CNN video of Guantánamo Bay censored

**The Man** · 07-11-2005, 05:13 AM

Gee, guess there really was nothing to hide after all. No First Amendment violations here either.

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba, July 7 (UPI) -- Taking up U.S. President George Bush's challenge for reporters to visit the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba, CNN did, but its video was censored.

In response to allegations of prisoner abuse at the U.S. Navy base in Cuba, Bush made the challenge in June, and again Wednesday while in Denmark.

However, a CNN crew that toured the facility was not allowed to see the worst-behaved inmates, who are kept in a block behind a mesh fence.

The prison holds about 520 prisoners from 44 countries, most of them captured during the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.

CNN employees were not allowed to speak to the prisoners, and military censors demanded the crew erase video footage they said would allow viewers to identify a prisoner.

In the hospital wing, one prisoner shouted in English, "We take the torture in here," but it was not possible to talk to the prisoner about his allegation, the network said.

**ShunNakamura** · 07-11-2005, 05:26 AM

not sure what to say about this... but this actually makes me more curious and more suspect then I ever was before.

**Big D** · 07-11-2005, 06:16 AM

Omg, I'm completely surprised by this turn of events!

Pardon my sarcasm.

Bush & Co have repeatedly made it clear that eliminating news of crimes is more important than eliminating the crimes themselves. Remember Abu Ghraib? Rumsfeld's first response was to condemn the media for publishing the photos.

If you can control the press, and control what info it feeds the public, then you can prettymuch manufacture "reality" as it is perceived by the people.

**Hawkeye** · 07-11-2005, 06:36 AM

If you can control the press, and control what info it feeds the public, then you can prettymuch manufacture "reality" as it is perceived by the people.

True, but how do you think that Bush's overall rating in the United States are deteriorating? More alligations of the Iraq war have been brought through the press, and although Bush may have limited control over the media, it isnt enough to stop his declining rates. People percieve things much different when they oppose something rather than support something

**edczxcvbnm** · 07-11-2005, 02:18 PM

Bush can't win anymore. The majority doesn't support Iraq, they don't believe Bush. The only thing that he has going for him is that he is 'tough' on terrorism. With the terrorist attack in Britian and Spain I bet it gets harder and harder for him to look that way. It is even worse with Britian though because it was planned in Iraq.

**fire_of_avalon** · 07-11-2005, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by The Man

CNN employees were not allowed to speak to the prisoners, and military censors demanded the crew erase video footage they said would allow viewers to identify a prisoner.

There's a reason for that; prisoners cannot be filmed in such a way to identify themselves for their own protection, unless of course they sign a contract stating as much.

But this is no surprise to me, however the video of Guantanamo is ultimately not as important politically speaking as the huff over the censorship. People who previously supported the war and supported Bush WON'T support censorship.

So in the long run, I'm sure many people who are aware that this is wrong will be pleased with this turn of events. Approval ratings will dip even lower and if Bush wishes to maintain his integrity, he will have to begin actively listening to the public.

**edczxcvbnm** · 07-11-2005, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon

So in the long run, I'm sure many people who are aware that this is wrong will be pleased with this turn of events. Approval ratings will dip even lower and if Bush wishes to maintain his integrity, he will have to begin actively listening to the public.

Why would he half to start listening to the public? He isn't going to be in office again in 4 years. Unless the republicans decided it is better to go against him than with him, he isn't going to face any sort of impeachment or anything. The man basically doesn't have anything to fear so why does he need to start listening to the public.

**Optium** · 07-11-2005, 04:17 PM

You think the only reason a president does anything is for reelection?
Why do you think anyone would want to be reelected in the first place?
Because being in that office gives them the power to control things,
however there are checks and balances so if the president goes against
the grain completely, he will fail. Bush has the ability, working with
congress, which also depends on the people, to pass and veto different
laws where he sees fit. This ability is one of the things that defines a
president. Someone who is said to have gotten many things done is
someone who has followed through with his ideas in the form of laws and
reform.

.opt

**Old Manus** · 07-11-2005, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by Big D

If you can control the press, and control what info it feeds the public, then you can prettymuch manufacture "reality" as it is perceived by the people.

This is the message Metal Gear Solid 2 tries to give you.

**Madame Adequate** · 07-11-2005, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon

But this is no surprise to me, however the video of Guantanamo is ultimately not as important politically speaking as the huff over the censorship. People who previously supported the war and supported Bush WON'T support censorship.

Very good point. I don't care one bit about the people in Gitmo (Well I do, I care about the soldiers who go through daily threats, abuse, and attacks.), but censorship is a much bigger issue. Well, it would be, except for the whole 'not allowed to identify the prisoners' bit.

I'd also like to know why the worst of the worst of the worst (The worst few hundred captured of several tens of thousands are the ones in Gitmo.) are being believed when they've demostrated they're more than happy to kill and maim. Are they going to have a second's compunction about lying?

**edczxcvbnm** · 07-11-2005, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Optium

You think the only reason a president does anything is for reelection?
Why do you think anyone would want to be reelected in the first place?
Because being in that office gives them the power to control things,
however there are checks and balances so if the president goes against
the grain completely, he will fail. Bush has the ability, working with
congress, which also depends on the people, to pass and veto different
laws where he sees fit. This ability is one of the things that defines a
president. Someone who is said to have gotten many things done is
someone who has followed through with his ideas in the form of laws and
reform.

.opt

I agree but Bush doesn't strike me as that kind of person. To me it has always seemed that it was his way or the highway and I don't see him changing that for anything.

**Raistlin** · 07-11-2005, 05:27 PM

And this is surprising...how?

Bush doesn't care what this does to his approval ratings - he got reelected. And unless he does something really retarded, there's no way in hell he can be impeached.

**Shadow Nexus** · 07-11-2005, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by Raistlin

And unless he does something really retarded

How really retarded does Bush need to be to get kicked off? Getting his cock sucked by a secretary?

**edczxcvbnm** · 07-11-2005, 06:10 PM

That would do it as it would be demanded by his conservative base and the other republicans would do so to save themselves from the bases outrage.

**Raistlin** · 07-11-2005, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus

How really retarded does Bush need to be to get kicked off? Getting his cock sucked by a secretary?

And then lying about it under oath, yeah.

Thread: CNN video of Guantánamo Bay censored

Thread Tools

Display

CNN video of Guantánamo Bay censored

Posting Permissions