'The Canadians try to kill everybody'

[Colin Parkinson]

Considering the standard of reporting these days, this sort of stuff is more the norm than the exception. The only reasons they worded the article the way they did is:

A) Sloppiness bordering on incompetence.

B) Hidden agenda to increase support to have the troops withdrawn.

C) Blatant need to generate sales by using inflammatory statements in the hopes people will buy the paper to read the story, regardless of the harm done to the nation, the people and our partners in the mission.

D) All of the above

 

[muskrat89]

I know it's the US and Iraq, but Michelle Malkin writes about some similar shenanigans at www.michellemalkin.com today, that seem apropos to mention"

Rumors and reporting in Iraq
By Michelle Malkin  ·  November 30, 2006 10:39 AM
***scroll for updates...NYTimes blogger Tom Zeller Jr weighs in...plus: bloggers note the significance of the capture of Mazer Al-Jubouri, aka the Baghdad Sniper, and his group...103pm Eastern...Curt has posted the AP's non-response response...***

I've been following up with CENTCOM on the Associated Press/sketchy sources brouhaha. Just heard this morning from Michael B. Dean, Lieutenant, U.S. Navy MNC-I Joint Operations Center, Public Affairs Officer:

From CPATT PAO:
BG Abdul-Kareem, the Ministry of Interior Spokesman, went on the record today stating that Capt. Jamil Hussein is not a police officer. He explained the coordinations among MOI, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Defense in attempting to track down these bodies and their joint conclusion was that this was unsubstantiated rumor.

He went on to name several other false sources that have been used recently and appealed to the media to document their news before reporting. He went into some detail about the impact of the press carrying propaganda for the enemies of Iraq and thanked "the friends" who have brought this to their attention.

AP did attend the press conference.


I asked for more details, and Lt. Dean provided a summary and the first half of the press conference transcript. Some other interesting info here in addition to the false sources comments:

Ministry of Interior Weekly Press Conference Thursday, November 30, 2006
By Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf Al-Kenani
Ministry of Interior spokesman

Press conference synopsis:

1. Media, especially satellite news channels, must adhere to
responsible practices:

a. MOI is monitoring coverage, and will insist on corrections to
false reports.

b. Unnamed sources should not be used. Two recently named sources
do not work for MOI. Contact MOI PAO for official information.

c. Rumors are rampant, and media should be careful to check with
official sources about information to avoid spreading false rumors.

2. MOI succeeded in a number of operations against terrorists in
Baghdad.

a. The Baghdad Sniper was apprehended, and information gained from
him led to the arrest of 30 others in his organization.

b. Two unauthorized "courts" that had issued death fatwas were
broken up.

c. A kidnapping cell, including one that raped a young girl, was
arrested.

Statement:

This press conference will cover MOI operations from Nov. 23 to 29, 2006.

Before we start the weekly briefing, I have some points to highlight and to remind the brothers that work in the media, especially the Satellite television Channels. We meant by this note to stress the ministry of interior's intention that we believe in free press and truthful press, in order not to confuse what the free press presents and the misleading media show, where the latter's intention is to make the situation in Iraq worse than what it is.

The press release issued by the ministry of interior has three main points: First, a warning to the satellite TV. Channels continue broadcasting false news, and based on that we have formed a special observation room to monitor these TV stations; the purpose of this unit is to determine the fabricated and false news that hurts and gives the Iraqis a wrong picture that the security situation is very bad, when the facts are totally different.

After the monitoring process, we will contact those TV stations by presenting them with the mistakes and errors they committed by broadcasting such false news, hoping they will correct these false reports on their main news programs. But if they do not change those lying, false stories, then we will seek legal action against them.

For example, we have some of the respected news outlets that deal with news fast and have a relation with many TV channels and the media in general, who distributed a story quoting a person called Jamil Hussein. Afterward, we searched our sources in our staff for anyone by this name-- maybe he wore an MOI uniform and gave a different name to the reporter for money. And the second name used is Lt. Maythem.

However, all of you know that the ministry of interior has a large public affairs office and its official spokesman, and we are ready to answer any questions you may have. Therefore, you should contact MOI PAO for all your needs to get real, true news. Based on that, we strongly deny any relation with those two names. In order to serve you better and strengthen the relationship with MOI, do not take statements that have no meaning and do not represent any official. We would like this note to be helpful to you and any statement made by those persons to be ignored.

The second subject is rumors. The ministry received in a week more than 12 cases of claims, one stating 50 killed were there, 200 kidnapped here, 30 corpses found there etc. And when we dispatched our forces and investigators to the locations, we found nothing.

On this note, I would like to thank some of the brothers in the media who are cautious and take the extra step to make sure the news he gets is correct or not, by contacting the ministry to verify any news through us that they hear or receive. Not only (do we reply), but we also give them more detail than they expected, and we hope others will follow suit. Also, we ask our people, please do not take any news or give it credibility, except from a well-known source with a name and an address that is part of the security ministries, etc., such as a minister or police station commander. Or if it is from the MOD or MOI, the name of the officer, his rank, his unit, etc. It is not enough to say "a source from the ministry of interior."

Doing otherwise, you will end up helping the spread of the rumors and make them reality, even thought it was a false rumor. This rumor business -- if a large issue, it will take a long time to cover it, but the purpose of the rumors is to disrupt life and make the security apparatus busy with other things than its main tasks. We will end up following rumors instead of hunting terrorists and criminals.


The third subject is, this week the strikes we made against the al-Qaeda terrorist organization in Baghdad were many and very strong in Baghdad. Before my arrival to this press conference, I was informed that one of the three who were just captured or detained is Mazer Al-Jubouri, aka the Baghdad Sniper, and his group. He admitted many things that are very important and very dangerous and our forces used this information about his network and conducted raids in the past 24 hours and detained 30 terrorists.

Those terrorists executed several explosions in Palestine and Beirut streets, and the New Baghdad area. He also admitted that their base is in Diyala province, which supplied them with money, weapons and explosives. They are now under investigation and we think this cell or network has been dismantled.

This week also, we dismantled what are called "courts" in northern and southern Baghdad, and detained the two persons who issued fatwas to kill the people. Our force dismantled what is called the Omar network, this criminal network that used to exercise its criminal activities in southern Baghdad. And they admitted many things about other terrorist networks and our forces are pursuing them now, as well as other networks for kidnapping.

One of them, we regret, kidnapped a girl and used narcotics on her and raped this little innocent young girl. We captured those criminals and the little girl is receiving medical attention. This is not Iraqis' culture. Just look how far down in debasement they have traveled. With regret, I told you that, because MOI activity does not hold in the media the position it deserves, and also to show the great sacrifice by MOI this week.


***

Curt at Flopping Aces, who got the ball rolling, noted last night:

[T]he AP could solve all of this with one fell swoop by producing Capt. Hussein at the MoI during the press conference with his bonafides. I have a feeling that won[']t be happening tho.
Apparently not.

Sharon Tosi Moore, an officer in the United States Army Reserves currently serving in Iraq, writes at The American Thinker:

Sunni "eyewitnesses" confidently denounced the Shiite-dominated government for their inaction. There were bold claims that the Iraqi Army stood by and did nothing as this horrifying crime happened. People around the world braced themselves for the spectacular reprisals that would surely come from the Sunni. The press practically salivated at the bloodshed (and glorious headlines) that would be forthcoming.
A winning situation all around.

Except, well, except for the tiny little detail that the incident most likely never happened. A week has gone by and no charred bodies were produced. No dramatic funeral parades, with all the attendant wailing and gnashing of teeth, occurred. Not one photo. No grand reprisals. Not even any speeches (and it is hard to imagine Iraqi religious leaders miss an opportunity to make speeches). Just a few remarks from the Iraqi government, largely ignored by the U.S. press, that all reports showed that that particular district had been quiet, and pleading the Iraqi people for calm.

No one thought to question this unusual divergence from normal protocol.

The gullible press swallowed the initial claims whole. Of the major news sources, only TIME Magazine used the word "reportedly" in their headline. Besides, there are always new and dramatic stories of gore and bloodshed in Iraq and no one has the time to check their sources carefully or to go back and correct erroneous reports.


Scott Johnson at Power Line and reader Bill Maron point to a closer look at AP International Editor John Daniszewski.

***

The problem of reckless dependence on foreign stringers is not just relegated to AP. Or Reuters. It's everywhere, as Neil Munro documented earlier this spring even before the fauxtography scandal erupted.

Patterico has lifted the lid on a related controversy over at the Los Angeles Times involving a disputed Ramadi airstrike that deserves more attention than it's getting. We spotlighted the story today at Vent.

Check out the show and links.

***

Reminder: Bruce Kesler's got a contact list for the AP Board of Directors.

Tom Zeller Jr. at the New York Times blogs the latest developments and is still left wondering:

The one thing that remains unclear, though, is this: The Associated Press said in its story yesterday that Mr. Hussein “has been a regular source of police information for two years and had been visited by the AP reporter in his office at the police station on several occasions.” The military, meanwhile, seems to suggest that Mr. Hussein is not a police officer, nor a civil servant in the employ of any Iraqi agency.
So who IS Mr. Hussein?


Well, isn't there a NYTimes reporter in Iraq who can find out?

Allah notes this from Zeller's blog post and comments:

Author Tom Zeller notes that the Times itself covered the “burned alive” incident this way:
In the evening, a resident named Imad al-Hashemi said in a telephone interview on Al Jazeera, the Arab news network, that gunmen had doused some people with gasoline and set them on fire. Other residents contacted by telephone denied this.
Emphasis mine. I hadn’t heard that before.

He’s also suspicious about how/why an e-mail sent by Centcom to the AP made it so quickly onto conservative blogs. Er, because Centcom shared it with Flopping Aces after he made an inquiry about Jamil Hussein? Surely America’s one-stop shopping center for leaks isn’t tut-tutting at us over this, is it?


Surely, Zeller seems to be.

Patterico has "third-way" musings about Jamil Hussein.

The Belmont Club and Classical Values are watching.

Dan Riehl has been digging into the AP's witness claims that the burned-alive Sunnis were members of the al-Mashadani clan from Hurriya.

Maybe the NYTimes will follow, eh, Mr. Zeller?

***

I mentioned that the non-AP-related info from the press conference struck me as interesting. Ever-alert and illuminating Rusty Shackleford underlines the significance of the information on the captured sniper. Go read.

Matt at Blackfive adds: "Will CNN report that Juba the Baghdad Sniper (a group or cell of snipers - Juba is probably not a real person) is toast?"

 

[Cloud Cover]

At the risk of repeating myself:

1. I think the Taliban scored.  They threw out the audacious and totally unfounded statement that Canadians are worse than Americans because they (we/ you fellows) are indiscriminate killers of innocent villagers, etc.  The remark got published, with neither context nor challenge.  It will, without doubt, aid the large and growing anti-war/anti-CF wing (it’s well beyond being a fringe, much less a lunatic fringe ).

2. The reporter and the Globe and Mail became unwitting agents of the Taliban (because they are ignorant, careless or both).  Instead of reporting on the enemy – a legitimate and useful thing to do, in my opinion, they allowed themselves to be conduits for enemy propaganda.  They (Smith and the Good Grey Globe) then became part of a larger story: Information Warfare in Afghanistan.  To that extent Smith and the Globe both failed, in so far as I understand journalistic mores and ethics.

++1,1

BTW, notice how this did not make it into the Canadian main stream media?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=500838&ObjectID=10413099

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.


Human rights


Disembowelled and murdered for teaching girls

Thursday November 30, 2006
By Kim Sengupta


GHAZNI - The gunmen came at night to drag Mohammed Halim away from his home, in front of his crying children and his wife begging for mercy.

