The Ghost of Snapped Shot

Or, welcome to my low-maintenance heck.

Oh, the Humanity!

Here's yet another photo of heartless Israeli oppression. Imagine the sheer audacity of this soldier, helpfully pointing an obviously belligerent woman in the direction of the queue—Oh, the outrage!

An Israeli soldier gestures as a Palestinian woman argues as she is prevented from to crossing a checkpoint on her way to Jerusalem's Al Aqsa Mosque for the holy month of Ramadan near the West Bank town of Bethlehem, Friday, Sept. 28, 2007. Israel placed restrictions on Palestinian worshippers from the West Bank trying to enter Islam's third holiest shrine Friday, only allowing men older than 50 years and women over 40. (AP Photo/Kevin Frayer)

Someone remind me: Why do we bother employing photojournalists in the Middle East again? The ones already over there are so far in the bag for the "opposition" team that I really must wonder how any editor worth his salt would allow any of their material onto the news wires.

Being "impartial" is one thing, but this is ridiculous. Enough cheerleading for the terrorists already!

 Tags: kevin frayer AP #Intifada


#1 rach 28-Sep-2007
the correct question to ask is- how are these photojournalists' rights to take pictures that accurately portray the war infringed upon by the us government?

the media is being so carefully controlled over in Iraq that it is ridiculous- keep in mind that there are so many more pictures that beg to be seen that are not allowed out of iraq because of the administration's oppression of the press, even to the point of prohibiting photography of the coffins of U.S. troops returning home.

yes there's a bias in iraq war photography in the media right now, but the administration should be blamed, not the photographers.
#2 Brian C. Ledbetter 28-Sep-2007
Very interesting, Rachel. I would naturally disagree. In fact, I challenge you to try and find some good examples of what you consider the Western media treating the U.S. or Israeli military in a positive light. I think such a search would be pretty enlightening for you, as the instances tend to be few and far between (in my experience).

Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with us, though! It's always interesting to hear new viewpoints on these kinds of things!

#3 rach 28-Sep-2007
mm i do think i read your sarcasm seriously for a second there- my bad, i think exhaustion set in for a sec. i agree though- it can be argued that photographers on both sides tend to be extreme in their depictions of either perfect, heroic soldiers, or innocent, oppressed civilians. i think it's a mix in between frankly.
#4 Brian C. Ledbetter 28-Sep-2007
Hehe, I hear ya! It's nice of Fall to remind us that it's finally here, isn't it?

Here's a link I meant to send in my reply earlier, but was too hurried: Check out the comments section, in particular, where I debate magazine photographer Christopher Anderson on how stringently Hezbullah controlled what the press in Lebanon said during last summer's war. I don't think either of us ever conceded defeat, but it was definitely an interesting conversation to have!

#5 captainfish 28-Sep-2007
Ummm... US Administration oppressing the media in Iraq? Hmm.. then how did those reports from Abu Graib get out? How did all the reports of soldiers dying ever get out?

You know, there is a difference between not showing brutality in Lebanon, Gaza, or Saudia Arabia and showing a little bit of respect to the fallen soldiers who are fighting for those amended rights of those photographers.

There is no freedom to yell fire when there isn't one. Freedoms do come at a cost. When that cost impacts society as a whole or societies safety or the set morals of that society, then the freedoms of that person must be curtailed.

Thus, the construction of jails. (and for my 2 cents, some of the members of the media belong there for their betraying their country)
#6 Rooster 01-Oct-2007
That is one ugly, nagging bitch. Imagine that "joy" at home. Lucky Mohammed, what a catch.
Powered by Snarf · Contact Us