, should be a worthwhile distraction from all this shit.

Best
shamrock
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I still say why is it CNN that has to do anything. How many from CNN worked for CIA/FBI. We dont know? Also our CIA/FBI new since 1979 what was going on in Iraq. What they do about it nothing. Was CIA?FBI afraid others might get killed. But so what we just looked the oher way and kept helping Saddam out from 79 to 89. Chit CNN was a small speck.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
78
So Cal
I suppose if CNN had someone in Auschwitz during WWII, they would have rationalized reasons for keeping that quiet too.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Strange question Ferdville. I would have hope again our government new before a news agency would have. Other wise we would be spending to much on our CIA/FBI if we didnt. Media reporting anything as we are finding out right now. Most are not believing half of it. For sure when you get only one side as we have been from some these outlets. How can anyone believe it.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
78
So Cal
I agree djv - that is the problem. we don't and probably won't ever get a true picture of what is going on. All the news agencies have some sort of bias - some just more than others. I don't necessarily expect our government to share ALL their information with the people - it sounds good in an imaginary world - but makes no sense in a real world. I don't think there has been any shortage of reporting atrocities by Saddam and his cohorts. But as you are aware, much of this is dismissed as U.S. propaganda. In CNN were to report the same, it may have been received as news or factual instead of propaganda. It is not an easy call any way you look at it.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top