Oh, Here We Freaking Go, Again

Update 3: Make sure you check out Jason's post. He had  a lot more time to dig into this after I finished for the night. Also, see Hyscience - they got the ballrolling with the initial background info on the journalists.

Isn't it interesting that this was obviously filmed some time ago but breaks right on the heels of the Iraq election? That's a bit convenient for changing the news slant of the effort in Iraq. I hope combined intelligence operations have taken a good look at these guys. This strikes me as an incredibly well-timed bit of propoganda.

Important Update:  Click here and take a look at the bio-pic on the about page of the journalist who supposedly took the footage. And there may be more to come. Developing ... as they say.

More: Interesting portfolio for Stephen DuPont - Children of the Wall in Palestine - boxers in Cuba - Inside Jihad - The Lions Last Roar in Afghanistan. No agenda here ... nah.

You might not have to pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV for a day or two - here's what the news will likely be. Too bad they put this first sentence at the very end of the story.

According to SBS, Dupont said the soldiers told him they were burning the bodies for reasons of hygiene.

Appears he is working on another book, too.

A series of B+W portraits of the people of the Northern Alliance which I took in 1998 and 2001. These photographs are a part of a book project I am working on about the people of Afghanistan, which I began in 1993. Titled Generation AK-47 the book will be composed of photographs and personal diaries. It deals with a generation of Afghans who have grown up behind the barrel of a gun. Peace, a blessing too far away.

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - The U.S. military said Wednesday it was investigating a report carried on an Australian television network that claimed American soldiers in Afghanistan burned the bodies of two Taliban fighters and then used the action to taunt other Islamic militants.

The SBS television network said it broadcast video footage on its respected Dateline current affairs program showing U.S. soldiers burning the bodies of the suspected Taliban fighters in the hills outside the southern village of Gonbaz, near the former Taliban stronghold of Kandahar.

The footage was not immediately available for review and its authenticity could not be established. It was also not clear when the video was taken.

The network told The Associated Press that freelance reporter Stephen Dupont took the footage while embedded with U.S. troops. Dupont couldn't immediately be reached Wednesday.

Comments

[Steel]

Dan, what say you and I and few close friends get together and move to Guam?

It's a beautiful place. They have DSL, plenty of seafood, great beaches and it is stil the USA.

There's casinos there so plenty of work.

It's a thought huh?

[Smokey]

Screw the Taliban, and screw George Bush too, its all a ploy to raise oil prices all over the world anyways, all ya'll who voted for Bush twice(I was only able to vote on the last one), thanks for ruining our country.

Am I the only young person who thinks its ludacris for me to pay SS Tax, when I know no one under 25 wont see a dime of it in 30 years, becuase the program will have already crashed? Just a thought.

[Smokey]

* I voted for lame-ass Kerry, and I know, he was horrible, but anbody but Bush please.

[Jason Coleman]

Um Smokey, I really hope you're being sarcastic.

But if you're not, maybe I should clue you in on something. BUSH is the one who DOES NOT want you paying SS Tax. He want's you to keep your own money so that even if SS goes belly up you've still got all YOUR money earning interest.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you seem to be a bit. . . confused. Nevermind your screw them comments.

--Jason

[Jason Coleman]

Sorry bout feeding the troll, if that's what it was, but to the post.

I really hope that this isn't true, but if it is true, I hope that it's put into context correctly, I'd hate to see a situation where we burned the bodies to ward against disease (we already know that the Taliban doesn't collect their dead, so we have to deal with that in either graves or through burning, depending on terrain).

As for the taunting, I'd have to really see that, and it's ironic that the report is "out there" but the video isn't. In this day and age you don't have something broadcast often without it being captured and retained on tape or in digital form.

I smell a rat!

--Jason

[shonane]

They probably did it. No different that all the people blown up with bombs - all burned and mutilated and dead. This is not news is it, that they burned two of the Taliban? Are we over the shock and horror of it all, or are we numb?
>>

And to Smokey re paying social security taxes -

Yes you should do it. There is a lot of support for keeping ss, as evidenced by the fact that Congress is frozen into non action today. What are they going to do with all the old people? They need to eat and a roof over their head. Some revisions will need to be made to the program though.

