on 17-12-2014 08:22 PM
on 18-12-2014 04:50 PM
There is nothing there about CNN reporting the ludicrous comments that you attributed to them.
on 18-12-2014 04:53 PM
Is'nt ALL media (past and present) owned and controled by the same people?
on 18-12-2014 04:59 PM
It is a fairly natural reaction for people to wonder whether the bloodshed could have been prevented. I know I would be asking those questions if it were one of my family members in there.
As soon as this happened I flicked through BBC AlJazeera and some of the US news channels to see what they were saying and instead of hearing repeatedly how wonderful our police force is they were being objective. I often do that when there is a crisis on.
I mean, you wouldn't want to listen to our broadcasters when the Olympic Games are on as you never find out who wins!
on 18-12-2014 05:03 PM
Objective about ????? how the Police are performing ??
Not sure the yanks are the best people to listen to when it comes to hostage rescue !
on 18-12-2014 05:03 PM
Quite unnatural and macabre in my humble opinion.
on 18-12-2014 05:05 PM
@donnashuggy wrote:It is a fairly natural reaction for people to wonder whether the bloodshed could have been prevented. I know I would be asking those questions if it were one of my family members in there.
As soon as this happened I flicked through BBC AlJazeera and some of the US news channels to see what they were saying and instead of hearing repeatedly how wonderful our police force is they were being objective. I often do that when there is a crisis on.
I mean, you wouldn't want to listen to our broadcasters when the Olympic Games are on as you never find out who wins!
objectivity from armchair experts is not reliable information
18-12-2014 05:09 PM - edited 18-12-2014 05:10 PM
@aps1080 wrote:
Objective about ????? how the Police are performing ??
Not sure the yanks are the best people to listen to when it comes to hostage rescue !
Just generally, about what is happening, they didn't seem to show ad nauseum how wonderful the police force was and show interviews with them not telling us anything, in fact one interview was criticizing the fact that we were kept in the dark.
Imagine if we all relied on what the Daily Telegraph told us? I'm not saying they are more reliable, just more broad and objective. Not necessarily hysteria about Muslim Radicals.
18-12-2014 05:16 PM - edited 18-12-2014 05:19 PM
You want to limit the information and images being broadcast if possible.
It can give too much away to the terrorists, although in this instance it didn't.
Have a look at this video at about 1 minute 30 seconds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8p7Sm0WrKo
ITN had put up a Camera at the back that no one knew about showing the assault team on the roof of the embassy
rapelling down into position.
Now imagine if the terrorists had been watching TV and that was broadcast live, they would have seen people at the front,
people at the back, people on the roof.
Re being kept in the dark, do you or the media need to know ??????
The hostage families were being told what was going on, the police knew what was going on, it's not the type of situation
where they need to give a running commentary, regardless of whether the media want or expect it but they think they have
a right to know everything !!! LOL
The US Police, Navy SEALS, Deltaforce don't give running commentaries of live operations.
on 18-12-2014 05:23 PM
18-12-2014 05:27 PM - edited 18-12-2014 05:28 PM
The minute he pulled the trigger and shot the hostage, the question was answered and that is No.
Once that happens in almost all hostage situations, then a breach is likely to be needed and executed.
Until that time, negotiation and all the other tactics are used.
Once they go through the door, you have to expect casualties, of hostages, Police/Military and of course terrorists (depending on what the rules of engagement are because of course some will throw down their weapons and try to surrender, the ROE's determine whether they get shot dead or arrested.)
There is a formula for working out expected casualties.