« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
U.S. Troops Detained AP Cameraman, Confiscated His Footage
Yesterday the AP reported that U.S. troops in Iraq confiscated an AP cameraman's videotape of the aftermath of a Baghdad bombing. A military spokesman, Lt. Colonel Scott Bleichwehl, explained that the troops were enforcing an Iraqi law prohibiting the photographing or videotaping the aftermath of acts of violence. That seemed strange -- U.S. troops enforcing Iraqi law?
So yesterday I asked U.S. military representatives in Baghdad about the confiscation, the alleged law, and the use of U.S. troops as law enforcement for a foreign country. A spokesman replied to me that he knew of no agreement or arrangement "that would compel [U.S. forces] to enforce Iraqi law." A spokesperson for the U.S. Embassy declined to comment on the matter at all -- even to confirm the existence of such an Iraqi media law -- and instead referred me back to the military. Making matters even stranger, my interlocutor in the military told me that a colleague "checked with the unit who responded to the scene of the attack... and they reported that there was no video tape confiscated" by U.S. troops. I was unable to learn the identity of the unit.
When I asked AP for clarification about what happened, AP representatives e-mailed me this just-updated story . Apparently U.S. troops detained the cameraman -- after first denying that they even had the videotape:
U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl told the AP Thursday morning he had checked with American soldiers who were at the scene and the U.S. military did not take the tape. He called back later and said he had discovered in further checks that the tape was in the hands of the U.S. military and would be returned to AP shortly.The camera operator said he was handcuffed and detained by the U.S. troops at the scene for 40 minutes. He said he was kept inside an American Humvee then released. He said the Americans took the tape but returned his camera upon his release.
The Iraqi government passed a law earlier this year making it illegal to video tape or photograph the aftermath of attacks and bombings.
AP spokesman Jack Stokes tells me that U.S. troops did not explain why they had detained the cameraman, and that as of now, the AP is still waiting to have its footage returned. The U.S. military has not responded to my questions since this morning, but as soon as I know more, I'll provide updates.
Update: AP's Jack Stokes e-mails to clarify:
Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl in no way implied that the U.S. Army was enforcing Iraqi law. He said that by way of explanation that the tape may have been taken by Iraqi security forces.
I have questions out to Bleichwehl about this. But for the record, the AP's original story on the confiscation yesterday didn't paraphrase Bleichwehl mentioning Iraqi security forces at all:
U.S. authorities confiscated an AP Television News videotape that contained scenes of the wounded being evacuated. U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl told the AP the government of Iraq had made it illegal to photograph or videotape the aftermath of bombings or other attacks.
Josh
Zachary
Does this mean they'll be enforcing Iraqi law on Blackwater as well?
October 4, 2007 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
What "Iraqi"? The "Iraq" government is directly controlled by
President-VICE.
October 4, 2007 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Insurgents typically like to film the car-bombs and use it as recruiting propaganda. I believe the US military has the policy to prohibit filming, and to question anyone trying to film these events, knowing that this is an insurgent tactic.
BP
October 4, 2007 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps U.S. Army officials thought he was an insurgent taping the aftermath for a propaganda video? Here's hoping the AP gets their tape back.
October 4, 2007 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can understand wanting to question folks who appear to be videotaping bombings for purpose of obtaining evidence, but something tells me that the fellows intent upon videotaping attacks for propoganda purposes might not do so openly, in that they probably don't look and act like film crews.
Just sayin. I hope that the military is just collecting evidence and not suppressing information.
October 4, 2007 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
This seems part of a concerted effort to tightly control all news now related to violence in Iraq. They want us on the one hand to believe that violence is down, that the surge is working. On the other hand, they want us to believe that violence there necessitates tens of thousands of mercenaries. And god forbid the press tries to get an independent view of what's really going on there!
Stay on it, tpm!!
October 4, 2007 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the AP tape of the bombing that involved the Polish ambassador and the Blackwater rescue mission? Because if it is, then why did the major networks air tape of the ambassador being lifted into the Blackwater helicopter? What was in the AP tape that wasn't in the major media tape? The whole 'rescue mission' by Blackwater seems very suspect - coming right after Prince's testimony. I may be too cynical, but the whole thing reeks....if, that is, if the AP tape is of the attack on the Polish diplomats.
October 4, 2007 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The old saying - a frog will leap out of thrown into a pot of boiling water, but if you put him in cold water and slowly turn up the heat, he will sit there and let himself boil to death.
Are we slowly boiling to death?
October 4, 2007 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
has the ap filed any type of protest, esp considering the detention of their reporter. what about the committee to protect journalists..
October 4, 2007 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Legalize@3:27
Please. They're running damage control. If they wanted to question a newsman, they probably wouldn't need to handcuff him. If they needed a copy of the tape, they could have a copy in minutes without confiscating the master.
One of the only upsides of the civil war from the military's POV is its easy to control the message. The streets are so dangerous, its impossible for reporters to get out on there own. They do not want the violence that Iraqis live with daily to be seen on American TV.
October 4, 2007 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the AP tape of the bombing that involved the Polish ambassador and the Blackwater rescue mission? Because if it is, then why did the major networks air tape of the ambassador being lifted into the Blackwater helicopter? What was in the AP tape that wasn't in the major media tape? The whole 'rescue mission' by Blackwater seems very suspect - coming right after Prince's testimony. I may be too cynical, but the whole thing reeks....if, that is, if the AP tape is of the attack on the Polish diplomats.
October 4, 2007 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, that is the Bush way to decrease the violence in Iraq: make it illegal to report the violence.
October 4, 2007 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I toss these possibilities out just to stir up the pot:
Polish ambassador regarded as no longer part of the team
U.S. troops were playing a part in a constructed event
Insurgent bombers were not insurgents
"U.S. troops" were not U.S. troops
Blackwater needed to look good
October 4, 2007 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not news, really. The U.S. military has confiscated video and harassed, threatened and arrested reporters in Iraq since the beginning of the occupation (including CBS cameraman Abdul Ameer Younis Hussein, who was held by the U.S. for over a year at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison). And many have been killed, starting with Reuters cameraman Taras Protsyuk, who died when U.S. forces shelled the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad during the invasion.
The only difference this time is the bizarre excuse the military has trotted out to justify this obvious attempt at censorship. Same bull, different day.
October 4, 2007 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
These are the freedoms are men and women are dying for???????
October 4, 2007 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I too have been researching this story immediately after I viewed it as Katie Couric's lead story. It looked like pro Blackwater propoganda. The CBS story said "no other" U.S. helicopters were available, quoting a U.S. Embassy source. I believe the Bushies put out the word to look for a story that made Blackwater look good, and do it soon. This was their opportunity. The news report did not point out this occured 2-3 blocks from the Polish Embassy, that many U.S. and Iraqi soldiers had already secured the area before Blackwater arrived. It's like the faked story John McCain gave shopping openly in an open air Bagdad market showing things were back to normal. Later it came out, with pictures, that dozes of us soldiers and a couple of helicopters were overhead surrounding McCain and company. Same thing here. I hate to see CBS selling us this SH--. And I fault Couric for agreeing to it. By the way the Lt.Col. cited with confiscating the AP tape on the scene I found is the photographer of cameo pics of CBS lovely Laura Logan online. I wonder if this Lt. Col. has connections with CBS people who go to Iraq and he paved the way for them to put the story together.
October 4, 2007 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couric is a disaster: she was more interested in how Bush felt about ordering the surge than in what the surge was doing to the country. We can count on her to fall for false stories of sincerity and derringdo and completely miss the news.
October 4, 2007 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, if we don't allow the American people to see it, it will all go away!
Though it's not surprising to see the American military, lost in a losing situation, resort to uninspiring tactics such as, suppressing visual evidence of bombs going off, when the important item to note is that the bombs keep going off in the first damn place.
October 4, 2007 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gobblegobble,
I was asking myself the same questions. Didn't Poland threaten to pull out its troops?
October 4, 2007 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe this is part of Gen. Betray-Us' post-surge PR?
October 5, 2007 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Our next president, whoever he or she may be, is going to be faced with a salvage job of immense proportion. The office of the president, the vice president, the DOJ, the DOD and every other branch of government has consistently and without reservation pursued an agenda that stands in direct conflict with everything we ever believed in. Katrina was a disaster of immense consequence but it pales in comparison to the things we have witnessed and that have gone unanswered and for which there may never be an accounting. I suspect unless that happens things will only get worse. We cannot change our circumstance unless we know how we went wrong. Standing in the way of that is our government, both the WH and Congress, neither of which would like their ineptitude or criminal actions revealed. Any refusal to acknowledge our failures condemns us to more of the same. The life of GWB is an immense escalating failure, culminating in the possible demise of our nation. That is, unless the people and the congress of this nation demand an accounting. Only that can alter our course.
October 5, 2007 6:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
On the bright side, at least it wasn't Blackwater who detained the cameraman and confiscated the footage.
The cameraman wouldn't have been detained.
October 5, 2007 7:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I rather doubt an insurgent cameraman would have AP press credentials.
October 5, 2007 7:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
this makes my stomach churn. oh, we are soooo free in this country we need to shove it down everyones throat.
when are we going to take our country back!!
October 5, 2007 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink