delete the photographs or we will delete you

[133724]

NEW YORK In the past day, there has been wide media coverage of an official report on the slaying of Afghan civilians by U.S. forces early last month. The Afghan human rights commission concluded that American marines overreacted to a bomb ambush with excessive force, peppering civilians and vehicles with machine-gun fire in attacks that covered 10 miles of road and left 12 civilians dead, including an infant.

Gaining much less coverage are the report's comments on a nearly-forgotten aftermath of the apparent crimes, carried by E&P and other media outlets at the time: the U.S. military's forced "deletion" of images taken by Associated Press cameramen and others. A freelance photographer working for The AP and a cameraman working for AP Television News said then a U.S. soldier deleted their photos and video showing a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death about 100 yards from the suicide bombing. The AP lodged a protest with the American military.

The military defended their action in a letter to the AP later, stating that images gathered by “untrained people” might “capture visual details that are not as they originally were." But the Afghan commission concluded that there were "not sufficient grounds to justify the substantial curtailment of the right to freedom of expression, especially as the loss of information caused by these actions was directly harmful to the successful undertaking of a genuinely impartial investigation."

<snip>

There are also several reports of journalists being hindered from accessing the area and being forced to delete all pictures and videos already taken. 7 Journalists, representing 8 different media outlets complained that US Marines and Afghan forces confiscated their equipment to delete any images stored and forbid them to continue their work even outside of the security perimeter area around the VBIED site. There is some evidence that two of the journalists breached the security perimeter around the site, but all those interviewed agreed that the interference with the media went far beyond just these two cases.

In several cases, US Marines expressly threatened
journalists, with one cameraman reporting that he was told to “delete the photographs or we will delete you” (AIHRC interview, 6 March 2007). Another journalist said a soldier told him through a translator that “if any of this incident is released or shown on any media then the reporter will face the consequences” (AIHRC interview, 5 March 2007).


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003571803

[annabanana]

1. Well THAT'S pretty fucking fucked up!

I wonder how often this kind of thing is happening? Has America no shred of it's vaunted "freedoms" left?

[Double T]

6. Unfortunately, a lot. And NO.

Human decency has become a thing of the past.

[LiberalFighter]

2. What did McCain and Pence say about the atmosphere in the area?

[hobbit709]

3. This line

“capture visual details that are not as they originally were." gets me. In other words, their cover story might not match the visual evidence.

[Kagemusha]

8. That's about as honest an explanation as we're gonna get really.

Marines just do not intend to go to prison, or let their buddies go to prison, for shooting up a bunch of "ragheads" or whatever the current term is. Wiping out evidence is therefore a patriotic act and an expression of loyalty to one's band of brothers, not a crime... to them. Does anyone really think their superiors frown on this practice? No evidence, no scandal, the thinking goes. No scandal, no heads roll. Like their own.

[LiberalFighter]

4. And those Marines say they are fighting for our freedom?

I wish there was a way to easily identify the good troops and the bad troops.

I don't like the idea of all troops being labeled bad but I don't like the idea of all troops being labeld good either when it's not true.

[annabanana]

5. From the article:

"After the incident, the US military defended the forced deleting of images, arguing that their publication could have compromised an investigation"

Why would those images not have been EVIDENCE in those investigations? How could destroying evidence not hinder the investigation? I can almost understand a temporary hold on the publication, but not the destruction of the pictures...

[BuyingThyme]

7. Bush is turning the US military against the US people.

What else do people need to know?

[frogcycle]

10. yes, you are right

he's systematically replaced the top brass, gets "loyal bushies" in charge, and then the "we vs they" mentality trickles down rapidly. you can bet your ass that negative "spin" about the press and the public gets disseminated frequently - look at the Air Farce Academy's takeover by the xtian jihadists. Look at the episode with the USAttorney in Minnesota, quoting bible verses to the staff. There HAS to be a strong element of "gang mentality" being encouraged.

[liberal N proud]

9. Another similarity to Nazi Germany

When do we start burning books?

[Schema Thing]

11. I'm sure those pictures where seen then

and the press agencies (as well as the US military) have them in their possession. Perhaps this is the reason the General in charge took such decisive action to get those marines out of the country.


The press is in a hard spot... if they publish the pictures, their photographers are in more danger in the future.

[babylonsister]

12. This really is a war no one wants us to see, or know about, except

for all the 'good' things happening there. This is truly disgusting, yet we don't hear about it from the media whores.

[NobleCynic]

13. ...

Arm the journalists?

[In Truth We Trust]

14. IMPEACH NOW!

[EFerrari]

15. An al Jazeera cameraman has been in Gitmo for FOUR YEARS.

Cameras are now WMD.

[Subdivisions]

16. GODDAMNIT I'M SO FUCKING SICK OF THIS SHIT!!!

[IDemo]

17. Were they given the cameras/media cards back?

If so, the images were not actually deleted. Just as when you 'delete' a file from your pc, it has only been flagged as non-readable. The data is still there, at least until that area of memory has been over-written with a new image (or file). Our local camera shop offers the 'undeletion' service, but it looks like one can also do it themselves, given the right tools.

http://lifehacker.com/software/data-recovery/resurrect-deleted-photos-from-your-digital-cameras-memory-card-171222.php