- BIG NEWS:
- Magazines
- |
- NBC
- |
- ABC
- |
- Brian Williams
- |
 |
||
In March of 2007, three American soldiers detained four suspects in Iraq. They were supposed to take them to a detainee housing area. But instead, the first sergeant in the group approached another soldier in the group, Pfc Josh Hartson, and asked him whether he would have a problem "if we take care of them" instead. Following this exchange, the soldiers took the detainees to a canal and executed detainees.
The three sergeants who killed the detainees were rightly convicted of premeditated murder in a military courtroom in Germany and are serving long prison term sentences in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
In a CNN report by the company's "Special Investigation Unit," reporter Abbie Boudreau delves deep into the story. The report could have been an eye opening account of the details of this gruesome murder or its impact on how such incidents impact Iraqis' opinion of American soldiers, the vast majority of whom are trying to do the right thing and serve as best as they know how.
But instead, most of the report focused on tough rules and regulations regarding the gathering of evidence that soldiers must follow in order to keep the detainees imprisoned. This was the reason that the soldiers gave to justify their ugly act. But instead of challenging those claims, the CNN reporter seemed to take these excuses at their face value, delving into the army policy manual, which instructed the soldiers to gather a few pieces of evidence that could help keep the detainee.
She then grilled Brig. Gen. David Quantock, who now oversees detainee operations about the policy that required soldiers to offer some evidence for guilt every time they bring in a detainee. The last half an hour of the slanted report included lengthy and overly sympathetic interviews with the wives of the three convicted soldiers as they praised their husbands, calling them "heroes," and explaining how wonderful they were. The report showed the footage of three of one of the soldier's children and their ages. The reporter then read one of the soldier's letters from prison to his family out loud with the camera zooming in on the signature at the end of the letter, "Daddy."
The obvious problem with this report -- and most reports about the war, army, military and soldiers' conduct abroad -- is that it is heavily slanted toward the military. The report did not even mention the names of the captured detainees, and the reporter most certainly had no interest in the families of those detainees who were executed at the hand of these American soldiers without being charged with a crime and getting the chance to defend themselves before the rule of law. It was the most dehumanizing report I have seen in a long time that may as well have been made by the convicted murderers' defense teams.
Now compare this report with that of the recent murders of Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood a few weeks ago. Here was a soldier who -- while committed reprehensible and unjustifiable murders -- had long felt alienated in the military, expressed frustrations about being forced to go to Afghanistan and was mortified about the idea of having to kill fellow Muslims. He was also constantly discriminated against, isolated and treated not at a comrade and brother that he deserved to be treated. Once he found the following words written on his car: "Camel jockey! Get out of here!"
Based on the Sunday night report, one would think CNN may also be interested in learning about the deep causes of these murders committed by an American soldier. But of course, the cable news station has shown no such interest. Instead, they have brought up various experts to discuss semantics; should we call this an act of "terrorism" or just bloody murders committed by an extremist Muslim who wore white arab clothes, prayed five times a day, talked to an extremist mullah a lot, and oh by the way, his name was Hasan?
Of course the soldiers who killed the Iraqi detainees would come up with justifications for their premeditated murders. That's what murderers do! There is absolutely no reason for "the most trusted name in news" to give legitimacy to those excuses by spending a whole report to try to manufacture sympathy for convicted murderers without adequately explaining the consequences of such murders in the larger context of America's effort to get Iraqis on our side. The reality is the rules and regulations were put in place in 2005 after the pictures of pyramids made of naked Iraqi prisoners in Abu Gharib were leaked out. Our society must be clear in sending our soldiers the message that they are absolutely in no position to walk around in a country that we invaded in direct violation of international law and capture and execute people without turning them in with evidence on why they captured those individuals.
Perhaps the problem is deeper and hard to solve. After all, should the so called independent media call the soldiers on one side of the conflict "heroes" as CNN reporters often do any chance they get, especially on Veterans' and Memorial Days? How independent can we really expect any mainstream media reports to be on any story that relates to the military if it has already decided who is good and who is evil and often voluntarily acts as the privately funded public relations arm of the military?
Follow Sam Sedaei on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SamSedaei
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
It certainly is strange justice when people are shot in the head and murdered for lack of evidence.
Yes, Oliver, you can't be more correct in your assessment of how far we have fallen away from our ideals when major news outlets can't be counted upon anymore to provide an independent view for the American public of what is being done in our name in Iraq or any other place with our tax dollars. The media moguls have so sallied the everyday coverage of news that it simply isn't worth the time invested to view or read it unless one is monitoring it, as a critic.
