portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

imperialism & war | media criticism

Conservative propaganda cover for US massacre on pages of The Oregonian

I know, I know. So what else is new?
If no one at The Oregonian is reading David Reinhard's columns before they make print, editorial management there should seriously re-evaluate that practice. In Slouching toward Haditha on June 1 he flatly states, "Of course, nobody knows for sure what happened in that small Iraqi village last Nov. 19." Is he joking, or better yet, making a bad attempt at an existential moment?

Any rational observer could inform Mr. Reinhard that yes, there are people alive today who definitely know what happened on that day in that small Iraqi village when more than a dozen civilians, women and children included, reportedly were shot and killed. Those that know what happened undoubtedly include the on-site US Marines and probably their immediate superiors. And what about anyone who survived the Haditha Massacre? Yes, there are credible accounts of Haditha survivors. They would have a good idea of what went down. And what about any other witnesses who might have seen or heard something? I would say that yes, all these people surely have a good idea of what happened that day in that Iraqi village.

Any balanced reader of Reinhard's statement would have to at least question its basic premise, check the surrounding sentences for clues about context, and finding no clear answers become immediately responsible for asking the author exactly what he meant. That's where all the editors responsible for Reinhard's work should have come into play. Could it be that he simply writes a column, and it gets printed without review? Now that's really troubling.

Yes, there are plenty of people remaining who absolutely know what happened on November 19, 2005 in Haditha. Plenty. To say otherwise is irrational, to say the least.

You see, I don't really blame Reinhard for this rather grievous error in logic and intellectual honesty. He has made similar statements about the United States and its policies ever since the current president came to power. This is nothing new.

However, I do specifically blame a number of editors at this newspaper for letting slide this horrifically misleading statement on a deadly serious topic. Of course, we will never know 100 percent of everything that occurred before, during and after Haditha. That's true of any situation. But it's reasonable and rational to conclude that the vast majority of the truth about Haditha certainly will become known.

Trying to say otherwise, and by commission providing a type of conservative propaganda cover in the pages of The Oregonian for the involved US soldiers, officers, and administration in this matter is a new low for Reinhard, his editors and their publication. Is this the paper's idea of providing "fair and balanced" viewpoints?

Yes, The Oregonian did print several letters afterwards saying some of the things I've posted here. But I just want to make sure the point doesn't get dropped too quickly.

The paper also printed an editorial the same day as Reinard's column, "Pursuing the killers of Haditha." The editorial sums up with "The administration must be unflinching in its pursuit of the truth of what happened in Haditha."

Sorry, but that's just another ridiculous statement from the pages of The Oregonian. Since it illegitimately came to power, the Bush administration has clearly been incapable of pursuing the truth about anything in Iraq. The only way the world discovers the truth about the Haditha Massacre is through an independent inquiry with no connection to the US government or its military.

Killers and war criminals don't credibly investigate themselves, or is that not obvious?

homepage: homepage: http://www.maushard.net

Let do some ballistic testing of the bullets and the guns they came from... 04.Jun.2006 13:44

Pravda or Consequences

and then we will know who did what to unarmed civilians and their children.

As long as the American body count is low, atrocities will continue and ethics training will always happen after the fact and not before.

Be all you can be, but try not to make it a felony.

mission statement 04.Jun.2006 14:11


Some propagandists for the coalition are saying that it was an abarition, a few bad apples that killed the Iraqis. But the public relations propagansists had originaly said the people were killed by a road side IED. Are the propagandist's lies also an abarition, a few liars among all the military talking heads we see on the TV set god???

there are many stories from iraqis about coalition forces slaughtering Iraqis. Coalition propagandists saying the slaughtered Iraqis were killed by a road side IED prooves quite definatively that coalition propagansists lie. And they are not lying to iraqis who have a handle on what is going on by seeing what is going on in thier own homeland. The military public relations people are lying to US.

So, of the number of iraqis whom the coalition propagansists say were killed by the insurgent's IEDs, has that number gone down by 24? The propagansist, whom we know LIED to US, are using the alleged IED attacks to villify the insurgency in order to get us to support the continuing slaughter and burrying our own. The war crimes of the alleged "bad apples" slaughtering iraqis are fortifying the resolve of the insurgents. And more and more alleged "good apples" come home in body bags. And the public relations pricks of the military are aiding the "bad apples" by covering up thier offenses. They too play a part in getting more and more allegedly "good apples" killed.

selling apathy 04.Jun.2006 15:23


The mainstream has one primary objective. The objective is to keep the recipients of the news from taking effective action. The spins are worded to make it easy to do nothing. The public is "informed" and apathy reinforced.

Life magazine and CBS's Walter Cronkite gave us something that approached real reporting of the news. The Vietnam war was beamed into our living rooms every night.

What he really means by "Nobody Knows" 04.Jun.2006 17:05

Fred Bauer

What the author means by "Nobody Knows" is that there has been no "offical" results from the inquiry. We are supposed to withhold judgement until we hear the offical results and "Know Nothing".

But of course the results will probably be a white wash. Then we will "Know Something", but it will probably be wrong.

David Reinhard Speaks for His Class 04.Jun.2006 17:32


Pundit rehash, in the cause of sustaining the monetary and ecclisiastical corporate/military dominance and imperial course toward global domination, on what are viewed as the lesser cultures and societies, reinforces classism.

What predicates Mr. Reinhard's contribution is that there is no one qualified, competent and "acceptable" for purposes of evidence as to "what actually happened."

The troops are excused because of the 'fog of war'--millions of hypothetical invasion and resisted occupation scenarios are tossed off, exempting any coalition combatant (above a certain rank, for sure) for hands-on witnessing. Generalized pressures and stresses are cited that become all mitigating--whether actually applicable to the incident or not. Focus on the white-hot events are quickly distracte and cocooned in abstract, vague remediation--ethics review "stand down"s, top-heavy brass showing their faces and uttering some words of high sounding policy to the assembled fodder, rules of engagement directives launched in all directions, refresher courses on "duties", the real message being "don't do stupid things, and if you do, don't get caught."

The members of the occupied, terrorized communities--the indigenous, the locals, the natives--of course, have hidden agendas, are all complicit with the insurgents and hate us anyway, so how could any testimony from that demographic be realistically considered in a search for "what actually happened."

Even in death, members of the lesser cultures are second and third class dead.

So, Mr. Reinhard, in applying the white, Western capitalist paradigm, can fairly say that "no one knows what actually happened", since all involved were "no ones."

An issue that takes on greater concern than the slaughter of alien non-combatants--the aged, females and infants--for the imperial enterprise, is the appearance of cover up of the event (the one of which "no one knows what actually happened"}. After all this is an alleged crime within the imperial machine--a white culture on white culture crime--rising far above any crime perpetrated by the imperial machine in the lesser culture which it is occupying. This broaches the paradox of rallying around "the flag, honor and duty" within the ranks and camp followers of the imperial military institutions, stampeding to distance and position themselves with respect to a cover up of events of which, on the other hand, "no one knows what actually happened"!

cover up is the real story 04.Jun.2006 21:14


Nobody knows!

But we know damned well that the Iraqis were killed by bullets and not killed by a road side IED, as we were told. We know damned well we were lied to when we were told a road side IED killed the Iraqis. We know damned well that what is to BE KNOWN has been chosen for us. But that story fell to pieces like an Iraqi in coalition occupied Iraq.

The people who told us that the Iraqi people killed by bullets were killed by an IED are also saying it was an isolated incident. And that line is what media is selling. And that is the line being bought.

That we were lied to is the real story. IEDs kill with shrapnel, and force of an explosion, even heat. IEDs are not know to shoot bullets into people's brains anywhere but in official reports. The slaugher being presented to US as it was NOT shows a concerted effort by someone (?, but can be found out) to cover up the murders. Why? It sure wasn't to mislead the Iraqis, was it? It was to mislead US. Who gains power besides the insurgents who respond to such atrocities by killing the "good apples"?

The cover up is the real story. not that mass murder is not un-sensational. mass murder has powerfull effects on the senses of thinking and even feeling people. but how the public relations people of the coalition forces responded shows the mass murders as being institutionalized. You know, the same as mass murders by Nazis are presented by the media. The cover up shows the mass murders as the accepted (encouraged, since the cover up protected the guilty) reality instead of the "isolated incident" we are told to believe.

EVERY BODY KNOW 04.Jun.2006 22:30




illustration 05.Jun.2006 09:09


please use this Haditha pix for feature posting image. what it's about.

many thnx.

illustration please 05.Jun.2006 16:10


please use this image as illustration on the center post article.

thank you.
Haditha massacre victims
Haditha massacre victims