The 46-year-old schoolteacher tried to reassure his family that he would return safely.

But his life was over.

He was partly disembowelled and then torn apart with his arms and legs tied to motorbikes. The remains were put on display as a warning to others against defying Taleban orders to stop educating girls.

Halim is one of four teachers killed in rapid succession by the Islamists at Ghazni, a strategic point on the routes from Kabul to the south and east which has become the scene of fierce clashes between the Taleban and United States and Afghan forces.

The day we arrived an Afghan policeman and eight insurgents died during an ambush in an outlying village. Rockets were found, primed to be fired into Ghazni city during a visit by the American ambassador a few days previously. But, as in the rest of Afghanistan, it is the civilians who are bearing the brunt of this murderous conflict.

At the village of Qara Bagh, Halim's family is distraught and terrified. His cousin, Ahmed Gul, shook his head. "They killed him like an animal. No, no. We do not kill animals like that. They took away a father and a husband, they had no pity. We are all very worried. Please go now, you see those men standing over there? They are watching. It is dangerous for you, and for us."

Fatima Mustaq, the director of education at Ghazni, has had repeated death threats, the notorious 'night letters'. Her gender, as well as her refusal to send girls home from school, has made her a hate figure for Islamist zealots. "I think they killed him that way to frighten us, otherwise why make a man suffer so much? Mohammed Halim and his family were good friends of ours and we are very, very upset by what has happened. He came to me when the threats first began and asked what he should do. I told him to move somewhere safe. I think he was trying to arrange that when they came and took him."

The threats against Mushtaq also extend to her husband Sayyid Abdul and their eight children. "When the first letters arrived, I tried to hide them from my husband. But then he found the next few. He said we must stand together. We talked, and we decided that we must tell the children, so that they can be prepared. But it is not a good way for them to grow up."

During the Taleban's rule she and her sister ran secret schools for girls at their home. "They found out and raided us. We managed to persuade them that we were only teaching the Koran. But they spied and found out we were teaching algebra. So they came and beat us. Can you imagine, beating someone for teaching algebra."
- INDEPENDENT

 

 

[The Bread Guy]

Considering the standard of reporting these days, this sort of stuff is more the norm than the exception. The only reasons they worded the article the way they did is:

A) Sloppiness bordering on incompetence.

B) Hidden agenda to increase support to have the troops withdrawn.

C) Blatant need to generate sales by using inflammatory statements in the hopes people will buy the paper to read the story, regardless of the harm done to the nation, the people and our partners in the mission.

D) All of the above

I'm going to be more generous than usual, and say only SOME of the above, with the proportions depending on the media outlet and reporter involved... 

 

[bilton090]

MSN speak?! 

I think personal attacks here are unwarranted. Furthermore, this thread is dealing with a journalist who interviewed members of the Taliban and the ethics of such an interview. I would think this is beyond strictly military matters. And yes, I am not in the military. As far as strictly military subjects go, I will, and I think have, only participated in areas where I can make somewhat of an informed contribution. If I havent, I apologize. However, I do not think you need to be in the military to have an opinion on international deployments, or geopolitical strategy in general.

      Informed contribution ?, Beyond Strictly Military Matters ?    WTF !

 

[warspite]

Considering the standard of reporting these days, this sort of stuff is more the norm than the exception. The only reasons they worded the article the way they did is:

A) Sloppiness bordering on incompetence.

B) Hidden agenda to increase support to have the troops withdrawn.

C) Blatant need to generate sales by using inflammatory statements in the hopes people will buy the paper to read the story, regardless of the harm done to the nation, the people and our partners in the mission.

D) All of the above

D...D... I pick D

 

[GO!!!]

D...D... I pick D

+1.

The media exists to sell advertising - full stop. If having tea with torturers, rapists and murderers who kill their countrymen and spread enemy propaganda will further that lofty goal, they'll do it in a heartbeat.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

In my years of Search and Rescue we found that the media reporting got roughly 40% of the facts of the incident wrong, despite having access to knowledgeable people in a friendly environment. Sometimes this was not the fault of the reporter who often  phoned the story in, had it transcribed and then hacked apart by the editor, with much of the errors the fault of the transcribers and editors. This was pre-blackberry and wireless, so now the reporter has few layers between themselves and the published stories.

I have met some wonderful reporters who truly cared about their stories and the quality of them, I have also met a large number of indifferent reporters (the majority) and some truly awful ones. I have personally kicked news cameras off our base for being insensitive to the victims and families.

Currently I enforce a Federal Act, sometimes I have to approve or deny projects that I have a strong personal opinion on, I do not have the luxury of allowing my personal views to influence my review or decisions. What I see of the media is that they often allow their or their companies opinions influence the story. I wouldn't mind so much if the media outlet came out and said: "We support the Liberals, CPC, Green or Rhino party" and gave up the pretense of being impartial. This is sort of the UK media model, most outlets there are quite open to expressing their preference.

This past week it's painful oblivious that the media is pro-Liberal, the overwhelming media coverage was sickening, the central Canada based media outlets clearly miss the "Good old days" with the Liberals and it clearly indicated that Harper is correct in ignoring this group as they have no impartiality. that fact that they pretend to is unprofessional and fraudlent.

 

[Petard]

At first I thought Graeme Smith's "Canadians try to kill everybody" story was simply leaving it to the reader to see through the veil of what the Taliban were really trying to do, and trusted most would know that it was a BS propaganda story.

Then this story came out from the same author:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061201.dutch02/BNStory/Afghanistan/

Now that story definitely needed to be put in context, and he didn't do it. Smith is trying to suggest we use the Dutch approach since it would appeal to the Canadian sensibilities. Fortunately some in the readership know how different the two AO's are and pointed it out, and what a hollow point Smith was making. But even then there are a fair number of the comments that agreed with Smith's suggestion. Maybe his paper thought this was a way to show balanced reporting, as if to say "see, we're showing you the other side, its not all about Canadian Soldiers".

For awhile I thought the Globe and Mail were being about as balanced as could be expected of a media outlet in Canada, but now it seems their editors are being swayed by the populists view that we're being too "American" in our approach in Afghanistan. Christie Blatchford where are you?

 

[George Wallace]

At first I thought Graeme Smith's "Canadians try to kill everybody" story was simply leaving it to the reader to see through the veil of what the Taliban were really trying to do, and trusted most would know that it was a BS propaganda story.

Then this story came out from the same author:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061201.dutch02/BNStory/Afghanistan/

Now that story definitely needed to be put in context, and he didn't do it. Smith is trying to suggest we use the Dutch approach since it would appeal to the Canadian sensibilities. Fortunately some in the readership know how different the two AO's are and pointed it out, and what a hollow point Smith was making. But even then there are a fair number of the comments that agreed with Smith's suggestion. Maybe his paper thought this was a way to show balanced reporting, as if to say "see, we're showing you the other side, its not all about Canadian Soldiers".

For awhile I thought the Globe and Mail were being about as balanced as could be expected of a media outlet in Canada, but now it seems their editors are being swayed by the populists view that we're being too "American" in our approach in Afghanistan. Christie Blatchford where are you?

And anyone interested in our discussion on this article can cross-reference it at Doing it the Dutch way in Afghanistan.

 

[Petard]

Thanks George, I'm tracking it

My main point is there seems to me to be a growing shift in opinion about the Afghanistan mission, and the G & M, which tended to support the mission at 1st, now is beginning to question if not the mission then the approach being used.
I'm suggesting these two articles were thrown out there as they were to do exactly that, question the Canadian approach and, I'm not sure of course, I suspect the editorial staff supported what was being said in them, as is, and didn't want to add any context.

 

[George Wallace]

I did find the short Bios at the end of the article to be of interest.  Bios on several Taliban personalities is always a good piece of intelligence and useful to some.