Oh, well, then

The BBC reports that:

Nine Afghan civilians have been killed in a bombing raid in Kapisa province, Afghan officials say.

US forces have confirmed carrying out an air strike in the area but say they have no accurate casualty information.

The news comes shortly after US forces were accused of killing 10 civilians during a shoot out on Sunday in Nangarhar province.

Journalists say US troops confiscated their photos and video footage of the aftermath of the violence. ... The Associated Press news agency says it will complain to the US military after journalists said US soldiers deleted footage of the aftermath of the Nangarhar violence.

Freelance journalists working for the Associated Press said troops erased photos and video showing a vehicle in which three people were shot dead during Sunday's incident in the eastern province of Nangarhar.

And as Matthew Pennington writes for the AP, the Army not only admits it, but says it was justified:

The U.S. military asserted that an American soldier was justified in erasing journalists' footage of the aftermath of a suicide bombing and shooting in Afghanistan last week, saying publication could have compromised a military investigation and led to false public conclusions.

Why? Well, let's let Col. Victor Petrenko explain it:

"When untrained people take photographs or video, there is a very real risk that the images or videography will capture visual details that are not as they originally were," he said. "If such visual media are subsequently used as part of the public record to document an event like this, then public conclusions about such a serious event can be falsely made."

That's not all:

The AP also raised concerns about the military's efforts to restrict its coverage of the Feb. 15 crash of a U.S. helicopter in southern Zabul province in which eight soldiers were killed and 14 wounded. Two AP journalists and their vehicle were searched extensively in an effort to prevent footage of the wreckage getting out.

But Petrenko has an answer for that, too:

Petrenko justified that action on the grounds of "operational security" exercised when "equipment, aircraft or component parts are classified."

He maintained that the U.S. military had no intention of curbing freedom of the press in Afghanistan. "We are completely committed to a free and independent press, and we hope that we can help encourage this tradition in places where new and free governments are taking root," Petrenko said. "It so happens that on these two recent occasions, military operational or security requirements were compelling interests that overrode the otherwise protected rights of the press."

It so happens... Oh, well, then. And he's so reassuring about "our" commitment to a free and independent press, how can we doubt him?

Yet, for some reason, I don't quite believe the good colonel. Oh, I don't doubt his sincerity - about part of it. One thing we've seen recently is that "untrained personnel" can, with their amateur footage, have a significant impact on "public conclusions". I don't at all blame the Army for wanting to control what people see. (After all, we don't want to "embolden" the enemy and "send the wrong message to the troops" now, do we?)

But - a couple of things occur to me.

First - you don't have a free and independent press sometimes. If the press is allowed to operate only when they take pictures that flatter the authorities, only when they report on things the government wants reported, they are neither free nor independent.

Second - this administration in particular, administrations in general, and armies almost invariably, want to control the way they are perceived. This does no one any good, including them, for refusing to look at the truth is never a way to correct flaws. Nor does the visible perception of hiding the truth breed confidence. I'm quite sure that a part of my inability to believe Col. Petrenko is the sheer number of times I have been lied to already.

And third - "untrained people"? They work for the Associated Press. They weren't rubbernecking Afghanis taking snapshots. They are professionals. They just didn't work for the army.

And in the end, that's what we want, isn't it? A free, independent media keeping tabs on what happens? Even Col. Petrenko is willing to say that.