home

Detaining the Press in Iraq

By TChris, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Sun Sep 17, 2006 at 11:54:29 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

The favorable coverage that the president expects from AP may disappear now that AP has skin in the game. The administration hasn't endeared itself to AP by detaining one of its photographers for the last five months.

"We want the rule of law to prevail. He either needs to be charged or released. Indefinite detention is not acceptable," said Tom Curley, AP's president and chief executive officer. "We've come to the conclusion that this is unacceptable under Iraqi law, or Geneva Conventions, or any military procedure."

Well, yes, but that's true of all the 14,000 detainees, not just the one AP happens to employ. Still, the detention of journalists suppresses a free press and is therefore particularly offensive. What better way to stem the flow of information than to arrest the messenger?

The military in Iraq has frequently detained journalists who arrive quickly at scenes of violence, accusing them of getting advance notice from insurgents, Lyon said. ... Several hundred journalists in Iraq have been detained, some briefly and some for several weeks, according to Scott Horton, a New York-based lawyer hired by the AP to work on Hussein's case.

Western journalists can't venture into the streets, making it impossible for them to tell the story of the Iraq war. Iraqi journalists have access to the story, but they aren't trusted by the military -- or, in this case, by right wing bloggers who had it in for the photographer.

Hussein has been a frequent target of conservative critics on the Internet, who raised questions about his images months before the military detained him. One blogger and author, Michelle Malkin, wrote about Hussein's detention on the day of his arrest, saying she'd been tipped by a military source.

After behind-the-scenes negotiations were unproductive, AP decided to go public. Its own investigation casts significant doubt on the case against the photographer, but the problem with cases built on "secret evidence" is that they can never be disproved. Perhaps, in this administration, the crazed rantings of the likes of Michelle Malkin are enough proof to provoke a journalist's indefinite detention.

< Reviewing Nancy Grace | "Student and Teacher Safety Act of 2006": Permitting more school searches? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Detaining the Press in Iraq | 19 comments (19 topical)
    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 05:29:17 AM EST
    From the post:
    The military said Hussein was captured with two insurgents, including Hamid Hamad Motib, an alleged leader of al-Qaida in Iraq. "He has close relationships with persons known to be responsible for kidnappings, smuggling, improvised explosive device (IED) attacks and other attacks on coalition forces," according to a May 7 e-mail from U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Jack Gardner, who oversees all coalition detainees in Iraq.
    And then we have the AP backing up Gardner's claim.
    That Hussein was captured at the same time as insurgents doesn't make him one of them, said Kathleen Carroll, AP's executive editor. "Journalists have always had relationships with people that others might find unsavory," she said. "We're not in this to choose sides, we're to report what's going on from all sides."
    All through WWII we had reporters with the troops. They did some great things. But there was never any doubt about whose side that they were on. Why? Because we didn't have people saying:
    We're not in this to choose sides, we're to report what's going on from all sides.
    This current attitude from the press will, and must end. It will be sad that our freedom of the press will be impacted by those who are of the press. Plainer. If you are an Amerian, take sides.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#2)
    by soccerdad on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 06:37:28 AM EST
    Plainer: "Catapult the propaganda" regardless of the truth.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 07:24:31 AM EST
    Plainer. If you are an Amerian, take sides.
    Plainest: If you are a real American, seek the truth.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 07:40:25 AM EST
    For example, he said, the AP had been told that Hussein was involved with the kidnapping of two Arab journalists in Ramadi.
    But those journalists, tracked down by the AP, said Hussein had helped them after they were released by their captors without money or a vehicle in a dangerous part of Ramadi. After a journalist acquaintance put them in touch with Hussein, the photographer picked them up, gave them shelter and helped get them out of town, they said.
    The journalists said they had never been contacted by multinational forces for their account.
    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 08:58:36 AM EST
    Plainer. If you are an Amerian, take sides.
    Most have. But not your side...

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#4)
    by cpinva on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 08:58:36 AM EST
    jim, you can't possibly be that stupid or oblivious, can you? check out the guy's name. as well, not everyone working for the AP is american, they have foreign nationals working all over the world. so, AP is finally going to get its head out of..................the sand, and start reporting the actual truth, instead of drum beating for the prez., as a result of this? gee, that's nice, i'm so touched.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 08:58:36 AM EST
    Plainer. If you are an Amerian, take sides. Most have. But not your side. ---edger

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 10:16:42 AM EST
    Jim, America is capable of being terribly wrong. Only with a FREE, OBJECTIVE press can any wrongs be brought to light, corrected, learned from. You can't have it both ways. You either want a free press as a check on the government or you don't. And the WWII analogy here is useless, the appropriate one is Vietnam. And the only thing the military and its civilian leaders have seemed to learn from Vietnam is that a free press can actually report the ugly truth and affect the Americans at home in whose service it toils. And so...the press has been more controlled and censored than any time previously. Counterinsurgency methods and strategy, we could've learned an instituted THOSE into military training after Vietnam, if the lessons had been learned. But they weren't learned or instituted -- unbelievable as it sounds, the awful lessons of fighting the Vietcong insurgency and how best to counter them were simply forgotten by the institution. Instead, an irrational fear of the press, a scapegoating of unarmed reporters in a war zone, is what we get. Also, the military has produced ZERO evidence against this detained photographer. All talk so far. Nothing but empty talk. And with the track record of this administration's detainee policy, chances are they are simply acting like the old USSR or the current China, or any tyranny, and jailing someone for practicing freedom. Retribution is what it is, and a disrespect for, and fear of, one of the very things we're supposed to be passing onto a new and democratic Iraq...a free press.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#9)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:27:35 AM EST
    cpinva - Uh, if you would read, you discover that I wrote/quoted:
    Kathleen Carroll, AP's executive editor. "Journalists have always had relationships with people that others might find unsavory," she said. "We're not in this to choose sides, we're to report what's going on from all sides."
    Now she may not be an American, but my bet is that she is. Sailor - So he helped two Arab reporters... And your point is???? Dadler - This is from the third link:
    American journalists, he said, spend their days piecing together scraps of information from the Iraqi reporters to construct a picture, albeit incomplete,
    So there you have it. The profession that is sworn to accuracy and balance admits that it cannot provide it because it is having to use uncertain/unknown sources yet wants us to believe it knows what it talks about. Nonsense. They don't and they admit it. Also from the second link:
    The military in Iraq has frequently detained journalists who arrive quickly at scenes of violence, accusing them of getting advance notice from insurgents, Lyon said. But "that's just good journalism. Getting to the event quickly is something that characterizes good journalism anywhere in the world. It does not indicate prior knowledge," he said.
    Of course it indiates prior knowledge. et al - I understand that the press doesn't desire to be shot at, and I don't blame them. But if it comes with the job they have to do it, or be considered not doing the job. Plainer - Quit calling yourself a reporter and come home.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#10)
    by soccerdad on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:38:10 AM EST
    yes reporters, come on home. PPJ and his propaganda office will keep us informed as they sit in their offices and just make crap up. PPJ go back on your meds.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#11)
    by soccerdad on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:40:34 AM EST
    The real reason he is being detained, IMO, is that he has a lot of info about American actions in Fallujah and Ramadi. So its just keeping another voice of dissent and 1st hand experience quiet.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    SD - Go back on my meds? My, what an intelligent comment. Do you have many like that? I mean that was a real zinger. Been reading Capt'n Willie and his Whiz Bang again? Of course if you want to speculate:
    Document ISGQ-2005-00026108.pdf dated July 25 2000 is a report from an Iraqi Intelligence officer to different Iraqi Intelligence Directorates talking about information provided to them from a trusted source that works in the Associated Press (AP). The information is about the formation a newly formed UN weapons inspectors team called UNMOVIC.
    Link Now, since he supposedly came late on the scene, that may not be him. But, I think a reasonable person would say the military has every right to suspect every journalist that comes from the ME, and for that matter, the world. And yes, that includes the US.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 03:34:54 PM EST
    The military said
    EXactly, all the military has done is "said", no proof, no charges, no trial, just an illegal detention. Only unAmericans believe in locking someone up w/o proof or a trial.
    But, I think a reasonable person would say
    You would never have a clue about what a reasonable person would say; you believe in secret prisons, torture, violating the GenCons, no trials and illegal wars based on lies.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#14)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 04:50:09 PM EST
    I think a reasonable person would say the military has every right to suspect every journalist that comes from the ME, and for that matter, the world. And yes, that includes the US.
    No reasonable person I know wants to give the military the unquestioned authority to imprison somebody forever on the basis of an accusation. In other words, how could you be any more wrong? How would a falsely accused individual ever leave prison if not given the opportunity to dispute the charges in a fair setting? It's this sort of thinking that leads to torturing prisoners.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 05:19:24 PM EST
    This current attitude from the press will, and must continue. It will be sad - no, it will be one more step on the path to a totalitarian state - if freedom of the press is not impacted by those who are of the press. Perhaps anyone who thinks that the press should only be permitted to report "approved" news and should be arrested and jailed indefinitely without charges can explain how this makes the US different from these countries. ---edger

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 06:23:42 PM EST
    This current attitude from the press will, and must continue. It will be sad - no, it will be one more step on the path to a totalitarian state - if freedom of the press is not impacted by those who are of the press. Perhaps anyone who thinks that the press should only be permitted to report "approved" news and should be arrested and jailed indefinitely without charges can explain how this makes the US different from these countries.

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 08:15:39 PM EST
    et al - If you venture into a war zone, don't be surprised if bad things happen, That the US AP folks are now depending on locals is established by the article. So the errors and misinformation in their reporting is self admitted, but yet defended. These are true members of the ME generation. My career. My social standing. etc, and etc...

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#18)
    by Sailor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 09:25:25 PM EST
    If you venture into a war zone, don't be surprised if bad things happen
    But it's not a war zone, it is a country that has had free elections and an elected gov't.
    That the US AP folks are now depending on locals is established by the article.
    Uhhh, so is the US, what's your point?
    So the errors and misinformation in their reporting is self admitted, but yet defended.
    Provide links, and show how that is on a par with the US invading because bush relied on error and misinformation to to start the war.
    These are true members of the ME generation. My career. My social standing. etc, and etc...
    While ppj brags about how he's profited from bush's tax cuts. Talk about me, me, me, ppj is willing to have other people kill iraqis and Americans so his retirement is 'safe' (safe from what I never understood, but he'll kill you just in case his lifestyle might be endangered.)

    Re: Detaining the Press in Iraq (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Sep 20, 2006 at 06:47:45 PM EST
    Everything that I read that has an AP byline is pro right wing anti union pro Bush, pro big business and so naturally pro war. Hiring foriegn correspondents probably improves the profit picture. In my opinion they are the United States version of Pravda. All that said AP are definitely not making friends unless the reporter can be shown to be some kind of an operative harmful to the war against Islam. Then the WH can do some more liberal press bashing after they have finished torturing but then of course we do not torture. It is just good fun like what W and his evil father Cheeney and step child Rumsfeldt did at their frat houses. Probably some farting, lots of guys naked making pyrimids and so on. Not so sure they had dogs snapping at their genitals but something happened to these silver spoon in mouth babies that left them slightly sub human. If they wanted they would have shot him just like they have so many other journalist. Why did'nt they? This is different but who knows how. Maybe Hussein was just trying to tell the story with pictures. If we had not seen the pictures of My Lai and the napalmed girl we would still be in Viet Nam. No doubt those kind of compelling photos have been taken of Iraq but we are not seeing them.

    Detaining the Press in Iraq | 19 comments (19 topical)