STARTED! Baghdad Being bombed - Post made by Mr. OverclockerBloke, War Fanatic

Lopéz · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:00

Re: Re: re

Originally posted by Custor
How exactly does the treatment of US POWs differ from our treatment of iraqi POWs in respoect to the Geneva Conventions? Especially that every British newspaper bar three (?) this very morning are continuing to print the photos of POWs.

The British media are showing pictures as part of the extensive coverage this war is receiving.

The Iraqi government are showing pictures on their own television stations as part of their own agenda.

That is the difference.

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:00

Originally posted by Lopéz

That is the difference.

If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:00

Originally posted by Lopéz

That is the difference.

If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:02

Originally posted by Yossarian
If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

British tabloids arent run by the UK government and arent bound by the geneva convention.

MYB put it best in that thread i linked a moment ago.

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:02

Originally posted by Yossarian
If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

British tabloids arent run by the UK government and arent bound by the geneva convention.

MYB put it best in that thread i linked a moment ago.

Lopéz · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:03

Originally posted by Yossarian
If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

I don't think so, seeing as the Government do not run or own any part of the British media. But I could be wrong.

Lopéz · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:03

Originally posted by Yossarian
If the wording of article 13 includes "public curiosity" surely that applies to the British tabloids as well as Iraqi TV.

I don't think so, seeing as the Government do not run or own any part of the British media. But I could be wrong.

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:04

Originally posted by Balddog
British tabloids arent run by the UK government and arent bound by the geneva convention.

MYB put it best in that thread i linked a moment ago.

The BBC described the footage they had of surrendering troops as beloning to the MOD, presumably filmed by the troops. Making this available to public media outlets I'd have thought is equivalent to broadcasting it on state run television.

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:04

Originally posted by Balddog
British tabloids arent run by the UK government and arent bound by the geneva convention.

MYB put it best in that thread i linked a moment ago.

The BBC described the footage they had of surrendering troops as beloning to the MOD, presumably filmed by the troops. Making this available to public media outlets I'd have thought is equivalent to broadcasting it on state run television.

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:06

Originally posted by Yossarian
The BBC described the footage they had of surrendering troops as beloning to the MOD, presumably filmed by the troops. Making this available to public media outlets I'd have thought is equivalent to broadcasting it on state run television.

It was filmed by the embedded media cameramen. I dont know how the copyright thing is working in this situation..

Although the actual footage doesnt contravene the convention anyway. Have you read the thread i linked yoss? Theres a big discussion in there about this exact thing.

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:06

Originally posted by Yossarian
The BBC described the footage they had of surrendering troops as beloning to the MOD, presumably filmed by the troops. Making this available to public media outlets I'd have thought is equivalent to broadcasting it on state run television.

It was filmed by the embedded media cameramen. I dont know how the copyright thing is working in this situation..

Although the actual footage doesnt contravene the convention anyway. Have you read the thread i linked yoss? Theres a big discussion in there about this exact thing.

Sleepy · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:09

Sky News:

PA are reporting the first British combat fatalities

MindYerBeak · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:11

British soldier killed near Al Zubayr.

MindYerBeak · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:11

British soldier killed near Al Zubayr.

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:12

And now beeeeeg badaboom in Baghdad according to the good ol' Beeb

Yossarian · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:12

And now beeeeeg badaboom in Baghdad according to the good ol' Beeb

Over Clocker · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:13

Originally posted by MindYerBeak
British soldier killed near Al Zubayr.

yep, just been confirmed.

Also, AFP reporting 3 Massive explosions in Baghdad.

Strategy is now to get to Baghdad as soon as possible to cut the regime.

Over Clocker · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:13

Originally posted by MindYerBeak
British soldier killed near Al Zubayr.

yep, just been confirmed.

Also, AFP reporting 3 Massive explosions in Baghdad.

Strategy is now to get to Baghdad as soon as possible to cut the regime.

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:17

Originally posted by Custor
The thread dosen't really address it. Most of it's on Cuba. The controlling power is responsble for POWs and copyright don't come into it.

We are talking about the surrendering soldiers in Iraq right? Im confused about Cuba :confused:

theleg · 24 Mar 2003 at 16:17

Originally posted by Custor
The thread dosen't really address it. Most of it's on Cuba. The controlling power is responsble for POWs and copyright don't come into it.

We are talking about the surrendering soldiers in Iraq right? Im confused about Cuba :confused: