Wednesday, January 16, 2002
|
Wednesday, January 16, 2002 |
|
Story of civilians killed by bombing is suspect An opinion piece regarding civilian casualties in the Afghan conflict, by Roberto J. Gonzalez, anthropology professor at San Jose State University, is making its way around the country. It has appeared in at least the San Francisco Chronicle and Atlanta Journal-Constitution since the first of the year. Gonzalez cites a study by University of New Hampshire professor Marc Herold who claimed that 3,767 Afghan civilians had been killed by "U.S. bombing" between Oct. 7 and Dec. 10 of last year. Editor Jim Wooten pointed out Herold's bias by quoting Herold's own statements regarding the objectivity of the U.S. media. Herold apparently wants us to believe that the our media, whose members overwhelmingly vote Democratic, are tools of the conservative Bush Administration, while the European and Asian press, including the Bin Laden network of Al Jazeera, is objective and unbiased. Although rewarded with space in major publications, Gonzalez suspiciously failed to provide us with a reference to Professor Herold's calculations. The figures can be found on the web site www.cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm. Further examination of this web site reveals that it is a compilation of stories, in some instances reported by "mainstream" western media, but, in many cases, originating from the third world's anti-western press including that font of objectivity, Al Jazeera television. As an example of questionable reporting, Footnote 29 of Herold's text references a story originating in Pakistan which is headed: "633 civilians killed, four U.S. planes downed." (Four planes downed?) This approach is similar to compiling stories from supermarket tabloids and concluding there is an epidemic of alien abductions. The apparent Gonzalez-Herold attempt to propagandize this life and death issue is reminiscent of the Soviet KGB's propaganda program which paid compliant "reporters" in the non-western media to report fabrications as fact, then cited the stories as "proof" of U.S. evildoing. The nonsense about AIDS being invented by the CIA was initiated in this manner, and although the hoax was later exposed by former Soviet operatives, it is still occasionally referenced as fact. Our retaliation efforts in Afghanistan were originally reported as "allied bombing," due to the participation of the British. It soon morphed into "U.S. bombing," for reasons unclear, but probably to better focus criticism. Completely unaddressed has been the tons of metal thrown up into the air by the opposition in hapless efforts to shoot down allied aircraft metal which must have come down somewhere hopefully where no innocent civilians were present. Also unaddressed were errant rounds fired by artillery, tanks, and small arms that are fired around corners by fighters who don't even look to see where (or who) the bullets are impacting. Are we to assume that the millions of rounds fired in this manner killed or injured combatants only? Civilian casualties are one of the most tragic results of the violence inherent in military operations. But when there are civilians in the battle zone, casualties are inevitable, just as close fire support from artillery and aircraft endanger our own forces. The subject is serious enough to be treated respectfully, utilizing unbiased sources, and considering all forms of mayhem. Regardless, the circumstances are probably so murky, at best, that to attribute most casualties to "U.S. bombing" is ludicrous and betrays a "blame America" mind set. William F. Fielder Peachtree City
|
||