iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Harry Shearer

Harry Shearer

Posted: April 8, 2010 12:40 AM

What Isn't News: NATO's Coverup of Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan

What's Your Reaction:

I'm old enough now to remember a time -- check this, kids -- when journalism meant, more than anything else, telling you what was new (hence, news). Hence my curiosity over this week's focus on the admittedly haunting WikiLeaks video, while the national media totally ignore the story of NATO's remarkable coverup of the killing, presumably by special ops forces, of two pregnant women and an 18-year-old girl in a seemingly botched Afghanistan raid.

The story was broken by a Times of London reporter, interviewed at length here by Mark Colvin of Australia's ABC radio. The most crucial detail: after being shot, the victims appeared to have borne signs of attempts to carve out the bullets; similar attempts were made on the walls of the house where the killings took place. Prior to the raid, music was heard as a party to celebrate a newborn's naming was winding down at 4 in the morning, even though NATO characterized the house as a Taliban hideout (the Taliban notoriously ban music).

Key fact: the event memorialized in the WikiLeaks video happened three years ago. The event discussed in this interview happened this year, in the war we're currently being told is the good war, the necessary war.

Why so little mention of the coverup of civilian killings? Occam's razor is our friend. Unlike the Iraq killings uncovered by WikiLeaks, there's no video of the Afghanistan killings.

Lesson to all: turn off those robot cameras and you're cool.

 

Follow Harry Shearer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/letwits

 
 
  • Comments
  • 217
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
04:49 AM on 04/12/2010
Well, I gotta hand it to ya, Harry; you were more right than I thought. They got around to asking Gates about "the video" yesterday. And it proved easy for him to play it down as not Abu Ghraib. With such comparisons, who could think that we now have "our eye on the ball"?

BTW: Your Father Knows Best bit was one of the best political satires I have heard in - perhaps forever.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Harry Shearer
09:10 AM on 04/12/2010
Thank you.
09:46 PM on 04/11/2010
The media ignores this incident because it has the flavor of criticizing the troops - first they go to a place where a celebration is being held. Then they ignore the fact that there is music - a sign that possibly there is no reason to attack the place.

Then they attack and kill the innocent people in the house, including two pregnant mothers that have 16 children between them. Then they dig all bullets out, which means they know they have done something they want to hide.

Then the US and NATO pretend that the house was full of insurgents.

This has the feeling of bad behavior on the part of our troops, not stand-up guy types. Sooo, the media does not want to touch it. You just can not make our troops look anything but brave, good, caring guys who do not blast away just because they are there.

The thing that bothers me most about this and prior incidents is the constant lying that our government does when communicating what is going on in the war to us. To me that means the government KNOWS it is doing something wrong, but is too ***** you fill in your favorite word ***** to face up to it and just say, Hey, its necessary - if it is.
08:32 PM on 04/11/2010
I was in Europe last week and saw a report on CNN International. I'm guessing domestic CNN didn't run it. Surprise, surprise.
photo
LogicalMathMan
Math, Finance, English, Business Instructor
07:09 PM on 04/11/2010
I am surprised that the term 'collateral damage' was not used to justify this unfortunate incident. Also, might there be other such instances where a reporter was not present, and was similarly not disclosed?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Itsbeenalongday
Eliminating poverty is smart business
06:56 PM on 04/11/2010
Beautiful Harry. On one hand you are talking about the truth and the news and the next you offer a softening of the blow. The killings were carried out by US forces, not this nebulous NATO that provides an umbrella over all contingents. Why did you not make that distinction?

My countries forces are in NATO in Afghanistan and it wasn't them.
08:40 PM on 04/11/2010
Your county's forces are in Afghanistan because if they were not there America would not let your companies do business in the United States. Like Finland, if they did not send at least ten soldiers there, Nokia wouldn't be doing business in America. I mean, basically . . .
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Harry Shearer
12:10 AM on 04/12/2010
The terminology is that of the Times reporter, who refers repeatedly in the linked interview to NATO troops and NATO officials...
06:48 PM on 04/11/2010
Harry, you pose a question but you don't answer it. Doesn't the media ignore the events you mention because they are so profoundly embarrassing and shameful for America and undermine everything, once again, that fairytale books tell about America, and show how sordid this goody two-shoe nation really is. A bloody kinder and gentler nation, indeed, who goes around the globe preaching democracy and human rights and liberty and freedom and what not, circles the world with a thousand military bases, and is bent on lording it over, and so forth. The sharp critical media don't talk about these little details, either, do they?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyworry
Proud Liberal
05:39 PM on 04/11/2010
I suppose the murder of the innocent babies being loaded into the back of pick-up trucks were kept away from the publics eyes as well when we occupied Iraq. Those people didn't know what hit them. As much as I dislike the wars we're involved in; the "key word" here is WAR.

I was also around to witness the Viet-Name war and the nightly news reports and video footage that were broadcasted in my home every evening. Peter Jennings was reporter at the time...the bodies burning, dead dismantled bodies....it called a detestable war and in wars there are unwanted fatalities.
06:56 PM on 04/11/2010
"in wars there are unwanted fatalities" - ah, I already feel so much better . . . I've been under the impression that the Iraq war was a totally unwarranted aggression on a nation that had never attacked the US . . . who were the wanted fatalities . . . and how about the medieval siege of Iraq that preceded the present war in which half a million children were starved to death (by America) - I guess such unwanted fatalities take place when you're executing a siege . . . get a life, man (woman) and start thinking!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyworry
Proud Liberal
07:12 PM on 04/11/2010
What's wrong with some of you people today? Do you actually read or are you hung over today? The babies loaded into pick-up trucks were stated as a fact that we had no business in IRAQ. If you follow anything that happened when we "occupied" that nation where hundreds of thousands of men, women and children were slaughtered you would have known that it happened.

The "REAL" war was in Afghanistan and the fatalities that I was commenting on were pertaining to this article. The Taliban uses all types of methods to assist them in the murder of our servicemen and women and pregnant women and children are of no exception. In my opinion the death of civilians will happen because we are at War in that country. Get a life yourself MAN.
03:44 PM on 04/11/2010
"I am sure that I never read any memorable news in a newspaper. If we read of one man robbed, or murdered, or killed by accident, or one house burned, or one vessel wrecked, or one steamboat blown up, or one cow run over on the Western Railroad, or one mad dog killed, or one lot of grasshoppers in the winter, -- we never need read of another.... To a philosopher all news, as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea." -- Henry David Thoreau, Walden
03:44 PM on 04/11/2010
Before we blow journalism's past out of proportion with regard to its commitment to the truth, we should remember that the press always comes out in favor of whatever war the administration is brewing. Groundbreaking coverage during Vietnam was groundbreaking because no one else was doing it. Stories that cast the war in a bad light were rare.

Some quotes to ponder:

"I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time, whereas the accounts they have read in newspapers are just as true a history of any other period of the world as of the present, except that the real names of the day are affixed to their fables. General facts may indeed be collected from them... but no details can be relied on." --Thomas Jefferson

"I deplore... the putrid state into which our newspapers have passed and the malignity, the vulgarity, and mendacious spirit of those who write for them... These ordures are rapidly depraving the public taste and lessening its relish for sound food. As vehicles of information and a curb on our funtionaries, they have rendered themselves useless by forfeiting all title to belief... This has, in a great degree, been produced by the violence and malignity of party spirit." --Thomas Jefferson
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ConfuciusSay-
Aglets: their purpose is sinister.
11:48 AM on 04/11/2010
As soon as Bush announced the first war, I knew this kind of thing was going to happen. It's the vile nature of the business of war.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
06:35 AM on 04/11/2010
Not to change the subject Harry but every major republican law maker in the country was in NOLA this last week. Did anyone ask them why they weren't voting for legislation that would help NOLA? Help the wetlands? This is what I mean when I tell you you are are shouting at the wrong party about NOLA. The GOP can get you everything on your wish list from ACE standards raised, to funding for your specific issues. All it has to do is free one member to vote on any piece of legislation and it can be added in. Directives for ACE, funding, one vote on any bill. We have military aprop bills coming up. Why isn't Bobby Jindal demanding that the safest republican in his state add in the funding and ACE directives you need. It is a one day negotiation with Nancy Pelos? Because the GOP has made a strategic decision that the needs and wants of their constituents are less important they stopping Obama. That is a choice to abandon you. Make them pay for it harry. Be angry at the right people.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Harry Shearer
09:58 AM on 04/11/2010
In case you didn't notice, the Repubs here weren't discussing policy, they were "rallying the faithful". When Bush was President, my attention (re: the needs of the NO situation) was focused on him and the majority Repubs in Congress. Now, the Dems "control" executive and legislative branches, hence my focus on them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
01:12 PM on 04/11/2010
I noticed Harry, what I don't understand, is why you don't see that the entire state government and state delegation is republican. Being in control of the house and senate doesn't preclude people who aren't in control from getting, passing, proposing legislation does it? Your desire to let the entire GOP off the hook for the failing of the levees, for the rebuilding, for the entire ACE issue/wetland issue, is mind boggling. Any GOP rep could get exactly want you want if they were willing to cast 1 single vote for legislation. David Vitter, by backing any bill in the senate, could add exactly want you want with no objection from the dems. He could just do it. But he would have to vote for the legislation and the last year+ should have shown you that the people you defend or ignore in the GOP don't care about their constituents.

They simply don't give a dam. If they did they would have added what you want since 90+ percent of the delegation is republican. Who is representing LA and NOLA during this democratic presidency and control of congress. Mary Landrieu? That's is it. She is the only member of the delegation that has any responsibility in your eyes? No other elected official has any responsibility to NOLA or LA? Or, if they do have responsibility, how about going to their meeting and protesting their lack of, well, anything for the last 18 months.
04:42 PM on 04/10/2010
This is what's both frightening and reassuring about the age we live in. Big media may not do it's job, but we the people finally have access to tools and distributions methods that let us still try to get the story out. Menken once bitterly commented that "Power of the press belongs to he who owns one." Today, that's all of us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jak466
05:13 PM on 04/10/2010
Yes, and we can all write inacurate and biased views of events.

Just saying
photo
Libertarian09
Anti War Socialist with a taste for freedom
01:43 AM on 04/11/2010
But somewhere in the mass of information is the truth. Just takes a little bit of effort, but you have to be willing to consider both sides of an issue and do a little thinking
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Corvid
01:29 PM on 04/11/2010
I worked for 30 years as an editor at several newspapers, including some with Washington bureaus and foreign correspondents. I can tell you that the most consistent phenomenon I witnessed in countless news meetings was the groupthink that led to the exclusion of the most remarkable stories--such as the one Harry describes here--in favor of the blandest and, in many cases, propagandistic garbage possible.

I.F. Stone used to say he loved to read the Washington Post because he was always curious to learn which page they decided to put the page 1 stories on. This was certainly the case with Walter Pincus' pre-Iraq war stories that were skeptical of all the unsubstantiated WMD claims, stories that ended up way back in the A section.

Wherever you look in American life, we have immensely powerful institutions set up with all the wrong motives: transnational corporations legally beholden only to the most venal short-term interests of shareholders; too-big-to-fail banks bound to the sacred mission of obscuring financial risk till it can offloaded onto taxpayers; a military devoted to aggrandizing itself regardless of the cost in American and foreign blood and treasure; a political elite dedicated body and soul to the perpetuation of all the above, and mainstream media whose dirty little unspoken mission is to please them guys.

So, what's new? My question: Exactly how do we go about sweeping every last one of these goddam bastards into the dustbin of history?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:39 PM on 04/11/2010
Thanks for your post and the remembrance of I.F. Stone. Your image of the broom of righteousness sweeping away the dirt is unfortunately unrealistic. Unlike dirt, detritus, and other nasty things that fall to the floor and so invite a sweeping, the individuals that you mention have either risen to the top and out of reach, or are so intertwined with our day to day lives that a good sweeping would take all of "us" with it.
I mention this because so many who post at HuffPost seem to think that a sense of what's right combined with attitude and impatience is enough to change the course of things. Sadly, it is not.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Harry Shearer
05:44 PM on 04/11/2010
Don't worry, China will take care of that task.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KingCujo
10:52 PM on 04/09/2010
Harry, I read your blogs first. Thanks for your contributions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LavishTantrums
Lawyer, Writer
10:37 PM on 04/09/2010
In this age of information abundance, the responsibilities of the media have shifted from choosing to report or not report to choosing to HARD MARKET the story with adrenaline-infused, aptly
09:50 PM on 04/09/2010
Mr. Shearer - as heinous as war crimes are, I'm writing to urge you to broaden your view of the dynamics of Afghanistan in one key way.

The "Taliban" is, at this point, a catch-all phrase to describe myriad anti-government groups -- some, merely accidents of geography. A fraction of the Taliban are the hardcore ideologues - Mullah Omar and the like; others are just drug traffickers, others are groups connected to warlords fighting for their own chunk of territory; others are villagers just aligning themselves with whichever of the above is least likely to get them killed.

The case that you cite sounds awful - I'm not disputing the possibility of a war crime if those acts are true.

But to assume that a group has NOT committed actions against US troops or Afghan forces simply by the fact that they listen to music, is terribly, terribly oversimplified.

Since I hate anonymous postings to blog sites (including my own), information about me can be found on www.mpnunan.com, or trueslant.com/mpnunan. I'm a journalist who has covered Afghanistan and other fronts in "the war on terror."

The best book I've read on the subject lately is Gretchen Peters' "Seeds of Terror."

Respectfully,

MP Nunan