Breaking News 突發新聞 | | Forum 論壇 | | UK News 英國新聞 | | USA News 美國新聞 | | World News 世界新聞 | | Political News 政治新聞 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新聞 | | War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 | | Sports News 體育新聞 | | Multimedia 多媒體 | | Set Homepage 設為首頁

BREAKING NEWS 突發新聞

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008 週二， 2008年6月17日

By通過 Scott Ritter斯科特里特 | “I think the questions were asked. | “我認為，提出了一些問題。 I think we pushed.我認為我們推。 I think we prodded.我認為我們prodded 。 I think we challenged the president.我認為我們的挑戰總統。 I think not only those of us in the White House press corps did that, but others in the rest of the landscape of the media did that.我認為不僅是對我們這些在白宮記者團這樣做，但其他人在其餘的景觀，媒體這樣做。 The right questions were asked.有權提出了一些問題。 I think there’sa lot of critics — and I guess we can count Scott McClellan as one — who think that, if we did not debate the president, debate the policy in our role as journalists, if we did not stand up and say, ‘This is bogus,’ and ‘You’re a liar,’ and ‘Why are you doing this?’ that we didn’t do our job.我認為有很多的批評者-我猜想我們能指望麥克萊倫之一-誰認為，如果我們沒有辯論主席，辯論的政策，在我們的角色，作為新聞工作者，如果我們不站起來，說， '這是假的， '和'你是一個騙子， '和'為什麼你這樣做呢？ ' ，我們沒有這樣做，我們的工作。 And I respectfully disagree.我恭敬地同意。 It’s not our role.”這不是我們的角色“ 。

That was NBC correspondent David Gregory, appearing on MSNBC’s “Hardball With Chris Matthews.” He was responding to former White House press secretary Scott McClellan’s new book, “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception.” McClellan has challenged the role of the US media in investigating and reporting US policy in times of conflict, especially when it comes to covering the government itself.這是全國廣播公司記者戴維格雷戈里，出現在MSNBC的“強硬與克里斯馬修斯。 ”他是在回應前白宮新聞秘書麥克萊倫的新著， “有什麼事情發生了：裡面白宮和華盛頓的文化欺騙“ 。麥克萊倫挑戰的角色，美國媒體在調查和報告，美國的政策在衝突時期，特別是當它來包括政府本身。

As a critic of US foreign policy in the Middle East, especially when unsubstantiated allegations of weapons of mass destruction are used to sell a war, I am no stranger to the concept of questioning authority, especially in times of war.作為一個批評美國的外交政策，在中東，尤其是當毫無根據的指控大規模殺傷性武器是用來出售的戰爭，我並不陌生的概念提出質疑的權力，尤其是在戰爭時期。 I am from the Teddy Roosevelt school of American citizenship, adhering to the principle that “to announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but it is morally treasonable to the American public.”我是來自玩具羅斯福學校的美國公民身份，堅持原則，即“地宣布，不能有任何批評總統，或我們是站在由總統正確或錯誤，不僅是愛國和奴役，但它是不道德的叛逆向美國公眾“ 。

Some may point out that Roosevelt made that statement in criticism of Woodrow Wilson’s foot dragging when it came to getting America into World War I, and that it is odd for one opposed to American involvement in Iraq to quote a former president who so enthusiastically embraced military intervention.可能有人會指出，羅斯福總統提出的這一聲明在批評伍德羅威爾遜的腳拖時，來獲得美國成為世界戰爭，我和它是多為一，反對美國參與在伊拉克引述前總統誰踴躍擁抱軍事干預。 But principle can cut both ways on any given issue.但原則上可以減少兩種方式在任何特定問題。 The principle inherent in the concept of the moral responsibility of the American people to question their leadership at all times, but especially when matters of war are at stake, is as valid for the pro as it is the con.原則固有的概念，道義上的責任對美國人民質疑他們的領導在任何時候，但事宜，尤其是當戰爭的威脅，是為有效的為親，因為這是結論。

The validity of this principle is not judged on the level of militancy of the presidential action in question, but rather its viability as judged by the values and ideals of the American people.的有效性，這個原則是不會作出判斷的水平，好戰的總統採取行動的問題，而是其可行性，作為衡量的價值觀念和理想的美國人民。 While the diversity of the United States dictates that there will be a divergence of consensus when it comes to individual values and ideals, the collective ought to agree that the foundation upon which all American values and ideals should be judged is the US Constitution, setting forth as it does a framework of law which unites us all.而多樣性的美國發號施令，會有分歧，達成共識，當談到個人的價值觀念和理想，集體應該同意的基礎後，所有美國的價值觀和理想，應該判斷是美國憲法，提出了因為這是一個框架，法律，我們大家團結。 To hold the Constitution up as a basis upon which to criticize the actions of any given president is perhaps the most patriotic act an American can engage in. As Theodore Roosevelt himself noted, “No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man’s permission when we ask him to obey it.”舉行憲法作為依據，其中批評的行動，任何特定的總統，也許是最愛國的行為，美國可以從事英寸作為羅斯福本人指出， “任何人都不是凌駕於法律之上，任何人都不是它下面;我們也不要求任何人的許可，當我們要求他必須服從它“ 。

Now David Gregory, and others who populate that curious slice of Americana known as “the media,” may hold that they, as journalists, operate on a different level than the average American citizen.現在大衛格雷戈里，和其他人誰填充認為，好奇的切片美洲稱為“媒體” ，可能會認為，他們作為新聞工作者，經營，不同程度低於平均水平的美國公民。 As Mr. Gregory notes, it is not their “role” to question or debate policy set forth by the president.作為Gregory先生注意到，這是不是他們的“角色”問題或辯論的政策，提出了由總統。 This is curious, coming from a leading member of a news team that prides itself on the “investigative” quality of its reporting.這是好奇，未來從一個領導成員的新聞團隊，標榜對“調查” ，它的高質量的報告。 If we take Gregory at face value, it seems his only job (or “role”) is to simply parrot the policy formulations put forward by administration officials, that the integrity of journalism precludes the reporter from taking sides, and that any aggressive questioning concerning the veracity, or morality, or legality of any given policy would, in its own right, constitute opposition to said policy, and as such would be “taking sides.”如果我們採取格雷戈里在面值，似乎他唯一的工作（或“角色” ）是簡單鸚鵡政策的提法，提出了由政府官員，即完整的新聞排除記者從偏袒，並認為任何侵略性質疑有關的真實性，或道德，或合法性的任何特定的政策會，在其本國的權利，構成反對說，政策，和這樣的將是“偏袒” 。

This, of course, is journalism in its most puritanical form, the ideal that the reporter simply reports, and keeps his or her personal opinion segregated from the “facts” as they are being presented.當然，這是新聞工作在其最清教徒的形式，理想，記者簡單報告，並保持他或她個人的意見，分隔的“事實” ，因為他們現正。 While it would be a farcical stretch for David Gregory, or any other mainstream reporter or correspondent, to realistically claim ownership of such a noble mantle, it appears that is exactly what Gregory did when he set forth the parameters of what his “role” was, and is, in reporting on stories such as the issue of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the Bush administration’s case for war.而這將是一個可笑的拉伸大衛格雷戈里，或任何其他的主流，記者或通訊員，要切實聲稱擁有這樣一個崇高的地幔，看來這正是格雷戈里當年他提出的參數，他有什麼“角色”是，是，在報告上的故事等問題，伊拉克大規模殺傷性武器和布什政府的情況下戰爭。 For this to be valid, however, the issue of journalistic integrity would need to apply not only to the individual reporter or correspondent, but also to the entire system to which the given reporter or correspondent belonged.為，這是有效的，但是，問題新聞的完整性將需要不僅適用於個別記者或通訊員，而且對整個系統，這給記者或通訊員屬於。 In the case of Gregory, therefore, we must not only bring into the mix his own individual performance, but also that of NBC News and its parent organization, General Electric.在該案件格雷戈里，因此，我們不僅要帶入混合他自己的個人表現，但也指出， NBC新聞和其母公司的組織，美國通用電氣。

As a weapons inspector, I was very much driven by what the facts said, not what the rhetoric implied.作為一個武器檢查員，我十分驅動什麼事實說，沒有什麼修辭暗示。 I maintain this standard to this day in assessing and evaluating American policy in the Middle East.我堅持這個標準，這一天在評估和評價美國的政策，在中東。 It was the core approach which governed my own personal questioning of the Bush administration’s case for confronting Iraq in the lead-up to the war in 2002 and 2003.這是核心的做法，管治我個人的質疑，布什政府的情況下對抗伊拉克的帶頭行動，戰爭在2002年和2003年。 I am saddened at the vindication of my position in the aftermath of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, not because of what I did, but rather what the transcripts of every media interview I conducted at the time demonstrates: The media were not interested in reporting the facts, but rather furthering a fiction.我感到難過，在平反我的立場在後的入侵和佔領伊拉克，這並不是因為我所做的，而是什麼謄本，每接受媒體採訪時本人在時間表明：媒體不感興趣，報告事實，而是進一步虛構。 Time after time, I backed my opposition to the Bush administration’s “case” for war on Iraq with hard facts, citing evidence that could be readily checked by these erstwhile journalists had they been so inclined.時間後的時間，我支持我反對布什政府的“案件”對伊拉克的戰爭與鐵一般的事實，引用的證據，可以隨時檢查這些昔日記者，他們已傾向。 Instead, my integrity and character were impugned by these simple recorders of “fact”, further enabling the fiction pushed by the administration into the mainstream, unchallenged and unquestioned, to be digested by the American public as truth.相反，我國的完整性和性格被指責的，由這些簡單的錄音機的“事實” ，進一步使小說的推動下，政府當局融入主流，挑戰和質疑，消化，由美國公眾的真相。

