Major bucket list completed. Shoot at #ISIS ? Check! pic.twitter.com/sACRLFoY5V— Jason Buttrill (@JasonButtrill) December 8, 2016
Military Times: Reporter takes heat for shooting at ISIS
Journalists in warzones are supposed to be non-combatants, but Jason Buttrill of The Blaze recently tweeted a picture of himself with a sniper rifle along with the message: “Major bucket list completed. Shoot at #ISIS ? Check!”
A Marine veteran, Buttrill also tweeted that he fired six shots at the enemy. “ISIS looked like ants on that scope, but...my USMC PMI [primary marksmanship instructor] was exceptional.”
Buttrell served as an intelligence in the Marine Corps from January 1999 to January 2003, shortly before the invasion of Iraq, according to Manpower & Reserve Affairs. He was promoted to sergeant in July 2004 while serving in the Individual Ready Reserve.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: There are some lines that war reporters should not cross .... is this one of them .... clearly many war correspondents feel that he has crossed that line. What's my take .... I am split between both sides.
33 comments:
When a reporter picks up a weapon in a warzone, they become a "propagandist" an make the big white letters spelling out "Press" on their vehicles, blue body armour and helmets, lawful targets, and not just theirs, but everybody who wears a "Press" badge.
"When a reporter picks up a weapon in a warzone, they become a "propagandist".'
LMFAO!!!
No Jay, they become a combatant.
LMFAO!!!
He should be praised for his courage. ISIS is such an evil enemy that there is no way a reasonable person can ve neutral. Of course now that his actions have been made public his family is in grave danger. There is nowhere on earth where ISIS cannot strike.
Perhaps he has no family. Perhaps they understand the risk. Either way what an incredibly courageous act by this man. In a world where most reporters have bent over backwards to try and support ISIS especially against America the moral clarity of this man is most refreshing!!
Didn't think it would be long before one of the pro- killing the Press Deplorables would show up,
41 minutes.
No more pissing and moaning now that the jihadi's have a legal reason to kill Media.
Before, it was an "atrocity", now it's just killing "illegal enemy combatants".
Jay, that's just a lot of your typical half-baked, spin BS. No one here said kill the press/kill the media - except you.
And if a Marine vet wants to take up arms against ISIS and become a combatant, that's his own decision. I hope he killed a couple ISIS "combatants".
/les déplorables! ;)
The simple test, is to go counterfactual.
If this was an alArybia reporter in Fallujah in 2004 taking pot shots at US Marines, your answer would be completely different.
The Press has a hard enough time reporting from war zones. A reporter turning the "Press" sign into a lawful target, doesn't make it any better.
If he really, really wanted to shoot at ISIS, he should have taken off his "Press" credentials and donned camo and joined the YPG. Lot's of Americans and "Internationalists" have.
You're working yourself into a lather over nothing. As to your argument that that all reporters will be targets from now on - its ridiculous and I'm not buying.
Is there a photograph of his field of fire? His tweet pic looks like he's at a shooting range. No concealment or cover at all. Dudes standing around with hands in pockets. (not exactly a high heat area)
/we might all be being had here.....
Nice shiny Dragunov, by the way.
LMAO
I agree with Jay here... He's right. ISIS will use this as nothing but an excuse to take shots at the Presscore. To be fair; ISIS doesn't really need much reason to have a go at the western press, and I'm sure they have no qualms about killing, capturing and ransoming journalists.
But Jay has a point; perception is everything. And the perception of a journalist picking up a sniper and taking shots at ISIS will trickle down (assuming it becomes a big enough story to get their attention) the ranks of Jihadists and they may now just regard journalists as KOS targets.
Doesn't have to be just ISIS either. Other so-called 'rebels' in Syria may consider the same. In the grand scheme of things, it will probably have little to no effect.
But principles are at stake; he did cross a line in putting his fellow journalists in danger.
https://www.google.ca/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3772147/amp/Reporter-shot-Syria-claims-gunman-US-backed-rebel.html?client=safariI'
"A reporter for Britain's Times newspaper who hit the headlines after being kidnapped and shot in Syria said that a recent Facebook video appeared to show the gunman was now a US-backed rebel.
Anthony Loyd was seized along with photographer Jack Hill in 2014, as they were returning to Turkey after several days working in the conflict zone of Aleppo."
I am glad he was called out by his employer and other press people. This guy just put every journalist in the Middle East and beyond in the sights of the despots and terrorists and you all praise him. Because in your eyes the press is so terrible for calling out your beloved Trump and President Putin and. Other illiberal A holes,
Some people are not stupid.
They get it.
"Father of Aid Worker Killed in Syria Endorses Donald Trump"
Carl Mueller's daughter Kayla died last year while being held hostage by Islamic State
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/10/29/father-of-aid-worker-killed-in-syria-endorses-donald-trump/
Reporter's are protected by the first amendment for pursuance of information and the publishing of it. This does not imply that any reporter's actions are beyond criticism nor should they be.
