Setting the record straight on Haditha
Perhaps when the MSM is done lecturing Marines on the rules of war they could share with us the rules of fundamental fairness and objectivity.
Just asking.
They'll just have to stop taking drugs long enough to become coherent.
h/t cube
From Townhall.com
By Mary Katharine Ham
When I worked at a newspaper, my fellow reporters and I made mistakes.
Sometimes those mistakes were on the front page of the paper; sometimes tucked away on B7 between the obits and the county's largest legume. Sometimes they were mispelled names and misplaced box scores; sometimes misused facts and mishandled reputations.
But no matter the nature of the mistake-- its size or its import-- the correction always went in the same place. Second page of the A section, bottom right-hand corner. It was policy, and the policy had the unfortunate consequence of usually making the correction of a mistake less prominent than the mistake itself.
Such is the nature of news coverage on all levels, and one of the most valuable contributions the new media and blogs can make to that news coverage is to highlight corrections that would otherwise be overlooked in their little corner of A2.
A couple of weeks ago, spurred by Congressman John Murtha's assertion that Marines in Haditha had killed civilians "in cold blood," the media promptly rushed to judgement, topping every story with Murtha's cold-blooded soundbite. When word leaked from Pentagon sources that there might be murder charges in the case, the media ran with the "maybe murder" story.
Because no one had yet been charged, and no one was leaking the Marines' side of the story, many became concerned that the slanted coverage might affect the fair treatment and presumption of innocence to which American servicemen are entitled. One of those people was Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms, a former Marine lawyer who the Washington Post quoted out of context in its eagerness to get an Abu Ghraib reference into the story.
This week, the media is backing off of its original tone, and it's time to highlight corrections so they don't end up being relegated to the back of the paper and the back of people's minds. So, I give you the Top 3 things to remember about Haditha that the press would like you to forget.
1. Oops, Time After Time
In the first media report on a "possible massacre" at Haditha, back in March, Time magazine reported that "a day after the incident, a Haditha journalism student videotaped the scene at the local morgue and at the homes where the killings had occurred. The video was obtained by the Hammurabi Human Rights Group, which cooperates with the internationally respected Human Rights Watch, and has been shared with TIME."
Because the incident was under investigation and no one could comment on it, Time used that videotape to bolster the accusations of civilian massacre. Now, buried at the bottom of page four of that article is this correction:
In the original version of this story, TIME reported that "a day after the incident, a Haditha journalism student videotaped the scene at the local morgue and at the homes where the killings had occurred. The video was obtained by the Hammurabi Human Rights Group, which cooperates with the internationally respected Human Rights Watch, and has been shared with TIME." In fact, Human Rights Watch has no ties or association with the Hammurabi Human Rights Group. TIME regrets the error.
Without the connection to "internationally respected Human Rights Watch," the origin of the video and the motives of the journalist involved become much more questionable.
But that's not the only piece of photographic evidence called into question by Time corrections.
In a subsequent Time story , we have this correction:
In the original version of this story, TIME reported that "one of the most damning pieces of evidence investigators have in their possession, John Sifton of Human Rights Watch told Time's Tim McGirk, is a photo, taken by a Marine with his cell phone that shows Iraqis kneeling — and thus posing no threat — before they were shot."
While Sifton did tell TIME that there was photographic evidence, taken by Marines, he had only heard about the specific content of the photos from reports done by NBC, and had no firsthand knowledge. TIME regrets the error.
Well, I would hope they regret that one. When a major national news magazine claims there is specific photographic evidence of American Marines killing civilians while they were praying and it ends up being wrong, that correction should be as prominent as possible, especially when those Marines have not yet been charged or faced trial.
Over at Sweetness and Light, a blogger takes a look at Time's young journalist source and finds that the journalist was not exactly the green go-getter Time had described.
Why start a human rights group if you want to remain anonymous? And why did Time pretend their source was young? Why did they pretend he had no involvement with Hammurabi? (When in fact he is its founder.)
But that is just the start of the many questionable aspects of Thabit's accounts.
Bear in mind that this "budding journalism student" waited until the next day to videotape this alleged atrocity, which supposedly happened on his very doorstep.
Note that this same "budding journalism student" and self-proclaimed human rights watcher did not bother to turn over his video to a media outlet or a real human rights group from November 2005 until March 2006. A four month delay.
That's how eager they were to make sure such a crime is never again
repeated.
2. Context Come Lately
There was more going on in Haditha that day than just the IED explosion that killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas and apparently sparked the fighting that left so many dead.
Capt. James Kimber offers his story:
But that day, at about the same time, Iraqi insurgents attacked all three Marine companies patrolling in the Haditha area--one of them commanded by Kimber. He said he could hear over his radio the shots being fired during a running gun battle in Haditha.
"They weren't just Marine weapons. You can tell from the sound," he said...
Kimber's recollections provide a valuable backdrop to the events last November, a period during which Marine units were encouraged to escalate their use of force in dealing with insurgents, according to a Marine colonel with knowledge of operations in that area.
A source I've talked to, who is involved in the potential defense cases for these Marines, said that the IED that took Terrazas' life was just the beginning of a coordinated insurgent attack on four Marine squads they knew would respond to the first IED attack. The cluster of attacks ended up hampering relief efforts and injuring about a dozen Marines.
As the situation developed, the Marines at the initial ambush site were isolated for a period of time in this hostile city and they had every right to fear for their lives. A group of about 15-20 foreign fighters were believed to be in Haditha that day, supplemented by local insurgents. Knowing that 6 Marines had been surrounded and killed in Haditha before help could reach them just three months before, the isolated Marines had to fear the worst as they responded to the first attack.
Haditha was a hotbed of insurgency in November of last year. It's important to remember the frequency and intensity of attacks these Marines were facing. There's also another side to the story, and the accused are beginning to tell it through their lawyers:
A sergeant who led a squad of Marines during the incident in Haditha, Iraq, that left as many as 24 civilians dead said his unit did not intentionally target any civilians, followed military rules of engagement and never tried to cover up the shootings, his attorney said.
Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, told his attorney that several civilians were killed Nov. 19 when his squad went after insurgents who were firing at them from inside a house. The Marine said there was no vengeful massacre, but he described a house-to-house hunt that went tragically awry in the middle of a chaotic battlefield.
3. The Nature of the Enemy
Something terrible happened in Haditha. The day ended with one Marine and 15 Iraqi civilians dead. But we don't know how it happened or what the reasons were.
What we do know is that it is the exception to the rule to find American Marines wantonly murdering civilians. It is rather the rule, however, for insurgents to put those same civilians-- women and
children-- in harm's way.
That is what Terrazas' father says happened that day in Haditha:
Exactly what happened that day remains unclear. Miguel Terrazas' father, Martin, said the Marines his son fought with told him that after the car bomb exploded the Marines took a defensive position around his son's battered vehicle. Insurgents immediately started shooting from nearby buildings, and the insurgents were using women and children as human shields, Martin said he was told.
The Marines shot back because "it was going to be them or" the insurgents, Martin said of what his son's fellow Marines briefly described to him.
It wouldn't be the first time terrorists have shown such disgusting disregard for the lives of children.
We do not know what happened in Haditha on November 19, 2005. When two military investigations and any trials that result are complete, it will become more clear. If Marines are guilty of atrocities, they will be punished severely.
In the meantime, rely on alternative media and bloggers like Mudville Gazette , Sweetness and Light , California Conservative , and this bunch of informed milbloggers to keep level heads about the accusations.
The mainstream media spent a couple of weeks throwing around the "cold blood" and "maybe murder" stories. Now that they're backtracking, it's our job to make sure new corrections and less damning facts don't get lost in the corner of page two.
Mary Katharine Ham is the former Senior Writer and Associate Editor for Townhall.com.
Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/MaryKatharineHam/2006/06/12/200752.html
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
Huh... With a policy like that, it's almost as if the MSM could make up whatever they want for shock value, while technically telling the truth by correcting it later in a fashion that almost no one would pay attention to.
Of course, that is after the selective "fact" reporting...
And they go on about the "culture of corruption."
Comment by Brooke— 2006/06/14 @ 11:45 AM — (Reply)
Use civilians as their shields. If the enemy kills some of them it is just great PR.
If the enemy fails to kill them, well they stage it anyhow.
Like the latest "murder" by the Israelis on Gaza beach.
We did see all MSM outles cry 'bloody murder' whey they thought it was a stray Israeli shell.
Did you see any apologies after it had been proven it was the stock pile of Qassam rockets, which exploded behind Palestinian human shield?
No, of course not.
Comment by MissingLink— 2006/06/14 @ 12:13 PM — (Reply)
We still don't know all the facts and probably never will. My guess is that a lot of real bad guys were slaughtered in that event. Guerrilla war-fare participants never use uniforms and always hide amongst civilians--being the cowards that they are.
Comment by Florian Guerrero— 2006/06/14 @ 12:54 PM — (Reply)
what actions are we defending dugg? We are defending their rights of due process, Not the alleged behavior that has not been proven yet. SEE THE DIFFERENCE.
You seem bent on convicting them despite evidence that the MSM may have made this up and that the jihadists themselves may have perpertrated this.
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/06/16 @ 10:35 AM — (Reply)
just to clarify the real issue at this point (until there is a trial) is defending the right of due process and if there is evidence to the contrary that these allegations did indeed happen shouldn't they have a right to air them, just as it appears the MSM aired things that they are now correcting.
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/06/16 @ 10:37 AM — (Reply)
Saddam Hussien himself used civilians to shield his bombs and war-factories from the coalitian attacks.
Comment by Florian Guerrero— 2006/06/14 @ 12:56 PM — (Reply)
Oops, Time After Time...thts there motto and this post is brilliant!