Scott McClellan is correct to point out the complicity of the media in facilitating the rush to war.麥克萊倫是正確的指出，共謀傳媒在促進急於戰爭。 David Gregory is disingenuous in his denial that this was indeed the case.戴維格雷戈里是虛偽在他的拒絕，這是確實如此。 Jeff Cohen, a former producer at MSNBC, has written about the pressures placed on him and Phil Donahue leading to the cancellation of the latter’s top-rated television show just before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.傑夫科恩，一位前生產者在MSNBC的，寫了有關壓力對他和菲爾多納休導致取消後者的一流的電視節目之前，入侵伊拉克在2003年3月。 Katie Couric, the former co-host of NBC’s “Today Show” (and current news anchor for CBS News), has tacitly acknowledged “pressure” from above when it came to framing interviews in a manner that was detrimental to the Bush administration’s case for war.凱蒂庫里克，前共同主辦的美國全國廣播公司“今日秀” （和當前的新聞主播， CBS新聞） ，已默許承認， “壓力”從上面的時候來誣陷，在面試的方式，這是不利於布什政府奇摩案件戰爭。 Jessica Yellin, who before the war in Iraq worked for MSNBC, put it best: “I think the press corps dropped the ball at the beginning,” she told CNN’s Anderson Cooper.潔西卡yellin ，誰之前，在伊拉克戰爭MSNBC的工作，把它最好的： “我認為，記者團下降，球在開始時， ”她告訴有線電視新聞網的安德森庫珀。 “When the lead-up to the war began, the press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war that was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president’s high approval ratings.” “當帶頭的後續戰爭開始，記者團是巨大的壓力下，從公司經理，坦白說，要確保這是一場戰爭，這是在陳述的方式是一致的愛國熱在國家和總統的高支持率“ 。

Now, one would think that a journalist with the self-proclaimed integrity of Gregory would jump at the opportunity to take the bull by the horns, so to speak, and focus on this story line, if for no other reason than to prove it wrong and thereby clear his name (guilty by association, at the very least) and the name of the organization he represents.現在，一會認為，記者與自我宣布的完整性，格雷戈里將跳轉在機會來的牛市是由牛角，所以發言，並著重就這個故事線，如果沒有其他原因，比，以證明它是錯誤的從而明確自己的名字（由協會承認，至少）和組織的名稱，他的自覺性。 The matter is simple, on the surface: NBC network executives either did, or didn’t, pressure their producers and reporters when it came to covering and framing stories.這個問題很簡單，表面上：全國廣播公司的網絡主管要么沒有，或沒有，他們的壓力，生產者和記者時，來涵蓋和制定的故事。 Surely an investigative reporter of Gregory’s talent can get to the bottom of this one?當然，一名調查記者，對格雷戈里的人才可以進入底部的一？

While Gregory certainly does not need help from someone of such humble journalistic credentials as myself, perhaps my experience as a former weapons inspector in tracking down the lies and inconsistencies of the Iraqi government could be of some assistance.而格雷戈里當然並不需要幫助，有人從這種謙卑的新聞全權證書，作為我自己，也許我的經驗，作為前武器檢查員在追踪的謊言和不一致的，伊拉克政府可以對一些援助。 The first thing I would do is to frame the scope of the problem.第一件事，我會做的，就是框架問題的範圍。 The issue of Iraq as a target worthy of war really didn’t hit the mainstream until the summer of 2002, so I would start there.在伊拉克問題上作為一個目標，值得戰爭真的沒有擊中的主流，直到2002年夏天，所以我將開始有。 I would be interested in defining the potential sources of “pressure” that could be placed on NBC as an organization when it came to reporting on Iraq.我會在確定有興趣的潛在來源“壓力” ，可放置在全國廣播公司作為一個組織，當它來到的報告對伊拉克的。

We do know, courtesy of the Pentagon, that throughout the summer and fall of 2002, NBC News, via its Pentagon bureau chief and other contacts, worked closely with the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Public Affairs, on the issue of media access in any potential future conflict with Iraq.我們知道，禮貌的五角大樓，在整個夏季和秋季的2002年， NBC新聞，通過其五角大樓局行政和其他接觸，密切配合，秘書辦公室，國防部，公共事務，對這個問題的媒體訪問在未來的任何潛在的衝突與伊拉克。 We also know that these meetings were an outgrowth of a meeting held on Sept. 28, 2001, when the Pentagon and bureau chiefs, including representatives from NBC News, discussed how to balance the needs of the media to do their job while protecting national security and the safety of military personnel.我們也知道，這些會議的產物舉行的會議上， 2001年9月28日，當美國五角大樓和局主管，包括代表NBC新聞，討論了如何平衡的需要，媒體做他們的工作的同時，維護國家安全和安全的軍事人員。 The issue of embedding media personnel with the military was raised, with the Pentagon emphasizing that “security at the source” was the principle means for which to ensure no security breach occurred.問題嵌入媒體工作人員與軍事有人提出，五角大樓強調， “安全在源頭”的原則，手段，其中，以確保沒有違反安全發生。 This meant that if journalists were so embedded, they would have to be responsible about what they reported.這意味著，如果記者們，使嵌入式，便要負責什麼，他們的報告。

This concept of self-censorship is not a new one, nor is it particularly controversial.這個概念的自我檢查是不是一個新的，也不是特別具爭議性。 Ernie Pyle and Joe Rosenthal, two famous journalists from World War II, were able to establish stellar reputations while operating under the conditions of wartime censorship.恩尼派爾和喬羅森塔爾，兩個著名的記者，從第二次世界大戰後，能夠建立起恆星的聲譽，而經營的條件下，戰時新聞檢查。 So were thousands of other journalists, in several wars.因此，被其他數以千計的記者，在幾次戰爭。 In this manner, journalists covering D-Day knew of the invasion long before the American public, or even members of Congress.以這種方式，記者採訪的D -天知道入侵之前很久，美國民眾，或什至美國國會議員。 Were they bad journalists for not reporting what they knew beforehand?他們是壞的記者不報什麼，他們知道，事前？ Were their parent organizations corrupted by agreeing to censorship as a prerequisite for access?他們的上級組織的損壞，同意檢查的一個先決條件准入？ The answer in both cases is clearly “no.”答案在這兩種情況下，顯然是“不” 。

However, in the interest of establishing a foundation of fact upon which to further any investigation into the possibility of pressure being exerted on NBC reporters and/or correspondents covering a war between the United States and Iraq, an intrepid investigator would want access to documents and records from those early meetings between the Pentagon and NBC News.然而，在利益建立的基礎，事實上後，其中的任何進一步調查的可能性正在施加壓力，對全國廣播公司記者和/或通訊員涵蓋之間的戰爭，美國和伊拉克，一個勇敢的調查將要訪問的文件和記錄從這些早期之間的會議，五角大樓和美國全國廣播公司的新聞。 What were the specific terms spelled out in those meetings?有什麼具體條件，闡述了在這些會議上呢？ What derivative internal documents were generated inside NBC News, and its corporate master, General Electric, based upon those meetings, and what did those documents discuss?什麼衍生金融工具的內部文件所產生的內NBC新聞，和其企業主，通用電氣，基於這些會議上，和什麼這些文件的討論呢？ Unlike the situation faced by journalists during World War II, America and Iraq were not yet at war, so did NBC News establish policies on how to balance the operational security needs of the military while reporting on a war which, in the summer and fall of 2002, the Bush administration said wasn’t being planned?的情況不同，所面對的記者，二戰期間，美國和伊拉克尚未處於戰爭狀態，所以沒有NBC新聞制定政策，就如何平衡的運行安全的需要，軍事的同時，報告對戰爭，在夏季和秋季的2002年，布什政府說的是不是正計劃？

Formal planning for “Operation Iraqi Liberation” (only later renamed “Operation Iraqi Freedom”) commenced early on in 2002.正式規劃為“解放伊拉克行動” （後來才改名為“自由伊拉克行動” ）展開，早在2002年。 The US Army began working on a public affairs plan early in 2002 and, in June of that year, briefed US Central Command on a concept for large-scale media embedding for ground forces.美陸軍開始工作，對公共事務計劃在2002年初，並在6月的這一年，並向客人介紹了美國中央司令部對一個概念，大型媒體嵌入地面的力量。 US Central Command expanded the Army’s plan to include the other services, and by September 2002 had prepared a draft public affairs annex to the overall war plan.美國中央司令部，擴大了我軍的計劃，包括其他服務，並在2002年9月編寫了一份草案，公共事務的附件，以整體的戰爭計劃。 Formal public affairs planning for US Central Command was initiated in October 2002, when a planning cell was established.正式的公共事務的規劃，美國中央司令部發起於2002年10月，當一個規劃細胞成立。 In its first meeting, from Oct. 2-7, the Pentagon reviewed past media operations in time of war, and recommended a break with the past practice of a media pool, and instead suggested a formal embedded media program.在其第一次會議上，從10月2日至7日，五角大樓檢討過去媒體的運作，在時間的戰爭，並建議與過去決裂的做法，媒體池，而是提出一個正式的嵌入式媒體計劃。 These and other media-related issues were consolidated into Annex F (Public Affairs) of the formal “Operation Iraqi Liberation” war plan.這些和其它相關媒體的問題被合併為附件F （公共事務）的正式行動“伊拉克解放”的戰爭計劃。 It is curious that the Pentagon acknowledges a formal war plan in existence at a time when senior Bush administration officials were telling members of Congress that there were no plans to attack Iraq and that the Bush administration was focusing its efforts on diplomacy.這是好奇的說，五角大樓承認，正式的戰爭計劃中存在的時候，布什政府高級官員告訴國會議員，有沒有計劃攻打伊拉克，並說，布什政府把重點放在其外交的努力。

