Still More Evidence of the Infinite Precautions Taken by the U.S. Military . . .

[Michael Tee]

. . .  to Avoid Killing Civilians.

http://www.truthout.org/iraq-war-vet-we-were-told-just-shoot-people-and-officers-would-take-care-us58378

Their sanctimonious pretensions would be laughable if the end-results were not so tragic.

[sirs]

Must fit template......must fit template

[BT]

Hart Viges, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division of the Army who served one year in Iraq, told of taking orders over the radio.

http://www.ivaw.org/member/benjamin-hart-viges

[Michael Tee]

Yes, he took orders over the radio.  I guess that's how orders come now.  The days of the motorcycle dispatch rider and the carrier pigeon are, sadly, gone.  What was your point?

And thanks for the IVAW site, which I found very interesting.  Up to a point.  The letter from Stan Goff (whose stuff I've read from links in antiwar.com) was interesting for a while but went on for far too long, like some of my own posts.  Again, what was your point?

BT, are you in training now to become an oracle?  I notice that more and more of your posts are cryptic and enigmatic, a puzzle at least to me.  You are starting to sound positively oracular.

[BT]

I just shine a flashlight on the information. You and other members are free to draw your own conclusions.

[Michael Tee]

There's a lot of information out there.  What made you decide to shine your flashlight on the information that Whatzizname took orders over the radio?

[BT]

It's always interesting to know who is reporting what. It helps with the why's.

[Michael Tee]

<<It's always interesting to know who is reporting what. It helps with the why's. >>

How profound.  And how nice that we can agree on something.

Does your skepticism extend to the source of most war reporting (i.e., the Pentagon/DOD) or is it reserved primarily for the reporters themselves?

[Plane]

Does your skepticism extend to the source of most war reporting (i.e., the Pentagon/DOD) or is it reserved primarily for the reporters themselves?

Oh?

Why do you think that most war reporting is based from the Pentagon/DOD?

[Michael Tee]

<<Why do you think that most war reporting is based from the Pentagon/DOD?>>

That's not important.  Let's say most war reporting does NOT originate from the Pentagon/DOD, only some of it.  My question to BT still stands, does his skepticism embrace the source of information coming from Pentagon/DOD or only to reporters in general?

I will answer your question anyway, though.  The Pentagon holds daily briefings for reporters in war zones, selects which reporters can report from the front as embeds and confirms or denies various reports on the conduct or alleged misconduct or U.S. forces.  In addition to that, a recent scandal indicated that various so-called "experts" retained as talking-head commentators by the  MSM were on the Pentagon payroll, either unknown to the MSM at the time or known but undisclosed to the  MSM audience or readers.  Past scandals have indicated that this applied in print journalism as well, with regard to "comment" on various wars in the press.  So I had reason to think that MOST war reporting was emanating directly or indirectly from the Pentagon/DOD, but I'm prepared to scale back that statement from "most" to "some" so as to avoid getting bogged down in side issues here.

[BT]

Does your skepticism extend to the source of most war reporting (i.e., the Pentagon/DOD) or is it reserved primarily for the reporters themselves?

Depends on time allowed. In this case I was familiar with the author going back to his days in Alaska.

Let's just say he is more noted for his propaganda skills than his reporting capabilities.

[Michael Tee]

<<Let's just say he is more noted for his propaganda skills than his reporting capabilities. >>

The subject of the thread had nothing to do with his or anyone else's reporting abilities, but if you feel that his inadequacies as a reporter led to factual errors in his report, by all means share with us your critique of where or how he misreported this story.

[BT]

The4 fact that his reputation is based on his propaganda skills and his sources to back up his stories are mostly members of Iraq Veterans Against the War, many of whom have been found to be frauds, makes my case for me.

[Michael Tee]

<<The4 fact that his reputation is based on his propaganda skills and his sources to back up his stories are mostly members of Iraq Veterans Against the War, many of whom have been found to be frauds, makes my case for me. >>

How many IVAW were "found" to be frauds?  Who exactly "found" that they were frauds?

In any event, the article itself is either fraudulent or it's not.  What fraudulent claims were asserted in it?  Surely you can't impugn the article because of the writer's past reliance on fraudulent sources, otherwise every article written by reporters who previously relied on Pentagon/DOD sources would have to be similarly dismissed.

[BT]

Surely you can't impugn the article because of the writer's past reliance on fraudulent sources

The author is using suspect sources in the article you posted.