"With or Against Us" (NBC FREELANCER AND ENEMY OF MARINES KEVIN SITES WEBLOG POST 11-18)

Plastic Cuffs It is nearly 2am and there are six men, bound and blindfolded on their knees forming a crescent around an armor-plated Humvee. It is their hands that fascinate me the most -- perhaps because I can still see them, little white anemones wriggling in the darkness. Their faces have already disappeared behind dirty strips cloth or snuffed like candles with nylon sandbags. It takes only moments from when they are captured and face down in the dirt, to the click, click, click of the white plastic cuffs noosed around their wrists, It is with stunning swiftness that these Iraqi men, these suspects in a guerilla war against occupation forces become newly crowned dunces in a world where American military, as it so often proclaims, owns the night.

One prisoner, who looks to be no more than 19 or 20 years old, the same age as many of the soldiers that now surround him, is getting more attention than the others. In the dark chill he is dressed in nothing more than a thin, cotton gray dish dash robe. As two OH-58's whirl above -- a soldier bends down beside the prisoner and talks to him.

"You hear those choppers," he says, "you like helicopters don't you? You like to shoot down helicopters? Go boom?"

The prisoner I am later told by the Brigade commander -- has been identified by four separate local sources as one of the men directly involved in the recent shoot down of a Blackhawk helicopter that killed six soldiers; perhaps even the trigger man who launched what the Army believes was a Bulgarian-made Strela-3 missile. I look at his index finger. It is uncalloused, slender, did it, I question in my mind, make the deadly pull?

The men that are captured are taken in front of the Humvee where an informant sits behind bulletproof glass. They are already blindfolded but a soldier shines a flashlight in their faces anyway to make sure they cannot identify their accuser. If the informant nods the man is taken to the right, if he shakes his head, they are taken to the left and later released.

Pity? It is strange to me that it is not so much pity that I feel while I am videotaping them, painting them green with the infrared light on my camera, but recognition. I know the position they are in, the dread they feel to be bound and awash in the indecipherable language of your captors, to feel your mouth turn as dry as the desert that surrounds you, to wonder if this will be the hour of your death -- or to wonder if the hours to come will make you wish it had been, to know that at this moment you are helpless and hopeless and that the question of whether you have any control over your own destiny has finally and irrefutably been answered.

Near the end of the war my CNN team and I had been in the very same position. But we were captives of the men American forces now hunt down -- Saddam's Fedayeen militia. We had pushed too hard to be the first journalists into Tikrit, the last major city not fallen to coalition forces. Thirty kilometers from our prize, at a checkpoint near a village called Amulbedi, we are forced from our vehicles at gunpoint and told to lie face down on the road. Their leader, a middle-aged man wearing a red head scarf called a kaffiyeh and a dirty trench coat, looks at me and says in Arabic, "This one is surely an American spy."

Then he lowers the barrel of his AK-47 and fires a shot on the asphalt between my legs. I am frozen in place. My colleagues are kicked and punched while my arms are bound tightly behind my back.

But it is Tofiq who will save us -- goading a tribal chieftain to intervene with the Fedayeen, telling him that if we are harmed coalition forces will turn Almubedi into rubble.

We are eventually released, but have lost one of our trucks, most of our gear and all of our money; thousands in U.S. dollars that were supposed to help buy us out of binds like this one. Instead it is words, Tofiq's words that have set us free.

Now as I look at these men, bound and blindfolded, I think of my time in their place; that they have no Tofiq to speak on their behalf, wonder if they are guilty of what they are accused. If they had killed soldiers that were friends of mine, indeed, it may be me leaning over and whispering discomforting things to them. If these had been my Fedayeen captors I would want to do worse.

Acronym Soup The Army, which has turned acronyms into the opposite of their intended use of making things easier to remember, calls its battlefield information headquarters a TOC, short for Tactical Operations Center. There the commander sits flanked by his XO, executive officer, battle captains, S2 (intelligence officer) and S3 (operations officer) sucking in the information flow and knitting together daily missions that help them to accomplish their overall mission.

In the TOC in Tikrit, 1st Brigade, 4th Infantry commander Colonel James Hickey, tells me the mission here is to, "defeat the enemy and stabilize the region." The enemy as he defines it is FRL’s (former regime loyalists) like Baathists and the Fedayeen. The overriding mission is the capture of HVT #1 (High Value Target), otherwise knows as Saddam Hussein.

Unlike some soldiers, he is not confused about his mission. It is not for hearts and minds, but to defeat the enemy. Colonel Hickey carries himself with overriding air of formality. He was former cavalry officer and quietly revels in the history of that belonging. He wears an ascot at times and would seem at home with jodpurs and a whip.

He has a reputation for being one of the most aggressive commanders in the theatre -- and if things goes well here, he likely get his first general's star.

"I have a military problem here and I'm applying a military solution," he says with complete confidence. "Our adversaries are not militarily effective. They are mercenaries, terrorists and pirates and they will be defeated."

I understand the logic of his reasoning, can identify with his belief system, share a cultural and communications bond with his American soldiers that I live amongst -- even find myself nodding and talking weapons hardware like some beltway think tank geek.

Betrayal So in some ways, embedded in this unit, I begin to feel I've betrayed the people that depend on me to be skeptical; to question the dominant powers and institutions of my nation and the actions it undertakes in the name of its citizens. I am not a military or American cheerleader, not a mouthpiece signed on to some institutional agenda whether I believe in it or not. I am here to ask the hard questions of the people who make the hardest decisions; ones that result in people dying or people being killed. I must remember as one journalist advised, "write in your notepad every day 'I am not one of them.'"

But in this room, where every piece of information is broken down quantitatively--number of patrols, number of raids, number of IEDs (improvised explosive devices), number of detainees, number of weapons -- and put back together in the form of a task completed or a mission to be accomplished, Operation Thunder Road, Operation Ivy Cyclone, the problems and solutions seem remarkably clear an seductively simple.

Watching the Power Point slides, it is easy to believe what the Colonel believes -- that a harder not softer approach is the key to victory here, that most people are indifferent rather than opposed to Coalition occupation, that these Saddam hangers-on are growing more desperate, dwindling in numbers and becoming less effective. And Tikrit, the ancestral homeland of Saddam Hussein, which does have the potential to become a Falluja or Ramadi, yet somehow, perhaps through Colonel Hickey's aggressive tactics, has not. But nor has it brought peace and tranquility. Something Colonel Hickey concedes, is not the next stop after this one.

"This," he says referring to his military operations, "won't bring democracy here -- only the civil authority can do that -- but this will get these guys out of the way so the process can move forward and the majority here can get on with their lives."

Living on base, behind walls guarded by American soldiers, I cannot say I have met the majority or even the minority in Tikrit. Without many exceptions my exposures this time in Iraq are limited to those Iraqis that have been vetted to clean the base or serve on the police force or work as interpreters -- or those that are captured during raids.

Land Rover When I travel through town I am just as insulated. I am either in a military convoy or in an armored Land Rover that NBC has equipped me. It is the shape and weight of a Brinks truck, with blast plates on the undercarriage and reinforced steel around the entire frame. When I am driving through town I feel as I am behind the wheel of a vessel as sporty and responsive and the Civil War's Monitor. And as far as making a subtle entry into the community I may as well be driving the Oscar Mayer Weiner Mobile.

While the Land Rover gives me some needed distance from the Army to try and engage the locals, its very purpose and presentation creates its own problems. It offers real protection from the hostile intent of some Iraqis, but also sends a message others, just as wearing a flak jacket does, that you fear them, don’t trust them, believe they want to kill you. It is not the most ingratiating handshake a journalist can give, but perhaps at this time, in this place it is the only one.

CIA When I get a flat tire, I see an opportunity to engage people in the community more directly. I take the tire to repair shop on a side street just off the main drag in downtown Tikrit. My colleagues Pelin Sidki from CNN and Joe Raedle from Getty Images are with me. Joe and I get out and roll the flat tire into the shop. The three men there are very surprised to see us. We’re not wearing uniforms or flak jackets so they are not sure what to make of us.

One unsmiling man takes the tire and begins the repair while the owner of the shop and the other man shake our hands. The owner points out yellowed photographs taped to the wall. In the pictures he is a younger, holding up fish that he’s caught on a trip to somewhere in another time. We admire the catch and proceed to try and communicate -- both of us babbling in our own language, stopping to laugh or point or do something else inane. I say we are journalists. They are puzzled until Joe says "sahafa" the Arabic translation.

Then I remember Pelin is still in the truck. I go to get her and bring her into the shop. It immediately changes the dynamic. The men are not used to having women in their workplace. They become more subdued. We need an icebreaker and I find one when the owner’s ten-year-old son, Ala, comes into the shop.

I shoot a still image of him with my video camera and show him the result. Then I show him how to work the camera himself and he videotapes the man repairing our tire. Everyone lightens up a bit, encouraging Ala in the task. But now there is a buzz around the shop. People know we are here. Young men in their late teens and early twenties gather on the sidewalk in front and try to speak with me as I go out to lock the truck.

I give them a big smile and shake all of their hands, to be as disarming as possible. One young man, wearing a red kaffiyeh just glares at me, but then reluctantly takes my hand. Another named Mohamed speaks a little English. He asks me where we stay so I tell him in Baghdad since I don't want to say we live on the base. It's only a partial lie since our main bureau is in the capital. He asks me where I'm from and I say Ireland, another partial lie—since I carry an Irish as well U.S. passport.

Red Kaffiyeh All of them warm to me a bit -- except for the one in the red kaffiyeh. He eyeballs me up and down, stares at my boots trying to decide if I'm a soldier, spook, civilian contractor or connected in some other way to the Americans. Sensing this, I ask them what they think of the soldiers being here. Mohamed translates. They all say "no, bad, bad." Why, I ask them?

"Because," Mohamed says, "Every night they break down door..." he struggles for the words, then pantomimes a soldier with a gun, pushing someone to the ground, then holding the gun over them.

I nod, again understanding fully. Knowing their fear and humiliation, but also the military’s motivation behind the raids -- even their aggressiveness in carrying them out -- their anger following the death or injury of a fellow soldier on a patrol that day.

It is for me, a strangely omniscient view of both the occupier and the occupied. In a way it is debilitating. I empathize with each, but sense no convictions for either, nodding with understanding at the explanation from both sides.

But this night while I sleep behind the concrete walls of one of Saddam's former palaces, now the Brigade HQ, I will dream that I have made a wrong turn in Tikrit -- driving my royol blue "Brinks" truck down an unfamiliar side street -- at the end of the road is an angry man wearing a red kaffiyeh, demanding to know who I am.

"these suspects in a guerilla war against occupation forces"

read the whole thing

but this is very telling

this is the view of the left: brain locked in the past, they have to resort to VietNam era emotion-laden terminology.

"guerilla war" -- this is clearly a completely inaccurate assessment; it tells us Sites' point of view, but NOT reality. They are not all even Iraqis! Does this refugee from a time-warp even know the difference? would he care to know the difference? These terrorists do not have the best interests of the Iraqi citizens in mind -- or they would not have to blow up so many of them! Sheesh!!

"occupation forces" -- again, clearly inflamatory language; it is clear that US forces will leave when Iraq is stable. We are NOT an occupation force. For Sites to claim this, in his sympathy with the -- ahem -- ENEMY is mind-blowing. I.E. he doesn't claim this is what the terrorists think: this is how HE characterizes it.

"suspects" -- my heavens!

This guy needs to be introduced to reality. This is how an embed should report the events from duty with a unit: Give him 4 weeks of boot camp, take his camera, give him a rifle for the duration, and THEN read his rants. Maybe his reporting would be a tad different . . .

"does anyone know how we can get him MORE EXPOSED? "

I guess we should demand that this entire rant be read to provide the proper context before each time the video is shown . . .

I have been thinking for a while that Sites should be the issue NOW, not the Marine. [The Marine IS being investigated. What more do people want if they keep replaying the video? do they want to see that Marine before a firing squad? or beheaded?? so it will be acceptable to the terrorist-mind-set?????]

i.e. Has Sites released other videos that have been aired? What do they show? If not, why not?

If all his reporting has been these Blogs, we know what message he is trying to get across with his "reporting."

How? I don't know. Rush, Hannity, Ollie North . . .

I am here to ask the hard questions of the people who make the hardest decisions; ones that result in people dying or people being killed. I must remember as one journalist advised, "write in your notepad every day 'I am not one of them.'"

It is appalling how "elites" like this can remove themselves from reality, divorce themselves from the facts of their existance then turn around and play god with the world.

Everything Sites has, his life, his education, his freedom, was paid for with the blood of soldiers. And now, soldiers stand directly between him and death. And so he judges himself better than them, aloof and superior. He plays moral equivalence between the soldiers protecting him and the terrorists who commit exibitionist murders of unarmed women.

Hey Sites: Stop playing God. The position is already taken, and you suck at it.

Email to kevin:

kevin.

I am not in favor of abortion, but in your case I would make a retro-active exception. Since this can only be fanciful daydream, instead may I suggest you stop in at a local bar next to Camp Le Jeune (wearing a large name tag, of course) and experience the Marine Corps love and respect for you.

Ernie Pyle you'll never be.....Dan Rather, maybe, if you continue to hone your traitorous skills.

RedWireNut
Arkansas, USA

"Key words are the dead giveaway."

yes, he's talking in "content-pre-loaded liberal-speak", not real English language used in a way designed to inform the reader of the actual reality.

AS SUCH: he is NOT "reporting" at all. I.E. he is not communicating objective reality from an objective point of view.

course I know the Blog is not supposed to be the objective-reporting part; but I doubt the other "reports" are objective-reporting either -- if the video is a representative example.

He should just keep to the facts and not make them up as he goes!

How is "uncalloused, slender" not the facts?

It is information that's not only interesting, but can have implications. It could imply that the insurgents were so weak that they had to have "desk jockeys" out there in the field. Or it could mean that "the insurgency is so pervasive that even desk jockeys are taking up arms against us!"

But he didn't do that. He reported some facts, which is what a Free Press should do. I'm very glad we have a free press, and don't want America to become like one of the regimes that's afraid to show what really happens.

It was NBC that took his footage and edited it, from what I understand (I didn't see it).

Instead it is words, Tofiq's words that have set us free.

No Kevin, you liberal idiot, it's what Tofiq said, to wit: he threatened a tribal chieftain to with total destruction of his city by coalition forces if he did not intervene with the Fedayeen

You are alive today because of the strength of the military you so want to distance yourself from in your touchy-feely world of liberal idiocy.

It never ceases to amaze me how heads such as Kevin's don't spontaneously explode in the midst of the incredible mental gymnastics required to maintain moral equivalency.

"I've seen him report off and on since the beginning of the war. And let's just say, that I knew exactly what his ffeling on the war have been. "

So somehow, against all his "objectivity", his real opinion came through . . .?! imagine that ?!

It certainly does on his Blog, which although it is couched merely as his observation and opinions and not reportage -- they ARE the observations and opinions he is registering BY VIRTUE OF his experiences as an embedded reporter WITH our military. So, he should keep them to himself til after the war, IF he wants to be perceived as an objective reporter instead of as an anti-war ACTIVIST.

IOW, he is not freelancing, as some reporters did in past wars, sustaining himself while reporting on the war. He is an official POOL reporter. Hence, his reporting BECOMES the input to the entire pool, when it is his turn to be the pool rep.

He is just not objective enough for that level of responsibility, IF he cannot keep his opinions out of his reporting, including WHAT he choses to report and what he chooses to NOT report.

I.E. IF he is implementing his anti-war agenda, not merely objectively reporting, he is in the wrong place. IMPLEMENTING his anti-war agenda would be INCONSISTENT with his responsibilities as an embedded reporter and member of the pool. THAT needs to be done using his free-speech rights as a private citizen, or as an employee of maybe el-jezzera (however you spell it).

IOW, due to the SERIOUS effect of his video inflamming the Middle East . . . it must be established that he is above reproach in his reporting. I.E. HE must be investigated. OTHERWISE we have a person IMPLEMENTING an anti-war agenda and causing harm BY VIRTUE of being an embed and pool reporter. And that is not acceptable . . .

The lens needs to be turned onto HIM. [The Marine and his unit are ALREADY being investigated.] This is not a free-speech issue, it is an issue of HOW he uses his POSITION as an embed and pool reporter.

As I mentioned on another post here, I don't know HOW to do it. I just wanted to explain my reasoning in detail.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.