I hope some people are finally getting it about the "lock box" that Al Gore kept saying he wanted to put on SS funds. Too many politicos busy putting Gore down instead of listening to a solid plan he had after years of studying the issue. His goal was to save SS. Smart man and cared about the old folks too. But NOOO, some wanted to go with G Bush's plan to throw it out the window, alternatives that will only work for the rich and there are less and less of them. What about the masses?

You should pay ss tax also, because your parents have paid all their lives. It will support your MAMA and DADDY who will depend on it - unless of course they are among the estimated 10 percent of the retired population who don't need it. (I made that percent up. However, only a limited number of people can make it in their old age without social security and the situation is getting worse and employers continue to eliminate defined benefits retirement plans.)

[res ipsa loquitor]

What are they going to do with all the old people? They need to eat and a roof over their head. Some revisions will need to be made to the program though.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 12:48:27 AM

I believe Karl Marx had the same idea. You can read all about it in the Communist Manifesto

[shonane]

Jason - You say Bush doesn't want you to pay ss taxes. You are right - He wants to eliminate ss. His plan is impractical as in the end there will be no safety net for masses of old people.

Bush just writes blank checks and uses the national credit card to increase our debt, but doesn't seem bothered about whether there is adequate revenue to support it. Do a google on National Debt and see what has happened under this administration. Most people when they discover, are in shock. Look at how much of our annual budget is need this year just to pay the interest on this debt. Know this, last two years of Clinton/Gore we were paying down the principle on the debt and they had a target (think 12-15 years) of paying it off. Now that makes sense doesn't it? Today, the possibility is almost unconceivable.

[shonane]

Jason, here's a link to the National Debt clock. This Iraq war put the thing into fast forward.

http://www.toptips.com/debtclock.html

[res ipsa loquitor]

Bush just writes blank checks and uses the national credit card to increase our debtPosted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:01:28 AM

This is true; Bush is spending like a Democrat. This practice has alienated many fellow Republicans in Congress.

[Smokey]

Bush aint trying to save a damn thing, living or dead(oil). If he drills in Alaska, that really should be the last straw. I mean seriously, how many stupid decisions/incidents is this guy trying to rack up on his resume? I think he makes most of his decisions after a night with the Ol' 8-ball and I'm not talking about pool ya'll.

I think he knew he could never be the Best President ever, so he decided to be the Worst president ever.

BTW if you are still supporting Bush, you should have to go fight in Afghanistan, and let my Uncle and his boys come home.

[Cindi in PA]

Bush and Gore, the guys who cut our military and failed to defend this country?

As for SS, I am 48 years old, I would not be counted in this cutting of SS. Our younger people should be given the chance to use their own money as they see fit. Problem will be the slouches who choose not to.

National debt would have decreased, but we do have a war going on. I love it, same folks screaming protect our troops, don't want to go in debt.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
* I voted for lame-ass Kerry, and I know, he was horrible, but anbody but Bush please.

Posted by: Smokey | Oct 20, 2005 12:29:52 AM

Sorry you missed out on the no child left behind program.

[shonane]

What are they going to do with all the old people? They need to eat and a roof over their head. Some revisions will need to be made to the program though.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 12:48:27 AM

I believe Karl Marx had the same idea. You can read all about it in the Communist Manifesto

Posted by: res ipsa loquitor
===============
Actually I have read it, and we discussed it extensively in one of my college classes. Have you read it? I think it was a noble cause and vision, just had some faults in the assumptions and especially in the implementation.

This is actually an off topic for Dans post. But, I am clear on my belief that a society has a responsibility to take care of its old people. Most people I know would agree with this. You, of course, have a right to your opinion and perhaps you would like to live in a country where they don't think that is important or haven't made any provisions for this. There are plenty of countries out there where you can find this situation - it isn't pleasant.

[Cindi in PA]

BTW if you are still supporting Bush, you should have to go fight in Afghanistan, and let my Uncle and his boys come home.

Posted by: Smokey | Oct 20, 2005 1:15:09 AM

Smokey, did you also miss out on world history?

Your uncle and his boys are there because they are men, who made a decision to defend their country. I have a nephew in Iraq, been there almost 2 years. When he gets home in December, maybe you would like to speak with him. He knows why he is there.

[shonane]

This is true; Bush is spending like a Democrat. This practice has alienated many fellow Republicans in Congress.

