Thread: News Stories
View Single Post
Old 2013-07-08, 10:27   Link #29297
TinyRedLeaf
Moving in circles
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
What other "context" do you need? It's Orwellian to the core.
I'll be the first to generally agree with adage that the end does not justify the means. But I'll also be the first to admit that this is just an ideal. It is very difficult to live up to it in practice.

The US government has already said that the surveillance is needed to pre-empt threats to national security. It has claimed that such spying has allowed it to prevent at least one terrorist threat.

It had also clarified that a secret court exists to impose legislative limits to such spying (but this applies only to US citizens; for foreigners, tough luck).

Of course, all these require you to take the US government at its word. Lacking the "big picture" view of all the potential threats to the country, we can't really decide whether these threats are real or perceived.

And I highly doubt that Edward Snowden was any more privy to the "big picture" than the rest of us. Given his background, I also doubt that he has properly assessed the full weight of the enormous pros and cons of the PRISM spying system before deciding to blow the lid on it.

It's notable that he decided to break the news through unofficial channels even though whistle-blower legislation is in place to allow individuals to bring to light egregious behaviour in the organisations they work in.

Sure, you could claim conspiracy theories about how his life endangered, and so on. But that's just what they are: conspiracy theories. We don't know if that will indeed be the case. We'd be guilty of pre-judging the US government if we were to indulge in such speculation.

If Snowden believed in the rightness of his actions, should he not also be willing to stand for his beliefs in a court of law? (I understand that his father's lawyers are currently trying to negotiate the terms of his return to stand trial, so I won't pre-judge the outcome.)

Unfortunately, given the low trust in the US government, it's also clear that few if any are willing to believe in what it says today. Frankly, the US government has dug its own grave and it will just have to live with the outcomes of its tarnished reputation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Why do their backgrounds matter? Would MLK be less of a hero if it turned out he was kinky? Would Mussolini be less of a villain if he adopted stray kittens so they wouldn't starve? No, because it's what one does for society that matters, not what useless drivel they post/do on their own time.
Their backgrounds matter because I need to assess the extent to which they have told the "whole truth". I need to consider whether they have twisted the "truth" to suit an agenda.

And yes, such distortions can happen. It would be naive to think they don't.

More importantly, even in the absence of an ulterior motive, accidents can happen based on how we report the "truth".

The story behind the man killed in famous 'Saigon Execution' photo


Quote:
Perhaps one of the most iconic images to come out of the Vietnam War, there is an undeniable brutality to this photo. But Eddie Adams — who won a Pulitzer Prize for capturing this shot — later admitted that it didn't tell the whole story and he stated that he wished he hadn't taken it at all.

Looking at this image out of context, it appears as though an officer is gunning down an innocent prisoner, perhaps even a civilian. You are apparently witnessing a savage war crime. That is why this image was adopted by anti-war protesters as an indictment against the Vietnam War.

But when you learn the story behind the man who is being executed in this photo, the image and the reasoning behind the execution becomes a little bit clearer.

The man's name was Nguyen Van Lem, but he was also known as Captain Bay Lop. Lem was no civilian; he was a member of the Viet Cong. And not just any member; he was an assassin and the leader of a Viet Cong death squad who had been targeting and killing South Vietnamese National Police officers and their families.

According to accounts at the time, when South Vietnamese officers captured Lem, he was more or less caught in the act, at the site of a mass grave. This grave contained the bodies of no less than seven South Vietnamese police officers, as well as their families, around 34 bound and shot bodies in total.

Eddie Adams, the photojournalist who took the shot, backs up this story. Lem's widow also confirmed that her husband was a member of the National Liberation Front (Viet Cong), and that he disappeared before the beginning of the Tet Offensive.

After being captured with the bodies during the Tet Offensive, Nguyen Van Lem was taken to Major General Ngoc Loan. In a street in Saigon, Loan executed Lem with his .38 caliber Smith & Wesson.

The general then walked up to Adams and said, "they killed many of my people, and yours too", then walked away.

Was this the right thing to do? As with so many things connected to war, the answer to that question is murky at best.

Military lawyers have not yet decided with complete certainty whether or not Loan's actions violated the Geneva Conventions relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, so there is no official decision on the matter.

From Loan's perspective, the man before him was a cold-blooded killer who not only killed some of his friends and colleagues, but their families and other innocent people.

He was a dangerous man, who in the name of patriotism nonetheless believed his political stance justified his actions, as presumably did General Loan himself concerning the execution.

The question is, how would you have reacted, on both sides of the coin?

Last edited by TinyRedLeaf; 2013-07-08 at 11:00.
TinyRedLeaf is offline