Romper noticias | Foro | Noticias BRITÁNICAS | Noticias de los E.E.U.U. | Noticias del mundo | Noticias políticas | Noticias del Sci-Tech | Noticias de la guerra y del terrorismo | Noticias de los deportes | Multimedias | Fije el homepage

Viernes 1 de agosto de 2008
Discuta este informe en los foros de RINF >

Por Naomi Spencer | Cinco años de la ocupación sangrienta de los E.E.U.U. han visto crímenes numerosos contra humanidad revelar en Iraq. Han matado a millones de civiles iraquíes y herido, con millones hizo más en refugiados. Las ciudades antiguas, una vez que-vibrantes han sido destruidas por ataques aéreos y armas químicas. Los millares de iraquíes han encarcelado por los militares de los E.E.U.U. en condiciones barbáricas, y en muchos casos torturado. En realizar la ocupación, más de 4.400 personal-más militar de ellos Americano-ha muerto y los diez de millares se han herido.

Poca reflexión de estas realidades debe ser encontrada, sin embargo, en los medios de los E.E.U.U., particularmente en forma visual. La censura por militar-y uno mismo-censura por medios enchufe-es parte de un esfuerzo por la élite predominante de esterilizar la guerra y de mantener al público americano la obscuridad sobre su naturaleza verdadera.

Según lo destacado en un pedazo del 26 de julio en Tiempos de Nueva York, titulado Los “4.000 E.E.U.U. Muertes, y un puñado de imágenes,” muy pocas fotografías de la ocupación han goteado hacia fuera de los periodistas militar-encajados y han lanzado por los medios americanos. Los militares y la administración de Bush han impuesto reglas salvo las fotos de ataúdes bandera-cubiertos, así como la documentación de las muertes del campo de batalla en las cuales las caras, las filas, u otros identificadores son visibles.

Épocas las notas, “incluso los servicios conmemorativos para los soldados matados, una vez rutinariamente abiertos, están cada vez más de límites. Fotografiaron a los Detainees extensamente en los años de la guerra, pero el departamento de la defensa, citando a presos las' derechas, ha parado recientemente esa práctica también.” Han prohibido a los periodistas también de lanzar demostrar de las imágenes qué los militares juzgan para ser sensible información-cualquier cosa de una imagen del armamento americano a las consecuencias de una huelga insurgente.

Periodistas entrevistados con por Épocas dicho que incluso reglas más apretadas impusieron el año pasado, requiriendo el permiso escrito de soldados heridos antes de que sus imágenes podrían ser utilizadas, eran casi imposible satisfacer en el caso de soldados seriamente heridos y que morían.

“Mientras que encaje las restricciones permiten que las fotografías de soldados muertos sean una vez publicada familia que han notificado a los miembros,” Épocas comentados, “en la práctica, los militares han exigido la recompensa en las ocasiones raras que han aparecido tales imágenes.”

Claramente, ningunas de estas restricciones tienen cualquier cosa hacer con los “presos' enderezan” o respecto por las familias de soldados caídos. To the contrary, the military’s intent is to obscure from the American people the hellish reality in which prisoners and US soldiers alike have found themselves. Indeed, while employing typical military jargon and doublespeak, Defense Department officials make no secret of the subject: free and easy access to photographs, print journalism, and first-hand accounts of the war are a “vulnerability” for US imperialism because it fuels antiwar sentiment in the population and within the military.

The Times article invites a comparison of Vietnam war-era photojournalism and coverage of the present occupation in Iraq: “If the conflict in Vietnam was notable for open access given to journalists—too much, many critics said, as the war played out nightly in bloody newscasts—the Iraq war may mark an opposite extreme: after five years and more than 4,000 American combat deaths, searches and interviews turned up fewer than a half-dozen graphic photographs of dead American soldiers.”

Significantly, the Times was able to document only five published images of war dead that had been released by embedded journalists. In four of those cases, the paper notes, “the photographer was immediately kicked out of his or her embed following publication of such photos.”

The number of embedded journalists has been cut drastically in the last five years. At the time of the invasion in 2003, 770 journalists accompanied US forces. Currently, according to the newspaper industry journal Editor & Publisher, only a dozen embedded journalists remain, about half of whom are photographers. Even if they were granted complete liberty to witness and document the occupation, the idea that 12 journalists could adequately cover the operations of 150,000 troops around the country is absurd.