Posted by: res ipsa loquitor | Oct
==============
Wrong, Bush is spending like a Republican. Most Democrats you will notice are fiscal conservatives. I am a Democrat and very much a Fiscal Conservative. This s a Republican administration and a Republican congress - Big, big spenders and big, big government like we have never seen. That is what defines Republican today - look at the Republican actions - that is who and what they are. You cannot say that that is Democrats who have opposed this.

[res ipsa loquitor]

Have you read it? I think it was a noble cause and vision, just had some faults in the assumptions and especially in the implementation.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:17:00 AM

Yes, I have read it. In a vacuum, a very noble idea. This is reality, however, not utopia. The SS system has evolved into a money-sucking machine, and unfortunately it cannot easily be dismantled for the very reasons of which you speak; it is too late in the game to yank the security from those whom depend on it.

Having said that, I believe in capitalism, free markets and competition.

As Jason said, probably more eloquently, private investment is more efficient than public assistance--for individuals and for the government. The general sense of entitlement in the US is degrading the concept of personal responsibilty and self-determination.

[Cindi in PA]

Republicans are doing everything big today. Top of the list, winning elections. Republicans outnumber Democrats.

And to say, democrats are not big, have you taken a look at Ted Kennedy these days lol.

Isn't what this thread is about? :}

[res ipsa loquitor]

Your uncle and his boys are there because they are men, who made a decision to defend their country.
Posted by: Cindi in PA | Oct 20, 2005 1:20:52 AM

Hear,here. Smokey, your comments are an insult to your uncle and his boys and their decisions.

[Smokey]

Did i say that biotch (do you like that spelling Cindy?), no.
So keep fooling yourself babe with your buddy Bush. BTW Cindy, which Bush do you think that would be for you) Dont tell me if i need a history lesson either, I know why they're there, and its time for them to come home, unless you like seeing our troops die for some stupid ass countries that dont even want our help. Freakin wake-up to that fact. And even if they want our help, do we have to wipe thier asses for them every step of the way? I hope not.

And I dont give a damn if i leave a letter off the end of a word here either Cindy, it aint that important to me. Some people man... You would be someone to point out something as useless as that, god your a petty human being.

[res ipsa loquitor]

Most Democrats you will notice are fiscal conservatives.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:25:32 AM

Re-read your posts; you're contradicting yourself. Pick a side; take a stand.

[hey cin, :)]

[shonane]

National debt would have decreased, but we do have a war going on. I love it, same folks screaming protect our troops, don't want to go in debt.
===========
I adamantly didn't support this war in Iraq. I resent the financial and other cost to our country, including our children being killed and mangled over there.

I could write essays about this, but most wouldn't want to read them, Dan wouldn't appreciate me tying up his bandwidth, and its off topic - I'll spare you.

[res ipsa loquitor]

its time for them to come home, unless you like seeing our troops die for some stupid ass countries that dont even want our help.
Posted by: Smokey | Oct 20, 2005 1:36:00 AM

Just curious, what exactly do you think would happend if we pulled out now? What would happen if we brought our troop back from all Islamic "soil"? Maybe you think that the terrorist network would become rational: along the lines of "gee, now that the U.S. has withdrawn, we are satisfied that our demands have been met. We will now become accountants instead of terrorists." YOU freaking wake up.

[shonane]

Most Democrats you will notice are fiscal conservatives.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:25:32 AM

Re-read your posts; you're contradicting yourself. Pick a side; take a stand.

[hey cin, :)]

Posted by: res ipsa loquitor
=========================
Because I support social security retirement? I am a fiscal conservative and always have been. Social Security is something people pay into all their lives. It is not something you just give to somebody, they paid for it. And a lot of people die before they ever access it. If it were managed properly, it is consistent with being fiscally conservative. SS is not the problem with our over all budget. Excess military spending is what is really blowing it out of the top. There is nothing inconsistent with these two positions.

[Cindi in PA]

I could write essays about this, but most wouldn't want to read them, Dan wouldn't appreciate me tying up his bandwidth, and its off topic - I'll spare you.

Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:40:08 AM

Understand, I have daughters, second year college. They write essays on the war also. They
adamantly support it war. Kind of like talking to yourself, don't you think?

