Foley continued, "They target and kill journalists … uh, from other countries, particularly Arab countries like Al -, like Arab news services like al-Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios with impunity. ..."

What blown up studios is she referring to?

She's more indicative of how rabidly Bush hating unions are.

There they go again...

Oh shoot! I thought it was only cops trying to cap those weasels in the news media. LOL

She never would have had the opportunity make such and asinine assertion if it weren't for the fact that Muslims are targeting civilians for death "in places like the U.S.".

Not only are they accusing our military of a war crime, they're accusing them of being COMPLETELY incompetent. (Otherwise, we'd be down a few more than 1700 reporters over a year ago.)

What was that about projection again?

So I guess a US tank deliberately aiming at a hotel well known to house journalists and then opening fire is not incompetence or a sign that our soldiers are targeting journalists?

Wow! That's the first time anyone signed a comment with my exact response to their opinion.

I just heard excerpts of the Linda Foley presentation and I'd say that she's certainly into hysteria, given her tone. I have little verification as to her allegations -- while I highly doubt the source -- other than she seems driven by emotional abnormality.

It produces the worst case scenario: paranoia, false allegations and worse, it denigrates the female gender because it fulfills the worst of negative stereotypes about "female hysteria" as irrational, vengeful, malicious and based upon aberrant intuitional fears.

The Jordan accusations were similarly based -- since disproven, too -- but Jordan didn't bring harms upon his male gender just because he was irrational, while with Foley, she's just doing harms without regard for compassion and reality itself, and unfortunately, she's female. Meaning, she's hurting two birds with one idiot lob.

Hilarious, Bullwinkle..

So, is that her point? I've read it written that some feminists intend harms to their gender (the nature of their ideology), and in Foley's case, I'd say she's doing a great job of that.

Her story, however: IF a terrorist is also a journalist, what then? Brings a whole new layer of the War on Terror into focus, certainly, to consider terrorist acts in conjunction with the media (all media).

I'm sorry, I know how you feel about vulgarity, but I can't help it.

!@#$%^&* her!

Hmmm.

"So I guess a US tank deliberately aiming at a hotel well known to house journalists and then opening fire is not incompetence or a sign that our soldiers are targeting journalists?"

Ever been inside of a tank? The view is rather limited. Then add in the stress of getting attacked with rockets and mortars.

The simple fact is that there are NO safe spots in a war zone. It's a testament to the professionalism of the American soldiers, and the complete imbecility of the modern press, that people could even imagine that there actually could be safe spots in a war zone.

And I thought it was the insurgents that were targeting journalist. Oohhh, thats right that Italian reporter was just visiting those nice people in iraq, she wasn't a hostage. And it was the american troops that tried to assassinate her after all. But for the bravery of the heroic Italian 007 they would have succeeded. So the roporters are affraid to leave their hotel rooms because of the american troops, not because they are affriad of getting be-headed by the nice freedom fighters. Now I understand why they cant go out now and do their jobs, it all the americans fault..

...and if so, what's wrong with that? The world press has made it clear whose side they're on and we would've shot Goebbels, no?
Soldiers have a duty to protect and not to deliberately target NEUTRALS and NONCOMBATANTS. If you're producing propaganda for the enemy (hear that, Newsweek?) you 're neither.

Why should the troops get to have all the fun.... "Journalists" or her caliber should be targeted everywhere....
Oh great, now I'm on some sort of watch-list or something. I retract my previous statement.

She'll be more popular than ever in her chosen field.

Is there a link to the audio somewhere?

Wait a sec ... I got lost somewhere along the line. I thoght journalists were supposed to REPORT the news, not MAKE the news. Or something Perry White-ish like that.

Audio and video at:

http://treyjackson.typepad.com/2005/05/video_linda_fol.html

Snipers and the Targeting of Journalists - by Bill Roggio (further links in his original):

"How has the enemy developed its tactics in Iraq? DefenseTech points us to a PowerPoint presentation for insurgent sniper training (the HTML version is available for those without PowerPoint). The presentation has some tried and true tactics for all snipers: target officers, communications and heavily armed soldiers; do not engage overly superior forces; target high value civilians over military; and other such information. The presentation lists the duties of the sniper and then has a question and answer section on "who would you kill first?"

Two items jump out in this slide show. In one of the "7 Duties of a Sniper", the trainees are encouraged to target non-combatant military personnel, in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions:

Killing doctors and chaplains is suggested as a means of psychological warfare.
In the "who would you kill first?" Q & A section, targeting journalists is explicitly encouraged. On the order of targeting:

The first one is the Soldier… because he has a MG [machine gun]. Then is the stupid soldier on the left. He is a very easy target (look how he is elevated from the ground), then the soldier or the reporter carrying the camera. First, because the camera can be used as binoculars; second, it is the most difficult thing to hide the death of a reporter in Iraq.
This is a clear and explicit policy to target journalists in a combat zone.

Where is Linda Foley's outrage over this?"

*****