The first “disembedded” photojournalist documented by the Times was Stefan Zaklin, then of the European Pressphoto Agency, who was barred from working with the US Army after publishing a photo of a dead US officer in Fallujah in 2004. In 2005, Chris Hondros of Getty Images was “kicked out of his embed” with an Army unit after photographing a young girl, screaming and covered in blood, after US soldiers killed her parents.

Two Times journalists were barred in January 2007 after the paper printed a photo of a fatally wounded soldier. The soldier died within hours of being wounded, but the military insisted that the Times reporters violated rules by not getting his written permission to use his image.

The most recent barring of a photojournalist followed a devastating suicide bombing June 26 in Anbar province. The bombing killed 20 people, including three Marines.

The photographer, Zoriah Miller, who goes by his first name, was among the first on the scene after the blast. He documented scattered body parts, pools of blood and debris, and wounded and shocked survivors.

According to a July 17 piece in Photo District News, a photography industry magazine, Zoriah was told to “stop photographing, delete his memory cards, [and] surrender his cameras”.

Three days after family members had been notified of the Marine deaths, Zoriah published the images on his independent website. The next morning, the Times reported, “high-ranking Marine public affairs officers demanded that Mr. Miller remove the photos. When he refused, his embed was terminated.”

Zoriah wrote on his blog that officers claimed the military “would not allow even the pants or shoes of an injured or killed Marine to be depicted in images.” On July 3, the photographer was handed a letter claiming he had violated embed rules by publishing photos that revealed “tactics, techniques and procedures witnessed during operations,” and provided “information on the effectiveness of enemy techniques.”

“Specifically, Mr. Miller provided our enemy with an after-action report on the effectiveness of their attack and on the response procedures of U.S. and Iraqi forces,” Marine spokesman Lt. Col. Chris Hughes told the Times. Another Marine officer, Captain Esteban Vickers, waxed indignant to the paper: “Mr. Miller’s complete lack of respect to these marines, their friends, and families is shameful… How do we explain to their children or families these disturbing pictures just days after it happened?”

Zoriah countered: “The fact that the images I took of the suicide bombing—which are just photographs of something that happens every day all across the country—the fact that these photos have been so incredibly shocking to people, says that whatever they are doing to limit this type of photo getting out, it is working.”

“It is absolutely censorship,” the photographer told the Times. “I took pictures of something they didn’t like, and they removed me. Deciding what I can and cannot document, I don’t see a clearer definition of censorship.” In an earlier interview with PDN magazine, Zoriah commented: “They embedded a war photographer, and when I took a photo of war, they disembedded me. It’s as if it’s okay to take pictures of them handing lollipops to kids on the street and providing medical care, but photographing the actual war is unacceptable.”

Indeed, the claim that documenting casualties aids the enemy is crafted to stifle information about almost any situation. It has also been used to justify the military targeting of independent journalists and media outlets that document American atrocities. The US bombings of independent Arab media Al-Jazeera offices in Kabul, Afghanistan, and in Baghdad served to quash critical coverage of the wars.

Photographers have been increasingly held back from combat zones. James Lee, a photojournalist embedded with a Marine unit, told the Times that he was thwarted by commanders from entering Basra during the massive air assault and raid offensive in April. He was told the military brass “did not want any Western eyes down there.”

As with Fallujah in 2004, the sieges on Basra and Sadr City constituted major war crimes. Over the course of a few days, hundreds of civilians and militiamen were slaughtered. During the siege in Basra, hospital and health officials were prohibited from speaking to independent journalists. American media dutifully reported Pentagon talking points, referring to killed civilians—even when children were counted among the dead—as “terrorists,” or at best “collateral damage.”

Such suppression of the truth is an expression of the larger crime of the war. More fundamentally, however, military censorship and the self-censoring of the media reflect the immense and growing militarization of American political life.

Discuss this report in the RINF forums >

Have Your Say: Military censorship of the war in Iraq

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

This entry was posted on Friday, August 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am and is filed under Contributions & Guests, War & Terrorism News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan Alternative-Energy Art BBC Big-Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CIA Climate-Change Cover-Up Cults Culture Database-State David-Hicks David-Ray-Griffin Democrats Demos Drugs Education Entertainment Environmental News EU False-Flag FBI Fraud Free-Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health-News History ID-Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel Law Marches MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police-State Propaganda RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Secrecy Security Slavery Space Sports Spying Stephen-Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony-Blair Torture TV UK-News UN USA-News Video Voting Warfare White-House Wolfowitz World-News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version