Comment by Angel— 2006/06/14 @ 02:14 PM — (Reply)
ML - I know it's not the first time. e.g. Al Dura
the rest - using human shields is brave don't you know
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/06/14 @ 02:22 PM — (Reply)
alright, elbro - you and yours hop in - y'all are comin' home with nancmom!
Comment by nanc— 2006/06/14 @ 05:51 PM — (Reply)
p.s. - we need the dependants now that i am being worked to death...
Comment by nanc— 2006/06/14 @ 05:52 PM — (Reply)
Don't you just love how corrections to new stories favoring our forces never get publicity?
Comment by Always On Watch— 2006/06/15 @ 12:29 PM — (Reply)
It's almost as if the MSM are the "insurgents" of the media, huh?
Comment by Brooke— 2006/06/15 @ 02:19 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2006/06/15 @ 05:30 PM — (Reply)
well dugg you are wrong because in america it's innocent until PROVEN guilty. why is it wrong for them to defend themselves of these allegations? why is it that people insist they are guilty before they are tried? want to talk about despotism dugg? that's what you would have if you convict these fellows before their day in court. nobody would defend their actions IF they are guilty, but you want to see them hang because you hate Bush and the war and that is NOT a good enough reason to throw out due process.
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/06/15 @ 07:48 PM — (Reply)
and dugg if they are found to have committed these crimes as I have said before they should be held accountable. That's the difference between us and our enemies. We will never be like them because we are willing to take a hard look at ourselves and hold people accountable. BIG DIFFERENCE my friend.
Are you willing to hold the pussies of jihad accountable?
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/06/15 @ 07:52 PM — (Reply)
a better analogy dugg would be the MSM is acting like the KKK, lynching the troops without a day in court
If you want lies keep on reading watching and listening to the MSM
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/06/15 @ 08:42 PM — (Reply)
Ah, the joys of a public school education! Dumb them down to the point that they can't think critically! Just answer questions on a standardized test! Don't think, accept, go back to watching sitcoms, we know what we're doing, don't ask questions, go back to sleep!
Comment by the merry widow— 2006/06/16 @ 12:40 AM — (Reply)
Ooops!
Good morning and G*D bless!
tmw
Comment by the merry widow— 2006/06/16 @ 12:42 AM — (Reply)
That covers it! The MSM is so ready to push the idea that only our country can do wrong, that they have already tried, convicted and executed these soldiers in the kangaroo court of the media.
I will reserve judgement until the facts are known. If the soldiers are guilty, they should be punished accordingly.
However, if they are innocent, the MSM has already done the damage, haven't they?
The worst part is, when the terrorists commit an atrocity, which they are very up-front about, the MSM claims it is 'cultural' or because we are opressing them. Why is it that the only ones who seem to do wrong are Americans?
Comment by Brooke— 2006/06/16 @ 02:34 AM — (Reply)
Of course, most of the ones they said flew planes into the WTC are all alive so... guess they didn't murder anyone.
I thought the real issue was defending their ALLEGED behaviour. Wether it happened or not - and maybe it didn't (but mountains of evidence suggests it did) you guys don't seem willing to draw a line that you won't cross. And all I'm asking is - What action of our people won't you defend? Defending their right to a trial is one thing - defending their actions and spinning it that the Iraqi's do the same thing (so it must be allright) is sick.
Comment by Dugg— 2006/06/16 @ 04:15 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2006/06/16 @ 04:29 AM — (Reply)
My, my, I'm impressed, not. I'm not exactly stupid either. As for tv, retch! Be aware that intelligence doesn't measure logic or common sense.
tmw
Comment by the merry widow— 2006/06/16 @ 09:52 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2006/06/16 @ 11:35 AM — (Reply)
Ralph Peters has a nice article over at Real Clear Politics. He points out that ..........Bush's visit forced the media to briefly stop whining about the phony issues of Haditha and Gitmo and to acknowledge that Iraq has a free, functioning government. But for ambitious journalists, inventing or exaggerating American misdeeds will always be more rewarding than telling the truth: Zarqawi's death was written off, while Haditha was written up.
First, the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi forced the alleged "massacre" at Haditha off Page One, frustrating media attempts to manufacture a sequel to Abu Ghraib. Then, President Bush made a midnight ride to Baghdad to put one very important pair of boots on the ground. He didn't hug the airport, either, but crossed the city to the Green Zone for a face-to-face with Iraq's new prime minister. It was a brave and inspiring act. And a worthy one.
Strategically wise, good for Iraqi and American morale - and, yes, politically savvy - the president's trip blew apart the media's effort to recover from their loss of Zarqawi.
It also shut down their bid to refocus our attention on the suicides of three poor, deprived terrorists at Guantanamo - thugs we're expected to mourn as victims of our inhumanity. Hate-America journalists just can't get a break these days.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/06/16 @ 12:15 PM — (Reply)