Oh, for a feisty press. Yet another example of what is fast becoming a regular CRANKed feature, "Things You Won't Read About in US Today" or any other US press outlet. The Guardian's Naomi Klein responds to US Ambassador David T Johnson's demand for an apology and/or proof of her accusation that the US targets doctors and journalists in Iraq in an attempt to keep evidence of civilian deaths from being reported. Klein connects the dots by noting that the US military specifically targeted doctors and other medical professionals in the assaults on Falluja and Mosul. As Klein notes,

The first major operation by US marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Falluja general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that "the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casual ties", noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones" at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world.

Klein goes on to note that "When fighting moved to Mosul, a similar tactic was used: on entering the city, US and Iraqi forces immediately seized control of the al-Zaharawi hospital."

This raises the question of why would the US military act this way. Klein provides an answer when she reminds us that the during the first assault on Falluja in April 2004 the US was forced to withdraw because of public outrage over the number of civilian deaths. Klein notes:

The reason for the withdrawal was that the siege had sparked uprisings across the country, triggered by reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed. This information came from three main sources: 1) Doctors. USA Today reported on April 11 that 'Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Falluja general hospital.'

Suddenly it becomes clear why the US military wanted to control the hospital in Falluja: to keep a lid on any reports of civilian deaths and injuries

Klein goes on to recount similar activities by the US military to suppress the independent media, going as far as targeting Al-Jazeera's offices during the invasion of Iraq and arresting journalists trying to cover the recent assault on Falluja. Religious leaders were also arrested for expressing opposition to the US attack on Falluja:

On November 19, AP reported that US and Iraqi forces stormed a prominent Sunni mosque, the Abu Hanifa, in Aadhamiya, killing three people and arresting 40, including the chief cleric - another opponent of the Falluja siege. On the same day, Fox News reported that "US troops also raided a Sunni mosque in Qaim, near the Syrian border". The report described the arrests as "retaliation for opposing the Falluja offensive". Two Shia clerics associated with Moqtada al-Sadr have also been arrested in recent weeks; according to AP, "both had spoken out against the Falluja attack."

Klein ends with this nice observation:

"We don't do body counts," said General Tommy Franks of US Central Command. The question is: what happens to the people who insist on counting the bodies - the doctors who must pronounce their patients dead, the journalists who document these losses, the clerics who denounce them? In Iraq, evidence is mounting that these voices are being systematically silenced through a variety of means, from mass arrests, to raids on hospitals, media bans, and overt and unexplained physical attacks.

posted by Idle Crank at 12/04/2004 02:17:00 PM