[res ipsa loquitor]

If he drills in Alaska, that really should be the last straw.
Posted by: Smokey | Oct 20, 2005 1:15:09 AM

As one of my favorite conservative radio hosts says:

Screw the Caribou; Drill Alaska

[res ipsa loquitor]

Social Security is something people pay into all their lives. It is not something you just give to somebody, they paid for it. .... If it were managed properly, it is consistent with being fiscally conservative.
Posted by: shonane | Oct 20, 2005 1:54:29 AM

Check your logic and your facts. Why pay future earnings to the government when you could privately invest and reap much larger returns?

And IF it were never created in the first place, there would be not issue of its proper management--THAT is fiscally conservative.

[shonane]

Drilling in Alaska - There have been some very interesting articles and theories floating around this. Has to do with a Russian pipeline that comes into Alaska, questioning how much of the oil will really come out of Alaska vs into Alaska, and if it is a front. With the warming of the Arctic, some struggles among countries are starting about water boundaries for territories among countries.

[Cindi in PA]

Smokey, do you understand the meaning of Democracy? And the importance of that in this world? Do you realize what will eventually take place if Democracy is not spread through the world? Would you want someone coming in to help you, if your ass was suppressed like these people in the Middle East and other places in the world are. Do you have a sister? Can she drive? If you sister becomes pregnant, would you hunt her down and kill her for shame she put on your family? Now, let me hear you say screw Bush with your tongue cut out.

[usmcmom]

Screw the Caribou; Drill Alaska

Posted by: res ipsa loquitor | Oct 20, 2005 1:58:31 AM

Best post of the day!!

[res ipsa loquitor]

Best post of the day!!

Posted by: usmcmom | Oct 20, 2005 2:18:39 AM

All in a day's work.

[Cindi in PA]

Screw the Caribou
Posted by: res ipsa loquitor | Oct 20, 2005 1:58:31 AM

That's a whole nother story res. lmao

[Cindi in PA]

Dan, clicked on the links for DuPont, can't read them. Is there a pc trick I need to know about?

Thanks

[res ipsa loquitor]

That's a whole nother story res. lmao

Posted by: Cindi in PA | Oct 20, 2005 2:21:53 AM

Get your mind outta the gutter and take it to the OT (biotch)

[Dan]

his site takes a while to load.

[???]

Is that a picture of you Dan? ; )

[res ipsa loquitor]

Hi Dan

[Cindi in PA]

his site takes a while to load.

Posted by: Dan | Oct 20, 2005 2:27:30 AM

Thanks Dan

[lawbster]

he has a rather impressive portfolio - timor, the lion (referring to the lion of panshir) the US ally against osama bin laden before his assasination, romania, cuba. your point was? he didn't sit home and cover the disappearance of upper middle class white american teenagers? true.

[Cindi in PA]

your point was?
Posted by: lawbster | Oct 20, 2005 4:55:16 AM

Maybe you can have an American explain too you what the point is.

[Beth]

GOD, what a bunch of clueless fools (Smokey, Shoshane).

Did you 'tards even read anything about the agenda behind this (non-)story? Did you click the links? Or do you just ALWAYS regurgitate the knee-jerk Bush-bashing talking points, even when they're off-topic (Social Security? WTF!)?

Do you morons have any idea how stupid you look, hijacking the thread and more to the point, COMPLETELY MISSING the story here?

[Beth]

Lawbster and others: Please click through Jason Coleman's trackbacked links for elaboration on the story.

[splashtc]

What I find hypocritical is that freelance photographers and film makers document injustice and then want the world to answer the crys for help and when we do take action then the US becomes the bad guy.
Talk about flip flopping.
Taliban bad,very,very bad.
North Korea will be next. Some documentaries are getting out about all the starvation and public executions. We'll go in to help and wind up getting bashed-as usual.

[Dan]

he didn't sit home and cover the disappearance of upper middle class white american teenagers? true.

No. But then he didn't just sit on his ass and read the content about a missing girl like some, either. ; )

If you don't like the content here - there are other options.

[Sue]

While I will never support WAR, we must support our completely VOLUNTEER Armed Forces, the guys and gals are there for us, we must not demean them and what they ar doing for Freedom. We must never forget 911 and become complacent again.

[bizarre]

Sonane: (interesting that your moniker rhymes with inane, did you do that purposefully?)

As regards the national debt, if your Mr. Clinton and his pal Jamie Gorelick would have recognized that we had a problem with these terrorists to begin with, instead of pretending that they didn't exist and hoping they would go away, then we wouldn't have had to have to live through 9/11. Did you ever think that maybe that fighting the war on terror is the reason why the money has been spent?

