Reuters calls for release of Iraqi cameraman
Wednesday, 24 August 2005 | 202 readers so far
This story is noteworthy.
And for the record, in my personal, non-official opinion, the U.S. military should be as forthcoming as possible about detainees and the reasons they have been detained.
Having said that, I find it dubious that the story mentions that two Reuters journalists killed by the U.S. military, but fails to mention that the U.S. military does not intentionally target journalists for death. The insurgency does. Isn’t that a significant difference? You might want to ask Eason Jordan. I’ve mentioned him in the past.
I would invite you to read the accounts of journalists dying in Iraq for the year 2004. What is clear from reading these accounts is that in a war, many accidents happen, and many innocent people die unjustly. What is also clear, is that the insurgents have a policy of murdering journalists with whom they are displeased. The coalition forces, on the other hand, have a policy of investigating every journalist death caused by the coalition in an effort to minimize such incidents. Do you understand the difference?
1 August 25th, 2005 at 6:49 am
jamal says:
Intrestingly you refer to killing media personal. So I suppose it was also an “Accident” when Al Jazeera was hit by a US missile. I am sure there are various other civilian and media targets that have been hit by the USA. So since you imply “insurgents” are bad for targeting USA journalists, does this make USA bad also, since they have done the same thing??
Because USA kills and then calls it an “accident”, does that justify it. With all their high tech weapons and geo tracking, should they really be making so many accidents. Or are they just lying to us? Yes they are. And i supposed youve ignored all the innocents that have been killed by the USA or captured and tortured in Abu Ghriab and Guantanamo Bay?….
Or is it one rule for some and another rule for others? Sounds like a double standard. Thats not too clever Trevor!
2 August 25th, 2005 at 8:06 am
Trevor says:
Which journalists were killed in that Al-Jazeera missile incident again? This article doesn’t mention ANY.
How are you sure that various other civilian and media targets were intentionally attacked by coalition forces? Name specific incidents, the casualties, and then I will respond on a case by case basis.
And while you are at it, tell my why Daniel Pearl deserved to be beheaded? No? OK then, how about Nick Berg? Kim Sun-il? Fabrizio Quattrocchi? Paul Johnson? Hussein Ali Alyan?
Your moral compass is broken, Jamal. Not every death perpetrated by humans against other humans should be seen in the same light.
As for innocents being captured and/or killed - why would I ignore them? I value human life on general principles (which are conditional). I wish no harm and complete freedom to all human beings who would extend the same courtesy to their fellows. But we don’t live in a perfect world so I sometimes put my idealism on hold while I carry out practical necessities to ensure my continued survival as best I can.
Perhaps Iraq will be freer as the result of my efforts. Perhaps the U.K. will be freer. Perhaps my adopted homeland will be freer. Or not. I suppose it all depends on a lot of factors over which my control is limited or non-existent.
Again, I am unware of any specific incident(s) in which U.S. personnel actively, purposefully targeted any media for death. If that did happen, it would be investigate, and those responsible would be punished. Please read the following entry before you comment any further.
3 August 26th, 2005 at 10:06 pm
Kate says:
According to reports stating information came from and interview BBC correspondent Kate Adie had with a Pentagon Official, the U.S. threatened journalists at the very start of the war. I believe they have killed journalists who attempted to report certain truths. Here is a link to a discussion about it at the House Of Representatives:
Apparently, some there believe it, too.
Medical examiners in other countries who saw the tape of the Berg beheading have stated that it is apparent Berg was already dead. They believe he was working for the U.S., and the U.S. killed him because he knew too much. Then they staged a beheading.
4 August 27th, 2005 at 7:16 am
Trevor says:
Kate,
I’ve done some research on Kate Adie, who is the one that made the claim the Pentagon said it would intentionally target journalists satellite uplink positions with bombs.
What you’ve presented me with, in your reference, is a secondhand “quote” from an unnamed senior Pentagon official. It’s about as useful as all the rumors that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian. Without some tangible evidence, it’s worthless.
It is within the realm of possibility, and even likely, that there are individuals within the U.S. government who would LIKE to target people they disagree with for death. They would be punished if caught, because official U.S. government policy doesn’t encourage or condone this type of behavior - I know that firsthand.
So get me some video of these rogue elements of government talking about assassinating people they don’t like and I’ll demand that they be jailed or worse. The rest of the first document you linked is typical Washington spew. It’s worthless inneunedo.
I know first hand that the U.S. military routinely fields requests for information and escorts Al-Jazeera on the battlefield. We don’t kill non-combatants on purpose.
As far as the U.S. military having killed Nick Berg, I had moments of doubt back when it first happened. But I spent lots of time reading and digesting whatever information I could get, and the theory that the U.S. did it makes no sense. To what end? If some sort of psyops psycho decided it would be good for pro-war sentiment in the U.S. then all he would have needed to do was wait. There have been plenty of other beheadings that were clearly done by Muslims in the name of Allah, however sick that is. So no need to stage a beheading and risk the fall of our system of government.
5 August 28th, 2005 at 12:22 am
jamal says:
This article is very misleading. People like to believe that Iraq soldiers target US journalists. It happens, but it is a propaganda technique to say thats ONLY the Iraqi’s do this. There are many reports of US soldiers targeting journalist. Below is one report from BBC news of a journalist that survived one such attack by USA troops.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/hardtalk/4446025.stm
6 August 28th, 2005 at 10:10 am
Mustang says:
Jamal: When you say “Iraq soldiers,” do I assume correctly that you are speaking of murdering, cut-throat terrorists rather than duly constituted members of the Iraqi military?
Now as far as the cited BBC news-bite is concerned, it is difficult to accept at face value the testimony of an avowed communist whose personal history is decidedly anti-Coalition. It is also hard to accept BBC as a factual source, given their impartiality in the war on terror. Now I realize that it is difficult to find stand-alone and factually correct accounts, but at the same time, you simply cannot argue effectively if you persist on gathering “garbage” produced by the MSM and offering that up as proof of your contention. And by the way, there are journalists who are reporting the truth from Iraq, much of it available on the internet — but these sources can only be located by people who have not already taken an unyielding position. I suspect, quite frankly, that you are less interested in the truth than you are in perpetuating the propaganda.
Finally, in a region that is by now well known to be inherently dangerous, what is to be said about journalists who place themselves in harms way and then bemoan the fact that some of them are killed or seriously injured? Like the insurgents, journalists take their chances . . . and they do so voluntarily.
7 August 28th, 2005 at 8:33 pm
Trevor says:
Jamal,
Very weak example of “targeting journalists.” In fact, it’s invalid. Guiliana Sgrena was kidnapped by insurgents, not the coalition. If you check the Wikipedia entry on her, the confusion surrounding Sgrena being shot in the shoulder is a classic case of he said/she said, except it involves nations instead of a married couple. Don’t speed towards roadblocks while in Iraq is the lesson I would take from the story. Instead, you walk away convinced that you have some sort of smoking gun that the U.S. is evil. Amazing how the neural paths in a human brain can misfire, isn’t it?
You haven’t given any clear examples of journalists being murdered by coalition forces because there aren’t any. If there were, the troops responsible would be in jail, not held up as heros.
Your rhetoric is growing tiresome.
8 September 1st, 2005 at 7:12 am
Jake says:
Accidents happen. With that being said I do think that some of our soldiers murdered innocent civilians in this war but I would not condemn the entire military for the actions of a few.
9 September 1st, 2005 at 8:47 am
Trevor says:
newsmax.comJake,
American servicemen are prosecuted when they commit murder.
10 September 2nd, 2005 at 6:10 am
Jake says:
Trevor,
I realize that.