The reporter has been suspended .... http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/12/the-blaze-suspends-reporter-who-shot-at-isis-232436
He should be.
Don't up to 100 reporters get killed in war zones a year?
Some of them have to be sniped.
The reporters status seems to be like the Geneva convention. I have not seen that upheld in Asia or the Middle East.
It is another Western 'protocol' that other people ignore.
Even Westerners ignore Western protocol. Downed American flyers were sent to concentration camps with the Jews.
ISIS will shoot at anyone, press or otherwise, if they are not believers.And that includes the press
This is not anything new, reporters have in the past shot at the enemy, passed on intelligence and spread the party line, that's why many soldiers consider reporters fair game.
// Length limit, posting in two part - 1/2
First of all this news is worthless, not really worth talking about it, but hey here we are wasting our time anyway.
Who do we lie, really, when we condemn him? I do not defend nor attack him for what he did (or allegedly did), because he is not one that need my words for defense, but hypocrisy what we do, not else. But let's go step-trough-step on this story.
So he was sent to Iraq as a "researcher"/"journalist" (in an earlier post of his own employer called him as a "correspondent"), but its says a lot about the today state of journalism that someone can be (or be labelled as ) one just by having some years of military experience. It's not that in other countries it's going differently, it's a general thing that everyone is an expert and worth by the words said by (and yes even including us here). I'm not here to talk bad about vets, but just because they were in the military, it's not mean that they are fit for every kind of job that with you would have advantage by your military experiences. The old way journalism, with actually researching, finding connections, relations and reporting objectively, and not falling to a side is almost completely gone extinct.
He went to a warzone and made a photoshot which he wrote a caption of shooting on IS. However as it was mentioned before, there is no real evidence on him actually doing so, and the area on the picture is really seems like a firing range, and even if it would not be one, why would the other fighters standing calmly there, in the open, without any cover, with their hands in their pockets, and sandals on their feets? I call this a big BS, and a bigtalking of just another guy, until I do not see a real footage of what happened. If this guy was just had lied about what he did, thats just proove his stupidity and just another example of modern journalism.
But okey, what if he was not lied, he really did so, and the photo was just an "example", a something that under he could write his message, because he forgot to record when he actually shot on IS. What then? Would he just become a combatant by that? Or a traitor? Or a propagandist? Maybe a terrorist? Why would be so, where do we draw the line in the sand? I have hard time to count how many videos I seen which in journalist were allowed to shoot guns, (either on "object" or just in general toward the horizon), and how much was there in the past? Uncountable amount. Shooting five round toward the enemy is nothing, it does NOT have effect, and it does not matter. If someone would really take action, they could always join to the groups and help them, they do not need to conceal themselfs as journalists.
// Length limit, posting in two part - 2/2
What about propagandists? How much journalist, and specifically war journalist have you seen who were reporting fully objectively from any war, could you please name them and send me the list so I could get decent news? Don't blame yourself if you can't put a long list together, I excuse this for you. Oh and if we talking about "propaganda" should not we talk about news sites, media companies, and how fckd up things they report from wars, and lie without making a blink? Oh wait, before that could we just sit down and watch any of the UN Security Council meeting that was held because of Syria, and prize that they do not lie and they do not push propaganda. When we done that and can truly say they all not lie, we can commit suicide to make the world a better place.
But okey, lets just step trough all of these things, and see how his claims effect negatively the real journalist and make their life and work more difficult. Could you tell me how many journalist died (and got attacked, wounded) in warzones during the past 5 years (and what about older times)? It's like him not firing an arm would save life of other journalist. We are talking about fighting sides that raping and executing people, no matter if they were soldiers, civilians or journalist. Oh and I forgot that they film what they done with them and then show it on the internet and jerk off on it. Should anyone stand up and defend IS on this thing? Hell no. Journalist and "researchers", correspondent were targeted in every war, specifically, no matter if they had mark on them or not, they were because there are always some trash people fighting on each and every side. And I do not talk about specific sides, faction, I talk about all, both rebels and governments, both Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Korea, Vietnam, you name it, they all did it. And it has nothing to do with this guy allegedly shot a rifle in a warzone.
No matter if you call him a hero or the scum of earth, he is not really different then others, and it's not a display of just him as a person, but a display of how sided the journalist reports in general, but especially the war reports are. It's ridiculous that this news got as much attention as it actually got. Hypocrisy at it best. Now that I shat on the carpet, have a happy Holiday season, that we can spend with watching thousands died in wars while arguing on five shots fired.
I read Long War Journal, because the main press agencies censor the news and twist the news. They lie by omission.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/
Long War Journal was specifically was specifically set up to get around the censorship of the propagandists who take their marching orders from among others the shitbags that feed from Ben Rhodes' palm.