The embedded media program was formally endorsed by the Pentagon in November 2002.嵌入式媒體計劃正式獲得通過，五角大樓在2002年11月。 On Nov. 14, 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, together with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sent a message to all military commanders discussing public affairs, and in particular the embedded media program.關於2002年11月14日，國務卿，國防部長拉姆斯菲爾德，連同主席參謀長聯席會議，發出了一個信息的所有軍事指揮官討論公共事務，特別是嵌入式媒體計劃。 In it, Rumsfeld addressed how potential future operations [ie, war with Iraq] could shape public perception of the national security environment, and recognized the need to facilitate access to national and international media to “tell the factual story — good or bad — before others seed the media with disinformation and distortions as they most certainly will continue to do.在資訊科技，拉姆斯菲爾德如何處理未來可能的行動[即，戰爭與伊拉克]可以形成公眾的看法，國家安全環境，並承認有必要，以方便向國家和國際媒體以“告訴事實的故事-好的或壞的-前其他種子的媒體造謠和扭曲，因為他們大多數肯定會繼續這樣做。 Our people in the field need to tell the story.”我們的人民在該領域需要告訴的故事“ 。

When did NBC News become aware of this Rumsfeld memo?什麼時候成為NBC新聞意識到這一點，拉姆斯菲爾德備忘錄？ Were there any reactions to the concept of embedded journalists being targeted by the military as being facilitators for disseminating a pro-Pentagon point of view?有任何反應的概念，嵌入式記者的目標，軍事作為調解人的傳播親五角大樓的角度來看呢？ The Pentagon states that while no formal meetings about draft public affairs annex content were conducted with bureau chiefs, “informal discussions were held with some key individuals in the media, who provided input for consideration.” The Pentagon also acknowledges that changes to the public affairs annex were made “based on a bureau chief’s recommendation.” Was NBC News part of the “informal discussions” with the Pentagon?五角大樓的國家，雖然沒有正式會議關於草案的公共事務的附件內容進行了局長， “舉行了非正式討論，與一些關鍵的個人在媒體上，誰提供了投入，以供審議。 ”五角大樓也承認，改變公共事務附件發了言“的基礎上，局行政的建議”是NBC新聞的一部分“非正式討論”與五角大樓？ Did NBC News provide any recommendations to the Pentagon’s public affairs office based on such meetings?當時NBC新聞提供任何建議，五角大樓的公共事務辦公室基於這樣的會議？ If so, what were the recommendations, who made them, and how was this staffed within the NBC/GE corporate structure?如果是的話，有什麼建議，是誰，以及如何這是工作人員與全國廣播公司/通用電氣公司的結構？

These are important questions, since balancing the need to maintain secrecy of potential military operations would appear to conflict with any effort undertaken by NBC News to probe Bush administration claims on not only the justification for confronting Iraq, but whether or not there was any plan to attack Iraq to begin with.這些都是重要的問題，因為平衡的需要，以維持保密，潛在的軍事行動會出現衝突的任何努力，由NBC新聞試探布什政府的債權，不僅理由對抗伊拉克，但無論是否有任何計劃攻打伊拉克開始。 How did NBC News compartmentalize its knowledge of the Bush administration’s plans to attack Iraq?如何NBC新聞compartmentalize的知識，布什政府的計劃攻打伊拉克呢？ Was there any crossover in terms of management?有任何交叉在條款的管理呢？ Did the same personnel who managed Pentagon relations also manage the reporters whose task it was to press the Bush administration on the veracity of its case for war against Iraq?沒有相同的人員，誰管理，五角大樓的關係，也可管理的記者，其任務是迫使布什政府的真實性，其案件為對伊拉克的戰爭？ Did such crossover ever manifest itself in a case of conflict of interest?這樣交叉以往任何時候都顯現在一宗案件中的利益衝突？ What is the documentary record of internal discussions within NBC in this regard?什麼是紀錄片，記錄內部討論全國廣播公司在這方面呢？ Were any policies established on the control of information that touched upon sensitive military activities?任何政策建立在對控制信息的觸及敏感的軍事活動呢？

It might appear as if I am on a fishing expedition, so to speak, probing for documents for which there is no evidence that they even exist.它可能出現的作為，如果我對實行捕撈遠征，可以這麼說，探索的文件，其中沒有任何證據表明，他們甚至存在。 Again, I’ll do my best to help focus David Gregory on his investigation.再次，我會盡我所能，幫助重點大衛格雷戈里對他的調查。 Much has been made of the fact that parent company GE makes a great deal of money from the machinery of war.許多已取得的事實是，公司的母公司通用電氣作出了大量的金錢從機械的戰爭。 It is useful, however, to examine a specific case, an instance where the news operation, the corporate parent and the military were all too intertwined.它是有用的，但是，研究具體案件中，一個實例的地方新聞的運作，該公司的母公司和軍隊都太交織在一起。

