• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Army anger as soldier killed saving journalist who ignored Taliban warning [Edit]

Realist1

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
537
Reaction score
84
Location
Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
A liberal Butt-Wipe ignores warnings, gets captured, and gets a Warrior killed.:

Army anger as soldier killed saving journalist who ignored Taliban warning - Telegraph

Senior Army figures have expressed disquiet over the death of a British soldier killed helping to free a reporter who had been kidnapped in Afghanistan after ignoring security advice against entering a Taliban stronghold.

Let the idiot Liberal Butt-Wipes die in the Future. They've been Warned.

Brain dead Bastards.
 
Last edited:
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

That kid's life wasn't worth the life of one reporter. Had they 50 reporters? Yeah, maybe. But, one? No way.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

That kid's life wasn't worth the life of one reporter. Had they 50 reporters? Yeah, maybe. But, one? No way.

Not 1 Life Lost, for the Media. Period.:( Let them die, as their own choosing.) The more, the merrier.
 
Last edited:
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Not 1 Life Lost, for the Media. Period.:( Let them die, as their own choosing.) The more, the merrier.

I don't neccessarily disagree, but if there are 50 reporters being held hostage, there's a good chance that some of them aren't lying, defeatest assholes trying to undermine the war effort and get soldiers killed. In that case, we have to go get them. One lying, defeatest asshole? naw, let'em have him.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

A liberal Butt-Wipe ignores warnings, gets captured, and gets a Warrior killed.:

Army anger as soldier killed saving journalist who ignored Taliban warning - Telegraph

Senior Army figures have expressed disquiet over the death of a British soldier killed helping to free a reporter who had been kidnapped in Afghanistan after ignoring security advice against entering a Taliban stronghold.

Let the idiot Liberal Butt-Wipes die in the Future. They've been Warned.

Brain dead Bastards.

No where in the article does it even use the word "liberal". Why do you have to try and turn everything into some hyper-partisan issue?

No matter what leaning the reporter had, he was mostly an idiot, and it's a tragedy that he got some one killed.

Your thread title is out of format by the way.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

I'm curious as to why we even let those bastards near the war zones. I realize they want to get a really good story so they can sell tons of papers or get ratings, but this is ridiculous. They have no business there.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

A liberal Butt-Wipe ignores warnings, gets captured, and gets a Warrior killed.:

Army anger as soldier killed saving journalist who ignored Taliban warning - Telegraph

Senior Army figures have expressed disquiet over the death of a British soldier killed helping to free a reporter who had been kidnapped in Afghanistan after ignoring security advice against entering a Taliban stronghold.

Let the idiot Liberal Butt-Wipes die in the Future. They've been Warned.

Brain dead Bastards.


"One senior Army source said: “When you look at the number of warnings this person had it makes you really wonder whether he was worth rescuing, whether it was worth the cost of a soldier’s life. In the future special forces might think twice in a similar situation.” "

Another military source said: “This reporter went to this area against the advice of the Afghan police. So thanks very much Stephen Farrell, your irresponsible act has led to the death of one of our boys.”



Ouch. This reporter needs a brain transplant. He got quite a few people killed by disobeying military and afghan police warnings to stay away from that area.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

So first off let tell the whole story shall we not only was one British SAS Soldier Killed but also two civilians and a Afghan Journalist.

Now right or wrong the British Govn. decide in the best interest of there Citz. which Stephen Farrell is. This is the second time that Mr. Farrell has been kidnaped the first time was in Falluja in 2004 when he was working for the London Times.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

I'm curious as to why we even let those bastards near the war zones. I realize they want to get a really good story so they can sell tons of papers or get ratings, but this is ridiculous. They have no business there.

Because the media has everyone suckered into believing it's their 1st Amendment right to have full access to the battlefield.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Because the media has everyone suckered into believing it's their 1st Amendment right to have full access to the battlefield.

Well, it technically is, but regardless they shouldn't be allowed to infringe on any military missions or put the lives of soldiers at risk. Putting themselves in harms way does this and this incident is a prime example of that. They have no business there at all.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

I guess every reporter is a "liberal" now, and every soldier is a "conservative".

:lol:
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Well, it technically is, but regardless they shouldn't be allowed to infringe on any military missions or put the lives of soldiers at risk. Putting themselves in harms way does this and this incident is a prime example of that. They have no business there at all.

Well, ya can't have it both ways.

Personally, I think reporters should be able to write what they please, as long as it's true, but I don't agree that the 1st Amendment gives them unrestricted access to military operations.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

I guess every reporter is a "liberal" now, and every soldier is a "conservative".

:lol:

Statistically speaking, that would be true.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Statistically speaking, that would be true.

Apparently, you don't know jack **** about the military then.
Or the press, for that matter.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Apparently, you don't know jack **** about the military then.
Or the press, for that matter.

Yeah, I guess those 13 years I spent in the service don't mean jack ****; didn't learn a thing.

Nevermind that most reporters are Libbos and most military members are Connies.
 
Can we really lay all the blame on the reporter? Someone had to make the decision to send ppl in to get him. They could have told the guy to go there at his own risk, that they wouldn't be able to help him if captured.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Because the media has everyone suckered into believing it's their 1st Amendment right to have full access to the battlefield.

Actually, a big part of the reason is the military gets good press out of the deal.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Statistically speaking, that would be true.

No, it would not. You might be able to make the argument that most reporters are liberal, and that most soldiers are conservative, but neither is true by a wide enough margin to just make the assumption that a soldier is conservative, or a reporter is liberal.
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

Because the media has everyone suckered into believing it's their 1st Amendment right to have full access to the battlefield.
I'd say that getting captured by enemy Primitives and getting you head cut off while the act is being video recorded for the web pretty much constitutes "full access to the battlefield."
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

No where in the article does it even use the word "liberal". Why do you have to try and turn everything into some hyper-partisan issue?
Stephen Farrell, from the New York Times
That pretty much say's "Liberal."

Conservatives still cling to silly, outdated ideas like "evil savages are dangerous," so probably would have been bright enough to avoid them.
 
Last edited:
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

This is the second time this New York Times turd has been captured, there's a growing pattern here. Plus four decent people were killed in the process, overshadowing the death of the Taliban commander. This jerk should be brought up on charges of negligent homicide or something. This isn't free of speech, this asshole needs to be punished, but good.
 
Can we really lay all the blame on the reporter? Someone had to make the decision to send ppl in to get him. They could have told the guy to go there at his own risk, that they wouldn't be able to help him if captured.
Like that's going to happen. :roll: Imagine what the NYT headlines would have been.
 
capt.jpg
 
Re: N.Y.T. Reporter, gets a Soldier Killed.

I'm curious as to why we even let those bastards near the war zones. I realize they want to get a really good story so they can sell tons of papers or get ratings, but this is ridiculous. They have no business there.


Sometimes a story has to be told.

Farrell however has shown serious incompetence and disregard for the consequences of his actions on other people. If journalists have a licence then his should be revoked. Not only did he disregard warnings from miltary personell - he ignored the advice of an Afghan villager who tried to warn him and his translator that the Taleban were on the way.

Tragic loss for the UK Special Forces.
 
One senior Army source said: “When you look at the number of warnings this person had it makes you really wonder whether he was worth rescuing, whether it was worth the cost of a soldier’s life. In the future special forces might think twice in a similar situation.”

Another military source said: “This reporter went to this area against the advice of the Afghan police. So thanks very much Stephen Farrell, your irresponsible act has led to the death of one of our boys.”

Should have left the dumbass there to die. He is not worth risking soldier lives especially seeing the ****wit got warned how dangerous it was.
 
Back
Top Bottom