The Aspiring Novelist Who Became Obama’s Foreign-Policy Guru
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/magazine/the-aspiring-novelist-who-became-obamas-foreign-policy-guru.html?_r=0
Junior Obama NSC Staffers Lied About the Iran Deal and Are Running U.S. Foreign Policy
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435136/obamas-no-1-adviser-ben-rhodes-profile-sycophancy-arrogance-incompetence
2. Rhodes Says The White House Created an “Echo Chamber” in Getting the Media to Back the Iran Nuclear Deal
http://heavy.com/news/2016/05/ben-rhodes-iran-speechwriter-echo-chamber/
You hear that echo even here in the comments by the people with false consciousness
"4. Rhodes’ Brother is Head of CBS News – The Youngest Network News President in U.S. TV History" - Heavy.com
The Rhodes brothers are part of the industrial-political complex.
LMAO
Aizino pulls Rhodes out of his ass to cover for the Pres of Biglies.com.
While he's busy -watching others- fighting for freedom whereever there's trouble he doesn't have the brains to realize there are more than terrorists in them thar hills.
The photographer was a civilian in a theatre of war. He should behave accordingly.
If he doesn't want to get shot he can
A) Stay home.
B) Unless he is under direct attack and in fear for his life or the lives of those in his immediate vicinity, keep his hands on the camera and off of weapons.
C) Don't listen to anything Aizino says about well, anything. Aizino thinks that no one should obey the Geneva Convention because the NAZIS didn't. No surprise there.
D) All of the above.
Obviously, like Aizino, the reporter thinks he can strut around someone else's country and do whatever he likes. Those brown people beg to differ. They know full well that the G.I.zinos of the world don't give a s--- about them as other than raw material for their industrial-fascist lie machine. So by all means Aizino, go over there and put down a camera and pick up a gun.
RRH,
I pulled Rhodes out your ass. Funny thing is he wasn't brown. I heard certain people no have douching products made for them also.
The NAZIs mostly did with regard to the allies. With the Russian not at all. There was a case of america flyers being sent to a concentration camp. Only because the concentration camp was next to a regular prison camp were the flyboys able to get the attention of Luftwaffe personnel and gain their freedom.
The Luftwaffe officers had to take their chances with the Gestapo.
The Russians also broke the Geneva convention.
The Japanese broke the Geneva convention
I have not looked into it, but I bet the Italians broke the convention also.
If I were to look I would look at their conduct in Ethiopia. Oh wait i think they used gas there.
The Americans also broke the convention. They engaged in psychological torture.
https://www.amazon.com/Company-Commander-Classic-Infantry-Memoir/dp/1580800386
I also wonder if shooting up farm carts with civilians driving constitutes a war crime. Sometimes there were explosives hidden under the hay and sometimes not.
Read about Dieter Dengler. I am trying to figure out the significance of shooting up his hometown (other than the train station).
The British and Eisenhower definitely committed war crimes in WW2. If the British did, you know the Canadians did also.
Every major combatant broke the Geneva convention in WW2
Heck, Churchill broke the Geneva convention in WW1
If every major combatant broke the Geneva convention, then what use is it?
A response is to maybe give a weighted average, a weight of how much each combatant broke the convention. Or maybe to argue that it might be worse with no convention at all.
It seems to me that the convention only applies if it is a Western country fighting a Western country and that both sides fear retaliation if the convention is broken or if the Western country fears public opinion.
Other than that it is a Western wet dream.
The comments were about how press is suppose to act in a war zone.
Someone mentioned the press are propagandists or presstitutes.
I second that mention by showing that Ben Rhodes was actively engaged in pressitution and the press was not wearing protection.
It seems RRH was not wearing protection either because he has become infected.
Run around and make noise some more.
You are with running cover for those you support by casting aspersions on others as usual.
Ben Rhodes was not holding as a pressitute, press secretary, pressure cooker whatever z a rifle in a theatre of war.
You used the subject to score typical cheap political points and, as usual, to turn everything toward your President _Obama, who did everything you wanted.
Your weighted average bullshit is a transparent dodge. The Japanese did not ratify the convention nor did the Soviets.
You did not did not say every major combatant. You said everyone. Who is having trouble with English now?
But keep squirming and fumbling about with irrelevancies. It suits you.
And I'm talking, in English, about the convention of 1929.
And it's quite obvious I believe a convention is better than no convention at all. That said, the failure of the one you are using to cover up your 4th world propagandizing says more about your "western mores and values" than anything else.
Breitbart was engaged in straight up lying and you lapped up every word of it and let them pimp you out on this and who knows how many other forums.
Aizino the Hoe.
Squeeeeeelllll like a peeeeeg....
Weeee!
Convention!
Reeee!!
Nazis (always gets back to that don't it?)
Reeee!!!
Rhodes!
Weeee!!! Snort_Oink!!
Obama!!!
"Ben Rhodes was not holding as a presstitute, press secretary, blabetty blabbety blah , ... " - RRH
I did not say he was a presstitute.
What he did was feed presstitutes spin and narratives.
RRH please try to keep up.
On second thought that is mean of me to ask, because we all know that you are slow.
Post a Comment