In November 2002, the Pentagon established formal rules that specifically forbade any journalist to “self-embed” with a given military unit, noting that all requests for embedding would be handled via the Pentagon’s public affairs office.在2002年11月，五角大樓建立了正式的規則，特別是不准任何記者“自我嵌入”與某一軍事單位，注意到所有要求嵌入將處理通過五角大樓的公共事務辦公室。 At the same time, in Kuwait, the US Army’s 3rd Infantry Division brigade and battalion commanders were experimenting with embedding journalists during short (three to five days) training exercises.在同一時間內，在科威特，美國陸軍的第三步兵師旅和營級指揮官被試驗的嵌入記者在短期（ 3至5天）的訓練演習。 The 2nd Brigade Combat Team in particular pushed the embedding concept, getting journalists embedded at the battalion level.第2旅戰鬥隊，尤其是推嵌入的概念，越來越嵌入式記者在營一級。 From this experience, the 2nd Brigade was able to establish embedding tactics, techniques and procedures that worked for both the media and the commanders.從這個經驗，第二旅是能夠建立的嵌入戰術，技術和程序工作都傳媒和指揮官。 According to the US Army, “The embeds realized they needed to work with their equipment and develop procedures for filing reports.據美國軍隊， “嵌入實現他們所需要的工作與他們的設備和制定程序，提交報告。 They identified problems with the durability of their equipment and its ability to withstand the elements and a need for power sources for extended periods.”他們發現的問題與耐久性他們的設備和能力，能夠頂住要素和需要電源延長期“ 。

One of these embeds was NBC News correspondent David Bloom.一，這些嵌入是NBC新聞通訊員朱開。 It should be noted that Bloom tragically died while covering the Iraq war.應該指出的是，布魯姆不幸死亡，而包括伊拉克戰爭。 Bloom was a rising star at NBC, with an eye for a developing story.布魯姆是一個新星在全國廣播公司，與眼一個發展中的故事。 “Early on,” NBC News President Neal Shapiro said shortly after Bloom’s death, “he said, ‘I want a piece of this war.’ ” Shapiro isn’t specific about the date Bloom made that statement, but since Bloom was dispatched to Kuwait in November 2002, we can assume it was on or about that time. “在初期， ” NBC新聞主席尼爾夏皮羅說，不久後盛開的死， “他說， '我要一塊這場戰爭” 。夏皮羅是沒有具體的日期盛開作出這一聲明，但由於是盛開派遣到科威特在2002年11月，我們可以假設這是對或約，當時。 Bloom was one of the embeds who worked closely with the US Army during that time, developing the “tactics, techniques and procedures” for embedded media.布魯姆是其中的嵌入誰密切合作，與美國軍隊在這段時間，發展“的戰術，技術和程序” ，為嵌入式媒體。 In December 2002, Bloom called NBC News from Kuwait, where he had just covered the largest US military live-fire exercise since the first Gulf War.在2002年12月，開花所謂NBC新聞從科威特，在那裡他剛剛涵蓋了美國最大的軍事實彈射擊演習以來，第一次海灣戰爭。 Bloom told his NBC News bosses that he had been given permission to embed with the 3rd Infantry Division, even though official Pentagon policy in place at the time specifically forbade any such action.布魯姆告訴他的NBC新聞的老闆說，他已獲准以嵌入與第三步兵師，即使官方的五角大樓政策到位，在當時的具體禁止任何此類行動。 Bloom already exhibited a familiarity with the war plans of the 3rd Infantry Division, bragging that they were the “tip of the spear.” Not only would Bloom and his cameraman be able to ride with the 3rd Infantry Division, they would be able to broadcast live while doing so.布魯姆已經展示了熟悉的戰爭計劃的第三步兵師，吹牛，他們的“秘訣的矛” ，不僅會開花和他的攝影師能夠饒有興致地乘坐了第3步兵師，他們將能夠播出活，而這樣做。 Clearly, Bloom and his 3rd Infantry Division colleagues had perfected their embed “tactics, techniques and procedures.”顯然，布魯姆和他的第三步兵師的同事，完善其嵌入“戰術，技術和程序” 。

The 2nd Brigade Combat Team had offered Bloom the use of a large M-88A1 tank recovery vehicle.第2旅戰鬥隊提供了布魯姆使用一個大的M - 88a1坦克回收車。 Bloom had worked with the Army to mount a camera and a mobile satellite transmission unit on the M-88.布魯姆曾與軍隊展開相機和移動衛星傳輸單元上的M - 88 。 The images taken from the camera would be sent back, while the M-88 was traveling at speeds of up to 50 miles per hour, to a radically modified Ford F-450 SuperDuty truck that carried specialized satellite communication equipment built by Maritime Telecommunications Network, and a gyro-stabilizing transmission dish mounted underneath a protective dome on the rear body.圖像從相機將被送回，而米- 88是行駛速度可達50英里每小時，一個根本性的修改福特F - 450 superduty卡車進行了專門的衛星通信設備建造的海上通信網絡，和陀螺穩定傳輸碟裝下一個保護圓頂對後方的機構。 This truck would trail the leading elements of the 3rd Infantry’s spearhead at distances of up to two miles.這卡車將徑領導的要素第三步兵的矛頭距離長達兩英里。 The M-88 carrying Bloom broadcast microwave signals back to the Ford F-450 truck, which in turn transmitted these signals via satellite uplink back to NBC News headquarters.的M - 88進行盛開廣播微波信號回到福特F - 450卡車，這反過來又轉發了這些信號通過衛星上行回NBC新聞總部。