Does anyone know the names of the men they killed?
One story reported that the names of the murdered were being withheld by the US military.
They don't count bodies and they don't name them either.
At least we know about these people even if we don't really know who they are. No thanks to CNN there. I guess that was not something their freedom of information request included.
If nobody had reported their killing and dumping they would have wound up uncounted and unreported - like alot of others dumped in drainage ditches and covered with dirt.
The CNN Reporters involved in seeking to validate the murders of the Iraqi prisoners appear to be
Scott Zamost, CNN Senior Investigative Producer
and
Abbie Boudreau, CNN Special Investigations Unit Correspondent.
Too bad that they appear to approve of the murders.
A story like this needs to give the names of the CNN reporters involved.
Does anyone know the names?
Never let facts get in the way of a good story is a media adage of long standing.
The report did not mention the names of the captured detainees because no one knows their names. The men were never reported missing.
Did the reporters attempt to talk to other Iraqi families who have lost loved ones, or did they use other methods to illustrate the Iraqi viewpoint of how it feels to be living in the middle of an occupation?
"How independent can we really expect any mainstream media reports to be on any story that relates to the military if it has already decided who is good and who is evil and often voluntarily acts as the privately funded public relations arm of the military?
Sam,
I have to admit that I started to watch the CNN report the other night, but couldn't stand more than just a few minutes. The tenor from the very beginning was obvious, so I am not surprised to learn that CNN didn't even bother to state the names of the victims or to give their families a proper hearing. Iraqi lives don't seem to count for much in the MSM. I have said this many times, but it bears repeating, that my family has all but given up on American broadcast/cable news; subscriptions to nwspps, maggies, while we find without much effort a whole world of real news in the alternative & international satellite media. Thank you for your analysis of the program I didn't watch.
sam...than
we all understand perfectly well that the vast majority of troops are serving with honor,class and bravery.ye
its part of the bigger meme of anyone involved in a war as being superhuman,and immune to the laws of humanity.
as in:any soldier is GI JOE,and all terrorists are evil supervillians who cant be contained by any maximum security prison.and if we even dream of bringing them onto american soil,they will immediately brainwash us all and spread their evil from sea to shining sea,while we are left helpless.
again,the msm has completely capitulated to the irrational hypocritical jingoism peddled by the hannitys and oreillys.s
Right or wrong, our military cannot win a war that is fought against an enemie who looks like and is living among the population
CNN is incapable of in-depth reporting. It's all about ratings. (Besides, Vanity Fair magazine covered these murders not long after they happened; nice that CNN waited until the trial to cover the incident--
Last week CNN had a series of reports in the morning about the upswing in militia activity since Obama took office. While the reporter actually tried to present a balanced view, some nitwit producer (probably the one who came up with the "Paula Zahn--a little bit sexy" promo) titled the series "Militias: Terrorists or Patriots."
Gosh, I wonder how the FBI agents who track these militia types feel about CNN suggesting these nutjobs might be patriots or the family members who lost relatives in the Oklahoma bombing by militia member Timothy McVeigh.
It seems to me that both you and Mr. Sedaei are far more biased than CNN.
Guess you mean that biased is asking the MSM to present a balanced picture. In addition it drives me up the way that like in the Ft. Hood incident, everyone is making judgements before all of the facts are. For example everyone jumping on the female officer saved the day, when in fact that was not what appears to be the case. But what can you expect from a public that appear to get their facts via the ticker tape appearing at the bottom of the TV screen.
I've had nothing but contempt for CNN as a "news" outlet since the Paula Zahn cheerleading contingent reported on the invasion of Iraq.
nailed it.
I watched the CNN investigative report you reference and came away from it with no question whatsoever that the soldiers involved were guilty of murder and received appropriate sentences for their crimes. That I have done so while still feeling sympathy for the extremely difficult situation they found themselves in and the pain their relatives are suffering seems to me to be a credit to the quality of the CNN report. Frankly I think the tone of your article is far more biased than the CNN report you are criticizing.
I had the same experience. Fanned.
I agree. The report was not perfect, but I thought they did a fairly nice job presenting a complicated situation. The lack of information about the detainees was frustrating, though obviously not CNN's fault given that the information does not exist.
It is telling that they didn't give the names of the victims - the victims of the murders.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
