Posted on 02/11/2002 2:26:03 PM PST by Lady In Blue
Feb 11, 2002
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon said Monday that U.S. soldiers were justified in keeping a newspaper reporter away from the scene of a deadly U.S. missile strike in Afghanistan.
The officials said they didn't know if soldiers had threatened to shoot Washington Post reporter Doug Struck, as the Post reported.
"We don't know the circumstances of what happened on the spot," Defense Department spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said at a news briefing.
The newspaper reported Monday that U.S. soldiers held Struck at gunpoint on Sunday. Struck wrote that the troops' unidentified leader said the reporter "would be shot" if he went any farther toward the missile strike site.
Philip Bennett, the Post's assistant managing editor for foreign news, said the incident "was baffling to us."
"We have questions about exactly ... on what basis the military in Afghanistan prevents American reporters from reporting on aspects of military operations in Afghanistan," Bennett said.
The reporter and the soldiers were investigating an attack last week by a missile fired from a remote-controlled CIA spy plane. The attack in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan killed several people who U.S. officials believed were al-Qaida members.
The military team has left the site, but no conclusions from its investigation are available, said Clarke and Rear Adm. John Stufflebeem, deputy operations director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Clarke said the situation in Afghanistan is so chaotic that soldiers can't be sure that someone who identifies himself as an American reporter really is one. Days before the Sept. 11 attacks, anti-Taliban leader Ahmed Shah Massood was assassinated by two men posing as journalists, Clarke noted.
Bennett said the incident occurred in a relatively calm situation in the middle of the day, and he said he thought Struck was able to convincingly demonstrate that he was an American reporter.
"Once the situation was explained, I see no reason for them to continue to train weapons on an unarmed American civilian," Bennett said.
Stufflebeem said one priority for the troops at the scene was to keep everyone, including reporters, away from the area.
"To believe that a U.S. serviceman would knowingly threaten, especially with deadly force, another American is hard for me to accept," Stufflebeem said.
"It would make a lot more logical sense to me that he is pointing out that there are hazards in this area. ... I would think that if there was any reference to physical harm in there, it's just a reality of the situation and not that the U.S. forces would bring that upon someone."
In an audio interview posted on the newspaper's Web site, Struck said he asked the soldiers' leader what would happen if he ignored their warnings and continued to the missile strike site. That's when the soldier said the reporter would be shot, Struck said.
"It wasn't delivered in a joking way," Bennett said of the threat. "I've never heard of an exchange quite like that, between an American soldier and an American reporter."
AP-ES-02-11-02 1701EST
This story can be found at : http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAKMTTUKXC.html
Of course the Left will claim that 1) this is a violation of freedom of the press; an absurd claim in another country in which we are engaged in a war, and 2) that this "proves" that the Bush administration is trying to cover up some mistake.
Journalist appointed themselves all-important demi gods after Watergate and have just never seemed tp get over themselves since then. They have this ludicrous notion that they are somehow "above the fray", a position completely undercut by the fact that the overwhelming majority of their ranks are leftists and cannot keep this bias out of their reporting...
On the battlefield specially in a foreign country? Sorry no explanation is necessary.
Who do these &^%$%#@( think they are?
Right gramps, that's why Amearicans go to war, to support our ability to be told the truth by the government, not by some pesky reporter who might not get "the facts" right.
The soldier didn't threaten him. He was apparently interviewing the soldier and the soldier gave a candid answer. I don't see a problem.
Besides, some guard posts come with the special intructions to 'use deadly force' to prevent unauthorized entry by anyone.
This certainly sounds like an appropriate order at this site.
I think each and every "reporter" who thinks he is above the fray and semi-godlike should be required to read Ernie Pyle's "Brave Men" to get a sense of how a journalist should behave.
Then they might understand why Pyle won Pulitzers, and was so loved by the soldiers he covered.
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.