Bloom was able to provide the specifications of his idea to his NBC bosses, and in just 40 days, engineers from Maritime Telecommunications Network and NBC were able to modify a Ford F-450 to not only withstand the rigors of the Iraqi desert, but also to accommodate the electronics and satellite dish.布魯姆是能夠提供的規格，自己的想法，以他的全國廣播公司的老闆，並在短短的40天內，工程師從海上電訊網絡和美國全國廣播公司能夠修改福特F - 450 ，不僅經受住苛刻的伊拉克沙漠，但也以容納電子和衛星天線。 Four weeks before the start of the war, the vehicle was tested, only to have the signal drop every time the vehicle turned.四周前，戰爭開始時，車輛測試中，只有有信號下降，每一次的車輛轉。 The engineers worked frantically to fix the problem, and the modified F-450, nicknamed the “Bloommobile,” was airlifted to Kuwait, arriving just days before the start of the invasion.工程師的工作，瘋狂地解決這一問題，和改進的F - 450 ，綽號“ bloommobile ， ”是空運到科威特，抵達前幾天開始入侵。

The cost of the Bloommobile has not been formally revealed, but is thought to run into seven figures.成本的bloommobile尚未正式透露，但被認為是運行到7的數字。 This vehicle would never have been made without the support of GE, which underwrote the cost of its construction.這個車可能永遠都沒有作出支持葛， underwrote的成本，其建設。 GE also fronted for NBC in negotiating special clearances with the Pentagon and State Department on exceptions to policy and import-export control.通用電氣公司也門前，為全國廣播公司在談判特別清拆行動與美國五角大樓和國務院對例外情況的政策和進出口貿易的控制。 The Pentagon’s official policy while the Bloommobile was being built was for embeds to ride in vehicles provided by their respective unit, and that the media were not to provide their own transportation.五角大樓的官方政策，而bloommobile是正在興建的，是為嵌入乘坐的車輛在所提供的各自的單位，以及媒體不提供自己的運輸。 Clearly, the Bloommobile represented a stark exception to that rule.顯然， bloommobile代表一個鮮明的例外。

Keep in mind that the entire time GE/NBC was investing millions of dollars into building the Bloommobile so they could get crystal-clear live video transmitted from the “tip of the spear,” the Bush administration was playing coy on the subject of war with Iraq.請記住，整個時間葛/全國廣播公司是投資數百萬美元到建設bloommobile ，使他們可以得到水晶般清晰的電視直播傳送從“尖端的Spear ， ”布什政府正在發揮青年事務委員會關於這一主題的戰爭伊拉克。 With GE/NBC News so heavily invested in exploiting a war, was there any pressure placed on NBC reporters/correspondents concerning how they dealt with the Bush administration’s case for war?與GE / NBC新聞，使大量投資於開發一場戰爭，是有任何的壓力，放置在全國廣播公司記者/記者關於如何處理與布什政府的案件為戰爭？ It is a fair question, and one that could best be dealt with through an examination of the internal GE/NBC documents concerning the Bloommobile.這是一個公平問題，一最能加以處理，通過考試的內部葛/全國廣播公司的文件有關bloommobile 。 Who in GE/NBC served as the project manager for the Bloommobile?誰在葛/全國廣播公司擔任項目經理為bloommobile ？ Certainly Bloom, the brain trust, was away in Kuwait.當然，開花，智囊，離開在科威特。 Who oversaw the project back in the United States?誰主持該項目早在美國？ What did the Bloommobile cost?什麼沒有bloommobile費用是多少？ What was the internal debate within GE/NBC concerning the merits/faults of the Bloommobile?什麼是內部辯論，葛/全國廣播公司有關的優點/缺點的bloommobile ？ An organization like GE/NBC does not allocate millions of dollars on a whim.一個組織如GE /全國廣播公司並不撥出數百萬美元的一種突發奇想。 There had to be some sort of oversight that was documented.必須有某種形式的監督，這是記錄在案。 Who in GE/NBC fronted for the Bloommobile with the US government?誰在葛/全國廣播公司門前，為bloommobile與美國政府呢？ What is the record of communication between GE/NBC and the US government concerning the vehicle?什麼是記錄之間的溝通，葛/ NBC和美國政府有關的汽車嗎？ Did GE/NBC have to provide the US government with any guarantees concerning the use of the Bloommobile?當時葛/全國廣播公司已提供美國政府與任何保證使用該bloommobile ？