The most telling thing I see about this is this comment..

"As for the taunting, I'd have to really see that, and it's ironic that the report is "out there" but the video isn't. In this day and age you don't have something broadcast often without it being captured and retained on tape or in digital form.

I smell a rat!"

--Jason

It is sad that the war has to be fought physically and also from a public relations perspective.

[Beth]

"It is sad that the war has to be fought physically and also from a public relations perspective.

Posted by: bizarre | Oct 20, 2005 10:24:34 AM"

Exactly. The war isn't going to be lost on the battlefield, it'll be lost here at HOME by those who are hell-bent on bashing the military, America, Bush, etc.

I'm continually reminded of the line "if you're not with us, you're against us," and how PERFECTLY TRUE it is.

[Sgt. York]

YOU MEAN....

The jounalist is an a-hole thus anything he films must be an illusion? Or didn't really happen?

What happened happened.
Stop acting like childish little brats.

[callmeBetty]

Regardless of his political agenda, this guy is a damn fine photographer.

If he dresses himself to blend into the background and get more candid shots from a trusting population, who are we to judge? If the accusations are baseless, an investigation will prove otherwise. I'm not outraged by the burning, even if it is true, BTW.

Or have we degenerated into a society unwilling to accept any evidence contrary to the party lines' rhetorical script? I thought intolerance of this nature and blind patriotism was endemic to the third world nations and communist countries. Most commies have to "impose" media blackouts. Scary to think that 'free' people would willingly 'choose' to villify dissenters...... Isn't that one of the things that made this country great?

[TheAlamo]

Exactly. The war isn't going to be lost on the battlefield, it'll be lost here at HOME by those who are hell-bent on bashing the military, America, Bush, etc.

I'm continually reminded of the line "if you're not with us, you're against us," and how PERFECTLY TRUE it is.

Posted by: Beth | Oct 20, 2005 10:37:09 AM

The war will be lost because this government is not dedicated to winning it. Some soldiers are going back for their 3rd tour. My son was supposed to be coming home in January, but he says they have not heard anything about replacements, so it might be longer.

The war will be lost because no nation has ever defeated a guerrilla force, especially a home grown one. The war will be lost because these people are willing to blow themselves up as well as their own countrymen.
The war will be lost because the population here does not demand to know who is supplying the weapons and money to the "rag-tag" guerrillas, and putting a stop to their arms acquisition. This war will be lost because people here do not dare ask why the "terrorists" are not blowing up the oil wells and the Afghan pipeline, which, if they really wanted to de-stabalize the new governments that would the a constant and ongoing problem. Hell it doesn't even happen at all. So the next thing the people should demand is to follow the money....but they don't.

We will not lose the war on the battlefield...if you do a study you will find that we never lost a major conflict in Vietnam either....but we managed to lose the war.

The Russinas have moved in to the Gaza strip vacated by the Israelis. Bush keeps badgering Iran and others and cannot even relieve the current troops that are stationed in Iraq. We have our troops spread all over the world, sitting ducks if the Chinese and Russians hit us. How can we win an extended war?
The Chinese are massively preparing for war...who do you think it is going to be against? In response, we continue to downsize our own military, and will not draft replacements. But we will subsidize illegal aliens and leave the borders wide open.

We pay a guy $30 million to play basketball, but cannot find $25,000 to those who risk their lives every day as a soldier. Something very wrong with that picture.

You say if you are not with "us" you are against "us." Who is "us?"
I am against communists too....and they are an... "us."

I totally support our military...and always have...even when most of you were protesting it during Vietnam. That war was 1000 times more just, and made much more sense than this one...unless you own stock in Carlyle Oil...of course. I do not support a government that is running around the world telling people to do this, or that, or else...like some cowboy. I do not support a government that passes laws affecting the freedom of its own people, especially telling them lies that this "war" is for freedom. What a scam. These "terrorists" you are all so afraid of, have no army, no navy and no air force...so explain to me just how they are going to take your freedom? But...your own government is doing it much faster under the lie of "protecting" all of you that live in fear. Exactly what they did in Germany, 1933-1939. Fear is their greatest tool, and anyone who falls for it is the greatest fool.

That attitude is the anti-thesis of America and what it stood for.

[Wild Thing]

Thank you Dan well said! I linked your post at my Blog.