andrew


Conditions Worsen at Guantanamo bay

From Amnesty International

In a new report published today (5 April), Amnesty International says that 80% of detainees at the US military prison at Guant’namo Bay in Cuba are being held in solitary confinement, often in harsh and inhumane conditions.

The report, published days after UK resident Bisher al-Rawi was returned from Guant’namo after over four years in detention – some of it in solitary confinement, calls for an end to the routine use of extended solitary confinement by the US authorities and for independent medical experts to be allowed to examine the prisoners.

Amnesty International has long called for the entire camp to be closed, with plans for unfair ‘military commission’ trials to be abandoned. Last month the organisation published a 103-page report condemning the military commissions as a ‘travesty of justice’.

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said: ‘The entire process at Guant’namo is a travesty of justice, but we have particular concerns over the widespread use of solitary confinement in harsh conditions at the camp.

‘With many prisoners already in despair at being held in indefinite detention on a remote island prison, some are dangerously close to full-blown mental and physical breakdown after years of solitary confinement.

‘The US authorities should immediately stop pushing people to the edge with extreme isolation techniques and allow proper access for independent medical experts and human rights groups.’

There are approximately 385 men held at Guant’namo Bay and, after an apparent hardening of US operational detention policy in January, around 300 of these are now being held in three units with minimal contact with other prisoners or even prison guards. These units – known as Camp 5, Camp 6 and Camp Echo – are comparable to so-called ‘super-max’ high security units in the United States.

Unlike mainland super-max prisoners, however, Guant’namo detainees are held indefinitely as ‘enemy combatants’, face either no trial at all or an unfair one, have no family visits and no independent expert examinations.

The Red Cross, the only independent monitoring organisation allowed to inspect the detention facilities at Guant’namo, has described conditions at Camp Echo as ‘extremely harsh’. Prisoners are kept in their windowless cells for 23 or 24 hours a day, and – in the absence of any natural light whatsoever – fluorescent lighting is kept on 24 hours a day. Meanwhile, Camp 6 has been described by one detainee as a ‘dungeon above the ground’…

The full press release is available here and the report (pdf) can be downloaded here

The AI petition calling for the return of all the British residents held at Gauntanamo can be signed here

View with comments

Lessons learned: Iran’s release of British prisoners

csmonitor discusses the consequences and lessons from the anticipated British detainee release.

“The release of 15 British naval personnel Wednesday, coming after several days of intensified negotiations, was welcomed in Britain as evidence that a “softly, softly” approach could prove effective with Iran ‘ as it did in a similar prisoner crisis three years ago….”

Go here for the full article

View with comments

Lancing the Spin

The best available scientific estimate of deaths due to the invasion and occupation of Iraq is 655,000, as of July 2006. Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, wrote in Comment is Free earlier this week about the misuse of scientific advice by the government, and its attempts to discredit the research published in his journal.

A report on the BBC FOIA request, that revealed the government machinations in detail, can be read here.

View with comments

Media Training for Young Central Asians

This training is run by people I know and trust, and seems an exciting development in teaching media skills to young Central Asians and push the bounds of information and free comment. For interested potential participants, more information in Russian is here.

Craig

Listen (mp3)

Read (Word Doc)

View with comments

British Intelligence Directly Implicated in CIA Kidnapping and Detention Site in Poland?

RawStory claim to have knowledge of a British intelligence memo demonstrating that the UK both: had knowledge of CIA illegal detention sites in Poland; and urged that sources in Poland keep information on CIA activities quiet.

POLAND – The CIA operated an interrogation and short-term detention facility for suspected terrorists within a Polish intelligence training school with the explicit approval of British and US authorities, according to British and Polish intelligence officials familiar with the arrangements.

Intelligence officials identify the site as a component of a Polish intelligence training school outside the northern Polish village of Stare Kiejkuty. While previously suspected, the facility has never been conclusively identified as being part of the CIA’s secret rendition and detention program.

Only the Polish prime minister and top Polish intelligence brass were told of the plan, in which agents of the United States quietly shuttled detainees from other holding facilities around the globe for stopovers and short-term interrogation in Poland between late 2002 and 2004.

According to a confidential British intelligence memo shown to RAW STORY, Prime Minister Tony Blair told Poland’s then-Prime Minister Leszek Miller to keep the information secret, even from his own government…

For the full article go here

Blairwatch provides additional analysis and comment.

View with comments

The Timing of Accusations?

On the morning of the same day when the British marine forces were detained, British sources were busy briefing on Iranian involvement in attacks in Southern Iraq. Obviously, just a coincidence.

It is about one year since the last, failed, attempt by the UK to implicate Iran in attacks on their forces in Iraq.

The Independent 5th Jan 2006: “MPs and soldiers’ families have demanded an explanation from the Government after a U-turn over claims that Iran was complicit in the killing of British soldiers in southern Iraq. Britain has dropped the charge of Iranian involvement after senior officials had repeatedly accused the Tehran regime of supplying sophisticated explosive devices to insurgents. Government officials now acknowledge that there is no evidence, or even reliable intelligence, connecting the Iranian government to the infra-red triggered bombs which have killed 10 British soldiers in the past eight months.”

Shaped charges formed the core of the allegations last year – this time they are only claiming reports from local sources and clearly state they have no proof. As again, it is perhaps the timing of the accusations that is of most interest.

View with comments

London 7/7 – The Story is Far From Over

Rachel from North London has been setting the scene for coming media coverage of new information on what was known and done about the London 7/7 attacks, both before and after. She is also calling on readers to sign the Downing Street petition for a public enquiry into the events.

“And then I started to follow a trail. I read, I researched, I found out more and more and more. I talked to people. I listened. I made it my business to know, as much as I could find out. Why? I didn’t want to let anyone down, by not being as briefed as I could be.

But what I found out was devastating. First, whispers, rumours. Then, facts, and I checked, and followed up, and I sat with what I knew, and sometimes I cried. And I bit my lip and waited…

It was, and is, not just about a failure of intelligence, but a failure to use intelligence. A failure of imagination. A misguided belief in a ‘Covenant of Security’, that was never security; that was a lie.

And for me, it is about the screaming I hear, still, in the darkness, when I sleep.

That might have been avoided, knowing what I know, what they knew, what we will all know, soon. And so I wait, and I write, and I wish, for what is coming soon…”

This is of course not the first attempt to build public and political momentum for an enquiry. However, it sounds as if April will probably see a new chapter in our understanding of what happened and why.

View with comments

In Iraq, public anger is at last translating into unity

“For four years, Britain and the US have aimed to encourage sectarianism, but ultimately they will fail to divide the country”

By Sami Ramadani in The Guardian

Sami Ramadani was a political exile from Saddam’s regime and is a senior lecturer at London Metropolitan University

Two catastrophes have been in the making since President Bush and Tony Blair launched their war on Iraq four years ago. Both are epoch-making, and their resolution will shape regional and world politics for decades to come.

The first catastrophe relates to the political and moral consequences of the war in the US and UK, and its resolution is the urgent task facing the American and British peoples. The second concerns the devastation wrought by the war and subsequent occupation, and the lack of a unified political movement within Iraq that might overcome it.

Bush and Blair are in a state of denial, only offering us more of the same. They allegedly launched the war at first to save the world from Saddam’s WMD, then to establish democracy, then to fight al-Qaida’s terrorism, and now to prevent civil war and Iranian or Syrian intervention.

Four years after declaring “mission accomplished”, the US government is sending more combat troops to add to the bloodbath – all in an effort to impose its imperial will on the Iraqi people, and in the process plunging its own country into its deepest political-moral crisis since Vietnam. Under heavier pressures, Blair, the master of tactical subterfuge, is redeploying Britain’s forces within Iraq and Afghanistan, under the guise of withdrawal. He has long known that British bases in Basra and the south were defenceless against attacks by the Sadr movement and others.

Bush, on the other hand, is escalating Iraq’s conflict and threatening to launch a new war, this time against Iran. It is hard not to presume that what he means by an exit strategy is to install a client regime in Baghdad, backed by US bases. The Iraqi people will not accept this, and the west should be alerted to the fact that US policy objectives will only lead to wider regional conflicts, rather than to full withdrawal.

In attempting to achieve their objective, the occupation forces will escalate their war with the resistance forces within and north of Baghdad, as well as clashing with the popular Sadr movement in the capital and the south. The latter is, despite the ceasefires and political manoeuvrings, Iraq’s biggest organised opposition force to the occupation.

Meanwhile, the destruction of Iraq continues apace and its people are subjected to levels of sustained violence unknown in their history. Overwhelmingly, the violence is a direct or indirect product of the occupation, and the bulk of sectarian violence is widely known in Iraq to be linked to the parties favoured by Washington. For example, forces in control of the various ministries, including the interior ministry, clash regularly.

It is not difficult to see how this violence is linked to the occupation, for it has spawned a multitude of violence-makers: 150,000 occupation forces; 50,000 and rising contracted foreign “mercenaries”; 150,000 Iraqi Facilities Protection forces, paid by the Iraqi regime, controlled by the occupation and engaged in death-squad activities, according to the prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki; 400,000 US-trained army and police forces; six US-controlled secret Iraqi militias; and hundreds of private kidnap gangs. Pitted against some or all of these are tens of thousands of militias and resistance forces of various political hues. In total there are about 2 million actively organised armed men in the country. There are about 3,000 attacks on occupation forces every month, while tens of thousands of Iraqis languish in prison, where torture is widespread and trials considered an unnecessary formality.

The success of the occupation’s divide-and-rule tactics and their insistence on basing the new political and military structures on sects, religions, and ethnicities is threatening the communal cohesion that was once the country’s hallmark. This is a factor in the absence of a united movement, capable of leading the struggle to end the occupation. The occupation has sown divisions where there were none and transformed existing differences into open warfare.

And is it any wonder that the long-suffering Iraqi people find themselves at an impasse. Try catching your breath after decades of brutal dictatorship, 13 years of economic sanctions and four years of an obscene war .

But even in the absence of a unified anti-occupation front, the resistance of the Iraqi people has managed to thwart the world’s greatest military empire. And there are signs of a mass rejection of these sectarian forces, and the possibility that public anger will translate into the very unity that is so desperately needed. Rage against corruption and the collapse of public services is sweeping the country, including Kurdistan. Similarly, the proposed corporate occupation of Iraq, disguised as a legal document to tie the country to the oil companies for decades to come, has reminded the population of one of the main reasons for the US-led invasion. It has also reminded them what a self-respecting, sovereign Iraq looked like in 1961, when the government nationalised Iraq’s lands for future oil production.

In an opinion poll released by the BBC yesterday, 86% of people are opposed to the division of Iraq. This and other polls also show majority support for armed resistance to the occupation. Four years into this terrible adventure, both the US and Britain must realise that it is time to pack up and leave.

[email protected]

See also: Civil War in Iraq: The Salvador Option and US/UK Policy

View with comments

Beyond Quagmire

Rolling Stone magazine has produced a must read for anyone interested in the ongoing geopolitical disaster and humanitarian catastrophe that is Iraq. A pannel of experts comment on the best, worst, and most likely scenarios

“The big danger is what I call the August 1914 Syndrome. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo — what would have been in the scale of history a minor event — set in motion activities that turned out to be beyond the ability of the Western powers to control. And they ended up in one of the most brutal wars in man’s history by accident…

A Shia Saddam — without nearly as much brutality, but still a strongman — is actually one of the best hopes…

I can’t help but think we’ve signed Jordan’s death warrant….

You’re going to see borders changing, governments falling. Lebanon is already on the precipice…

There isn’t any upper limit to how many people could get killed. Depending on how long the war lasts — a million casualties?

Once the Israelis get involved, then everybody piles on. And you’ve got nuclear events going off in the Middle East. That would be about as bad as it could get….

This is a dark chapter in our history. Whatever else happens, our country’s international standing has been frittered away by people who don’t have the foggiest understanding of how the hell the world works. America has been conducting an experiment for the past six years, trying to validate the proposition that it really doesn’t make any difference who you elect president. Now we know the result of that experiment [laughs]. If a guy is stupid, it makes a big difference.”

The lid is well and truely off – its just that no one knows for sure what’s in the box

Update: March on the Pentagon.org are organising a major protest at, err, the Pentagon this Saturday, 17th March. Their video can be viewed here.

View with comments

Debate on Iraq, Iran and Foreign Policy After Blair: Westminster Hall 20th March

PeoplesDebate.gif

On the 20th March, the fourth anniversary of the Iraq invasion, The People’s Assembly will convene in Westminster Hall to debate the following agenda:

1 Iraq: The Debate Parliament Won’t Have

2 Why We Should Oppose an Attack on Iran

3 British Foreign Police After Tony Blair

Speakers will include:

* DENNIS KUCINICH: US Congressman, candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential election will be the Assembly’s opening speaker at 2pm (http://kucinich.us/bio.php)

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT: * Bob Wareing MP, * John McDonnell MP, * Michael Meacher MP, * Linda Riordan MP, * Harry Cohen MP, * Jeremy Corbyn MP, * Katy Clark MP, * Sarah Teather MP, * John Hemming MP, * Lynne Featherstone MP, * Adam Price MP, * Elfyn Llwd MP, * George Galloway MP, * Kelvin Hopkins MP

And others including musician Brian Eno and comedian and campaigner Mark Thomas.

The debate is open to all.

Those wishing to attend can register here.

View with comments

Torture and Murder by UK Troops: No One Found Guilty

A new level of shame was brought on the now ex- Queens Lancashire Regiment as it emerged that a sucessful prosecution for the torture and murder of Iraqi civillians had been thawted. Remember that this is the same regiment that smugly rejected the relatively minor accusations of abuse published by the Daily Mirror newspaper – while at the same time they were effectively covering up much more serious crimes. The failure of the investigation and court martial to convict anyone for the murder of Mr Musa is a bad day for the British army and another nail in the coffin of ‘hearts and minds’ in Basra.

Iraq abuse case ends with soldiers acquitted

By Kim Sengupta in The Independent

The most high-profile court martial over the Iraq war has ended with the acquittal of six British soldiers and accusations from the military over “politically motivated prosecutions”.

The case also led to the disclosure that the Army high command had sanctioned brutal abuse of prisoners and condemnation from the trial judge of a cover-up surrounding the killing of Baha Musa, an Iraqi prisoner. The six acquitted soldiers’ all of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, now the Duke of Lancaster Regiment ‘ had pleaded not guilty to charges linked to Mr Musa’s death.

Another defendant, Cpl Donald Payne, of the same regiment, who pleaded guilty to a war crimes charge when he admitted the inhumane treatment of persons, will be sentenced at a later date. But at the end of the trial which lasted 93 days and cost an estimated ’20m’ no one has been convicted over the killing of Mr Musa, a 26-year-old father of two who suffered 93 injuries including fractured ribs, a broken nose and kidney failure during his detention.

Yesterday, his father, Dawood, told The Independent: “What they have done in this case will cause a lot of anger in Basra… Everyone knows what happened to my son.”

There has also been anger in the military over this and other courts martial, which some claim have been driven by Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, whose legal advice paved the way for the Iraq War. Some believe the soldiers have been made scapegoats. But a spokesman for Lord Goldsmith denied he had made the decision to prosecute.

Outside the court yesterday at Bulford Camp, Wiltshire, Col David Black, a former commander of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, said: “It has been gravely disappointing that it took over three years for the judicial authorities… to decide to bring to trial a number of gallant young men… Why, and what cost to the public? These are questions to be addressed by the Attorney General, who made final decisions over the trial.”

Among those cleared was Col Jorge Mendonca, the commander of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment and the highest ranking officer charged over prisoner abuse, and three men under his command ‘ Sgt Kelvin Stacey, L/Cpl Wayne Crowcroft and Pte Darren Fallon ‘ after the court heard the mistreatment, in contravention of the Geneva Conventions, was approved by the Army hierarchy.

The military jury also found Major Michael Peebles, 35, and Warrant Officer Mark Davies, 37, both of the Intelligence Corps, not guilty of charges of negligently performing a duty.

Defending the decision to prosecute, Major General Howell, head of the Army Prosecuting Authority, said: “The APA was satisfied… that there was sufficient evidence to proceed and it was in the public interest.”

He “utterly refuted” suggestions of any political or military pressure.