In investing in the vehicle, GE/NBC News was investing in the war.在投資於汽車，通用電氣/ NBC新聞是投資在戰爭中。 There are quid pro quo arrangements made every day, and the link between the US government granting NBC News so many exceptions in the creation and fielding of the Bloommobile, and the crackdown within the GE-controlled NBC/MSNBC family on anti-war and anti-administration sentiment, cannot be dismissed as simply circumstantial.有是指在無報償作出的安排，每天和之間的聯繫，美國政府給予NBC新聞這麼多的例外，在建立和菲爾丁的bloommobile ，打擊內部葛控制全國廣播公司/ MSNBC的家庭對反戰和反-政府當局的情緒，不能被視為單純的環境。 But a review of the available documents would clarify this issue.不過，檢討現有的文件將澄清這個問題。

David Gregory has vociferously defended the role he and NBC News played in the lead-up to the Iraq war.戴維格雷戈里已vociferously辯護的角色，他和NBC新聞所發揮的帶頭行動，伊拉克戰爭。 Scott McClellan’s new book, combined with testimony from other sources, including those from within the NBC News family, has called into question the integrity of the operation Gregory serves.麥克萊倫的新著，再加上作證時從其他來源，包括那些來自內部的NBC新聞的家庭，已成為問題的完整性運作格雷戈里服務。 An allegation from a credible source has been made, and any denial must therefore be backed with verifiable, documented information.一指控，從一個可靠的消息來源已取得，以及任何否認，因此，必須支持與核查，記錄信息。 To paraphrase former Secretary of State Colin Powell when talking about Iraq before the invasion, the burden is on NBC to prove that it wasn’t complicit with the Bush administration concerning its reporting on Iraq and administration policies, and not on NBC’s critics to prove that it was.以段前，美國國務卿鮑威爾在談到伊拉克入侵之前，負擔的方法，是對全國廣播公司，以證明它不是共犯與布什政府關於它的報告對伊拉克政府的政策，而不是在美國全國廣播公司的批評證明它。

The old proverb notes that “a fish stinks from its head,” something that aptly describes the GE/NBC News team when discussing the issue of Iraq.舊的諺語指出， “一條魚stinks從它的頭， ”這正好說明了葛/ NBC新聞組時，討論伊拉克問題。 I challenge David Gregory to demonstrate otherwise.我挑戰大衛格雷戈里證明，否則。

See More: 看到更多的： World News 世界新聞

Have Your Say: Why Are Corporate Journalists So Afraid of Questioning Authority? 你說：為什麼企業如此害怕記者的問話權力？
Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。

Or discuss this report in our new forums 或討論這個報告在我們的新論壇

RSS 的RSS TrackBack URL 跟踪 RUI

Name (required) 姓名（必填）

Mail (will not be published) (required) 郵件（不會被公佈） （必填）

Website 網站

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 17th, 2008 at 2:11 pm and is filed under 此項目被張貼於週二， 2008年6月17日在下午2時11分，並提交下 Media News 新聞 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反應，此項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 餵養。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回應 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 從你自己的網站。

Loading ...載入中...

TOP NEWS DISCUSSIONS top新聞討論

LATEST NEWS DISCUSSIONS 最新消息討論

Activism & Protest News 積極與抗議新聞 | | Business News 商業新聞 | | Civil & Human Rights News 公務員＆人權新聞 | | Environmental News 環境新聞 | | Media News 新聞 | | Globalisation News 全球經濟一體化新聞 | | Web Development News Web開發新聞

ADVERTISEMENTS廣告

SITE MAPS網站地圖

7/7 7 / 7 Afghanistan阿富汗 Alternative Energy替代能源 Art藝術 BBC英國廣播公司 Big Brother大哥哥 Bilderberg 。 Bilderberg Biometrics生物識別技術 Bush布什 CIA美國中央情報局 Climate Change氣候變化 Cover Up掩蓋 Cults邪教 Culture文化 Database State數據庫狀態 David Hicks大衛希克斯 David Ray Griffin朱射線格里芬 Democrats同盟 Demos演示 Drugs藥物 Education教育 EU歐盟 False Flag虛假國旗 FBI美國聯邦調查局 Fraud欺詐 Free Speech免費的講話 Freemasons共濟會 G8八國集團 Globalization全球化 Guantanamo關塔那摩 Health News健康新聞 History歷史 ID Cards身份證 Internet互聯網 Iran伊朗 Iraq伊拉克 Israel以色列 Law法律 Marches遊行 MI5軍情五處 MI6軍情六處 Microsoft微軟 Military軍事 MoD按付款當日價格計算 Money金錢 Music音樂 NASA美國航天局 Neocons新保守主義者 NSA美國國家安全局 Oil石油 Pakistan巴基斯坦 Podcast播客 Police State警察國家 Propaganda宣傳 RFID的RFID RINF rinf Rumsfeld拉姆斯菲爾德 Science科學 Secrecy保密 Security安全 Slavery奴役 Space空間 Sports體育 Spying諜報活動 Stephen Lendman斯蒂芬lendman Technology技術 Terrorism恐怖主義 Tony Blair Torture TV UK News UN USA News Video Voting Warfare White House Wolfowitz World News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version

About | DVD Store | Opinion | Reviews | Special Guests | Webmasters