From: Clancy Clarity on
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:10:52 -0500, Doug McDonald
<mcdonald(a)NoSpAmscs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>DG wrote:
>> Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
>>> Came across this article about AP publishing a photo of a dying US
>>> marine and the controversy surrounding it. There hasn't been much
>>> news here in the UK about it but I expect that it's big news in the
>>> US.
>>>
>>> <http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/53173,news,photograph-of-dying-marine-joshua-bernard-was-it-right-for-the-associated-press-to-publish>
>>>
>>> I'm all up for showing how things are and the press have done so on
>>> may occasions, but at the same time the family must be very upset. So
>>> I'm in two minds about this. Storm in a tea cup? Or genuine concern
>>> on showing dead or dying NATO/ISAF soldiers?

This is the first I heard about it. During the 60's and 70's is was
perfectly common practice to show all the atrocities of war. But the
right-wing scum are too afraid of showing anyone the truth these days. It's
how they're able to perpetuate their stupidity and insanity, by not making
it clear to the world. They're too insecure and afraid to show their true
face and all they have "accomplished" to the world.

>>
>>
>> What's a photographer supposed to do? Quit shooting in a war zone
>> because someone might die?
>>
>> If people are upset about the photo then they should blame the
>> politicians for the war, not the photographer for the image.
>>
>
>
>NO! They should blame the scum people who print it against
>the family's wishes, and the people who
>started the war: al Qaeda and the Taliban. There is nothing
>wrong with the photographer taking it ... if the family
>had agreed, publishing it would have been OK.
>
>Doug McDonald

So ... let me get this straight .... It's okay to photograph them killing
someone and publishing it without asking, but not okay to photograph them
being killed and publishing it without asking. Have I got that correct now?



From: Doug McDonald on
stephe_k(a)yahoo.com wrote:
> Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
>> Came across this article about AP publishing a photo of a dying US
>> marine and the controversy surrounding it. There hasn't been much
>> news here in the UK about it but I expect that it's big news in the
>> US.
>>
>> <http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/53173,news,photograph-of-dying-marine-joshua-bernard-was-it-right-for-the-associated-press-to-publish>
>>
>>
>> I'm all up for showing how things are and the press have done so on
>> may occasions, but at the same time the family must be very upset. So
>> I'm in two minds about this. Storm in a tea cup? Or genuine concern
>> on showing dead or dying NATO/ISAF soldiers?
>
>
> I feel images like this might make just some of the "pro war" people
> realize that yes fighting wars does cost lives. Shots of soldiers lined
> up in a parade might be more pleasant but isn't reality.
>


What about compensating images of al Qaeda's victims .. like the
hrrobly burned ones from 9/11, of the Taliban's victims. Funny,
we almost never see those people! Only the Left uses such images for
their political purposes.

Doug McDonald
From: Reality Bytes on
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 01:29:48 GMT, Igetrightwingersangry(a)nospan.com wrote:

>
>
>...And if the picture was of you --> and the last memory your children
>would have of you, would it still be okay to publish it?
>
>

Most certainly. I'd love nothing better than to show them and give them
proof of what happens when you unknowingly become nothing but a
corporate-pawn under the guise of "protecting freedom".

From: Ray Fischer on
Doug McDonald <mcdonald(a)NoSpAmscs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>RichA wrote:
>>
>> Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
>>> Came across this article about AP publishing a photo of a dying US
>>> marine and the controversy surrounding it. There hasn't been much
>>> news here in the UK about it but I expect that it's big news in the
>>> US.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There was no news value in it, the media outlets, threatened by
>> falling usage and viewers are desperate and will do anything to drum
>> up an audience.
>
>The picture itself is no news. The scum left-wing media use these
>to try to make people feel sick and therefore want to lose a war.
>Its standard stuff and long since the whole affair is well known.

And after all, telling the taxpayers how their money is being spent
cannot have any relevance. When neocons and rightards want to kill
people there can be no criticism tolerated.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Ray Fischer on
Doug McDonald <mcdonald(a)NoSpAmscs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>DG wrote:
>> If people are upset about the photo then they should blame the
>> politicians for the war, not the photographer for the image.
>
>NO! They should blame the scum people who print it against
>the family's wishes, and the people who
>started the war: al Qaeda and the Taliban.

That's a rightard lie. It was Bush and the neocons who started the war.

> There is nothing
>wrong with the photographer taking it ... if the family
>had agreed, publishing it would have been OK.

The soldier was there on the taxpayer's dime. The taxpayers have the
right to know how their money is being spent.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net