See also: British soldiers tortured Iraqi civillian to death: One pleads guilty to war crimes as case continues

View with comments

The Breaking of the Military Covenant

Following the weekend run of stories on the medical neglect of British soldiers injured in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Independent on Sunday has published an open letter to the Prime Minister. Politicians, leading figures in the arts and entertainment, and relatives of dead soldiers have put their names to it. Signatories include the playwright Harold Pinter, campaigner Bianca Jagger, Sir Menzies Campbell, leader of the Liberal Democrats, and MPs Peter Kilfoyle and Ben Wallace.

The letter is reproduced below via MFAW

To sign the letter write to [email protected]

Dear Prime Minister

We the undersigned believe that the military covenant is a cornerstone of our democracy, a mutual obligation between the nation, the armed forces, and every serviceman and woman. It is a common bond of identity, loyalty and responsibility that has sustained the armed

forces – and the country – throughout an often difficult history. In practice, this means that governments make the decisions, and the armed forces implement them. In return, the armed forces have:

* the right to expect any war to be lawful;

* the right to have adequate resources to carry out the tasks the

politicians demand of them;

* the right to be properly cared for in the event of injury;

* the right to know that, in the event of their death, their families

will be looked after properly.

This is a terrible war that has led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians being killed, maimed or displaced. At best, the legality of the war is dubious. Britain’s hard-pressed armed forces have been denied the support they require; in some circumstances, service personnel have paid with their lives because of this failure to make required equipment available.

Accommodation for many of the armed forces and their families back home is, as General Sir Mike Jackson, former chief of the general staff, says, “frankly shaming”. Military hospitals in this country have been closed while they have never been more essential, and wounded soldiers evacuated from the battlefield suddenly find themselves on civilian wards and at risk of physical or verbal attack from members of the public.

Servicemen and women are receiving insufficient treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder, and many are desperately ill, out of work, homeless, and even suicidal. We also believe that the Government is failing properly to look after the British widows and the children left behind.

We believe that the military covenant is broken, and that you have neglected the young men and women who carry out your orders in our name. At a time when the country is asking so much of our overstretched forces, it is failing to play fair by them. In this, you have prime responsibility, and you should at the very least meet the families of the bereaved to discuss their concerns. We call on you to reconsider your approach towards our military personnel, to restore the vital covenant, and to deliver to our men and women the just and proper treatment they deserve.

View with comments

Hans Blix restates the facts for the record

From Sky News

Mr Blix became a powerful critic of the US-led invasion after his teams failed to find the significant stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that Tony Blair and President George Bush insisted Saddam Hussein was hoarding.

He told Sky News’ Anna Botting the invasion was “clearly illegal” and said Mr Blair had not been completely straight with the evidence used to justify military force. Mr Blix said: “They put exclamation marks instead of question marks. There were question marks but they changed them to exclamation marks.

“And I think they got the political punishment for that. They lost a lot of confidence. Both Bush and Blair …”

He said that allowing the UN inspectors to continue their work could have avoided the war. More than 130 UK troops, over 3,100 US forces and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died since the invasion as the country threatens to tumble into full-scale civil war. Mr Blix said: “I think if they’d allowed us to carry on the inspections a couple of months more then we would have been able to go to all the sites suspected of by intelligence.

“And since there weren’t any weapons we’d have come with that answer: there are no weapons at all the sites you’ve given us.”

The former Swedish foreign minister added that he hoped Iraqi people could be empowered and turn around their country’s fortunes, saying: “I don’t see that the US can succeed.”

View with comments

Stop the Clash of Civilizations

At Avaaz.org they are campaigining for the start of meaningful middle east peace talks. They are also concerned about the rise in fear induced by leaders on both sides of current conflicts.

“Talk is rising of a ‘clash of civilizations’. But the problem isn’t culture, it’s politics ‘ from 9/11 to Guantanamo, Iraq to Iran. This clash is not inevitable, and we don’t want it.”

Click the play button below to watch their thought provoking video

View with comments

The Iraq Dossier is back

Old news? – maybe not. Apparently the information commissioner is currently ruling on whether the first draft of the dossier should be released. In the Guardian comment is free…, Chris Ames tells us why Draft Dodging by the government could result in further severe embarrassment for Blair et al.

The author also has a piece in the New Statesmen and has set up Iraqdossier.com, a site dedicated to “to telling the truth about the British government’s September 2002 dossier Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction”. Well worth a look.

View with comments

How Far is Iran from the Bomb? Who the Hell Knows?

From Counterpunch

By RAY McGOVERN – Former CIA analyst

That was one of the key questions asked of newly confirmed Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell at a Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing on Tuesday. Why had McConnell avoided this front-burner issue in his prepared remarks? Because an honest answer would have been: “Beats the hell out of us. Despite the billions that American taxpayers have sunk into improving U.S. intelligence, we can only guess.”

But the question is certainly a fair, and urgent one. A mere three weeks into the job, McConnell can perhaps be forgiven for merely reciting the hazy forecast of his predecessor, John Negroponte, and using the obscurantist jargon that has been introduced into key national intelligence estimates (NIEs) in recent years. McConnell had these two sentences committed to memory:

“We assess that Iran seeks to develop a nuclear weapon. The information is incomplete, but we assess that Iran could develop a nuclear weapon early-to-mid-next decade.”

At that point McConnell received gratuitous reinforcement from Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. With something of a flourish, Maples bragged that it was “with high confidence” that DIA “assesses that Iran remains determined to develop nuclear weapons.”

After the judgments in the Oct. 1, 2002 NIE assessing weapons-of-mass-destruction in Iraq’judgments stated with “high confidence”‘turned out to be wrong, National Intelligence Council officials decided to fine-tune the word “assess” to cover their asses. The council took the unusual step of including a short glossary in its recent NIE on Iraq:

“When we use words such as “we assess,” we are trying to convey an analytical assessment or judgment. These assessments, which are based on incomplete or at times fragmentary information are not a fact, proof, or knowledge. Some analytical judgments are based directly on collected information; others rest on previous judgments, which serve as building blocks. In either type of judgment, we do not have “evidence” that shows something to be a fact.”

So caveat emptor. Beware the verisimilitude conveyed by “we assess.” It can have a lemming effect, as evidenced Tuesday by the automatic head bobbing that greeted Sen. Lindsay Graham’s (R, SC) clever courtroom-style summary argument at the hearing, “We all agree, then, that the Iranians are trying to get nuclear weapons.”

Quick, someone, please give Sen. Graham the National Intelligence Council’s new glossary.

Shoddy Record on Iran

Iran is a difficult intelligence target. Understood. Even so, U.S. intelligence performance “assessing” Iran’s progress toward a nuclear capability does not inspire confidence. The only quasi-virtue readily observable in the string of intelligence estimates is the kind of foolish consistency that Emerson called “the hobgoblin of little minds.” In 1995 U.S. intelligence started consistently “assessing” that Iran was “within five years” of reaching a nuclear weapons capability. But, year after year that got a little old and tired…and even embarrassing. So in 2005, when the most recent NIE was issued (and then leaked to the Washington Post), the timeline was extended and given still more margin for error. Basically, it was moved ten years out to 2015 but, in a fit of nervous caution, the estimators created the expression “early-to-mid-next decade.”

Small wonder that the commission picked by President George W. Bush to investigate the intelligence community’s performance on weapons of mass destruction complained that U.S. intelligence knows “disturbingly little” about Iran. Shortly after the most recent estimate was completed in June 2005, Robert G. Joseph, the neo-conservative who succeeded John Bolton as undersecretary of state for arms control, was asked whether Iran had a nuclear effort under way. He replied:

“I don’t know quite how to answer that because we don’t have perfect information or perfect understanding. But the Iranian record, plus what the Iranian leaders have said…lead us to conclude that we have to be highly skeptical.”

Is help on the way? A fresh national intelligence estimate on Iran has been in preparation for several months’far too leisurely a pace in present circumstances. Will it have any appreciable effect in informing policy? Don’t count on it.

(more…)

View with comments

U.S. troops delete images of civillian killings

From Seattlepi

By Amir Shah

KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghan journalists covering the aftermath of a suicide bomb attack and shooting in eastern Afghanistan Sunday said U.S. troops deleted their photos and video and warned them not to publish or air any images of U.S. troops or a car where three Afghans were shot to death.

Afghan witnesses and gunshot victims said U.S. forces fired on civilians in cars and on foot along at least a six-mile stretch of road in Nangarhar province following a suicide attack against the military convoy. The U.S. military said militants also fired on American forces during the attack. The U.S. military and Afghan officials said eight Afghans died and 34 were wounded in the violence. One U.S. soldier was also injured.

A freelance photographer working for The Associated Press and a cameraman working for AP Television News said 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 plans to lodge a protest with the American military.

The photographer, Rahmat Gul, said witnesses at the scene told him the three had been shot to death by U.S. forces fleeing the attack. The two AP freelancers arrived at the site about a half hour after the suicide bombing, Gul said.

“When I went near the four-wheel drive, I saw the Americans taking pictures of the same car, so I started taking pictures,” Gul said. “Two soldiers with a translator came and said, ‘Why are you taking pictures? You don’t have permission.'”

It wasn’t clear why the accredited journalists would need permission to take photos of a civilian car on a public highway. Gul said the U.S. soldiers took his camera, deleted his photos and returned it to him. The journalists came across another American soldier, showed their identification cards, and he agreed that they could take pictures.

A Western military official who asked not to be identified said the troops were Marine Special Operations Forces, the Marine Corps component created in February 2006 of the U.S. Special Operations Command. “The same soldier who took my camera came again and deleted my photos,” Gul said. “The soldier was very angry … I told him, ‘They gave us permission,’ but he didn’t listen.”

Gul’s new photos were also deleted, and the American soldier, speaking through a translator, warned him that he did not want to see any AP photos published anywhere. The soldier also raised his fist in anger as if he were going to hit him, but he did not strike, Gul said.

Lt. Col. David Accetta, a U.S. military spokesman, said he did not have any confirmed reports that coalition soldiers “have been involved in confiscating cameras or deleting images.”

Khanwali Kamran, a reporter for the Afghan channel Ariana Television, was in a small group of journalists working alongside Gul. Kamran said the American soldiers also deleted his footage.

“They warned me that if it is aired … then, ‘You will face problems,'” Kamran said. Taqiullah Taqi, a reporter for Afghanistan’s largest television station, Tolo TV, said American soldiers were using abusive language.

“According to the translator, they said, ‘Delete them, or we will delete you,'” Taqi said.

A freelance cameraman for AP Television News said that about 100 yards from the bomb site, a U.S. officer told him that he could not go any closer to the scene but that he could shoot footage. The cameraman asked not to be named for his own safety.

“Then I started filming the suicide attack site, where there was a body and U.S. soldiers, and farther away, there was a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death,” he said.

As he was filming, a U.S. soldier and translator “ordered us not to move.” The cameraman said they were very angry and deleted any footage that included U.S. soldiers, as well as part of an interview from a demonstration. Hundreds of Afghans had gathered to protest the violence.

Reporters Without Borders condemned the actions of the U.S. forces, saying they dealt with the press poorly.

“Why did the soldiers do it if they don’t have anything to hide? The situation is very tense in Afghanistan, and the media should be able to report about it freely and safely,” said Jean-Francois Julliard, a spokesman for the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders.

View with comments

What’s it good for?

Ugly Rumours – Tony Blair’s band from his days at university have reformed and look set to rock the world by entering the top 10 with this weeend charts.

A new Ugly Rumours line up have recorded a version of the old Edwin Starr hit, War (what is it good for?). It has already reached number six in the midweek charts and can be downloaded for a fee from here. All profits go to Stop the War.

Update 09.03.07: From Stop the War

“SPOOF ‘BLAIR’ SINGLE MAKES HISTORY

Many thanks to everyone who bought the spoof Tony Blair single WAR! WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR? The mid-week chart prediction of a number 6 placing in the Top 40 translated to number 21 when the Top 40 chart was published last Sunday. This was due to the outrageous decision by the chart compilers to invalidate thousands of sales because some people bought more than one copy by mobile phone text message, the first time this method had been used for sales.

So the Blair spoof was just outside the top 20. How convenient that this avoided the widespread media coverage that would have followed a top 20 placement. That said, over the previous week it was a featured item on most of the main TV news channels, and the record still made chart history by being the highest entry ever by an act unsigned to a record label.”

View with comments