Why does any armed party in a conflict put up with reporters? Propaganda.
And there are other functions to fulfil than direct attack. They could have been spotting for mortars or other units. They could have been gathering intelligence.
Those could have been the reporters' armed guards, not interviewees.
We don't know for sure.
What I do know is that most people's hysterical claims of OMG BLOODTHIRSTY BABYKILLERS are non-objective emotional kneejerk. Which is clearly what the editors of this video intended.
Speaking of which, did you watch the footage cut out of even the 40 minute video wikileaks released? Really adds context.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: "propaganda-dot-com" (c)
Date: 12/4/10 03:10 (UTC)Propaganda.
And there are other functions to fulfil than direct attack.
They could have been spotting for mortars or other units.
They could have been gathering intelligence.
Those could have been the reporters' armed guards, not interviewees.
We don't know for sure.
What I do know is that most people's hysterical claims of OMG BLOODTHIRSTY BABYKILLERS are non-objective emotional kneejerk. Which is clearly what the editors of this video intended.
Speaking of which, did you watch the footage cut out of even the 40 minute video wikileaks released? Really adds context.