(Originally published April 7, 2010)
In journalist circles, it is clear that the use of Wikipedia (and other ‘Wiki’ sites such as Wiktionary, Wikiquotes etc.) is taboo. The “facts” are unreliable, inaccurate and biased. Wiki’s (user generated, user submitted, user-edited sites) are an attack on journalistic integrity and professionalism.
There is, however, a Wiki site that has caught the eye of governments worldwide. And the governments are scared.
In journalist circles, it is clear that the use of Wikipedia (and other ‘Wiki’ sites such as Wiktionary, Wikiquotes etc.) is taboo. The “facts” are unreliable, inaccurate and biased. Wiki’s (user generated, user submitted, user-edited sites) are an attack on journalistic integrity and professionalism.
There is, however, a Wiki site that has caught the eye of governments worldwide. And the governments are scared.
According to the New York Times, the Pentagon has added Wikileaks.org, a site (run by the not-for-profit organization Sunshine Press) that publishes secret and sometimes incriminating documents, to a long list of enemies of the United States.
On March 26th, 2010, WikiLeaks released a confidential CIA report detailing how the French and German governments may be able to manipulate their citizens in order to gain support for the war in Afghanistan. The report contains section titles such as “Public Apathy Enables Leaders To Ignore Voters”, “Tailoring Messaging Could Forestall or At Least Contain Backlash” and “Appeals by President Obama and Afghan Women Might Gain Traction”.
Despite the horrendous details of this report, no major news establishment has decided that it be deemed the ever-changing description of “news-worthy.” As a developing journalist, it sickens me to see the front pages of sites belonging to CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS et al. pushing the press conference of a sex-addicted golfer and the ratings of a reality show over stories such as the one mentioned above. I never thought I would see that day, until April 5th, 2010.
On that date, Wikileaks, as promised, released a highly confidential and disturbing video depicting the killing of approximately 12 Iraqi civilians including 2 Reuters photojournalists by the United States military. The video, taken from an Apache helicopter and dated July 12th, 2007, shows about 15 men in the courtyard of an area of Iraq that had been known to harbour insurgents. The soldiers incorrectly accuse them of possessing Ak-47’s and RPG’s [“Have five to six individuals with AK47s” “Is that an RPG?”]. These “weapons” were in fact cameras, arguably identifiable on the video (which can be seen at www.collateralmurder.org).
The American forces then fire upon the group, killing all but one of them in the barrage. [“Yeah, we got one guy crawling around down there, but, uh, you know, we got, definitely got something.” “Oh, yeah, look at those dead bastards.”] The one wounded man “crawling around” was Saeed Chmagh, a driver and assistant for Reuters.
Before troops arrive at the scene, a mini-van enters, noticing the wounded man. Inside the van are two children. This horrific story becomes even worse. The forces in the air beg Saeed to pick up a weapon; for under the rules of engagement, it would allow them to fire upon him once again. [“Come on, buddy. All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.”] A man then exits the vehicle, attempting to help the wounded man, unaware of the danger hovering above. The soldiers are giddy; begging their commanding officers to let them fire. [“Come on, let us shoot!”]
After receiving authority, the van is fired upon (with children still inside). After the attack, troops arrive on the scene to take account of the damage and casualties. Once all is said and done, 12 Iraqis are dead, and the two children are wounded.
If there was one thing that disgusted me the most while watching this devastating murder on tape, it was what a soldier said when he learned of the wounded children. “Well it’s their fault for bringing their kids into a battle.”
For anyone who has watched this video, it is painfully obvious that there was no battle here. A battle involves two sides attacking each other. This was a one sided brutal murder, based purely on the hypothetical and misinformation. A camera lens mistaken for a rocket propelled grenade and a Good Samaritan mistaken for an insurgent.
These deaths were horrific, unnecessary and most importantly avoidable. Had the American government had their way, this video would never have surfaced, and those who access the Wikileaks website would be charged with a criminal offence.
It is democracy at its best, being kept under wraps and out of the attention of the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment