Good Morning,
I’m writing to you today to ask you to help support Michael Yon, the former Green Beret turned independent combat journalist, currently in Iraq. As noted by Instapundit Glenn Reynolds and Austin Bay last night, Yon has been threatened with expulsion from Iraq by an Army General :
A general emailed in the past 24 hours threatening to kick me out. The first time the Army threatened to kick me out was in late 2005, just after I published a dispatch called “Gates of Fire.” Some of the senior level public affairs people who’d been upset by “Proximity Delays” were looking ever since for a reason to kick me out and they wanted to use “Gates of Fire” as a catapult. In the events described in that dispatch, I broke some rules by, for instance, firing a weapon during combat when some of our soldiers were fighting fairly close quarters and one was wounded and still under enemy fire. That’s right. I’m not sure what message the senior level public affairs people thought that would convey had they succeeded, (which they didn’t) but it was clear to me what they valued most. They want the press on a short leash, even at the expense of the life of a soldier.
The General who wanted to silence Yon in 2005 was Brigadier General Vincent K. Brooks, then the lead Public Affairs Officer (PAO) for the United States Army. The stories that got Yon in trouble with Brooks: Proximity Delays and Gates of Fire. Proximity Delays got Yon in trouble, and in Gates of Fire, Yon picked up a rifle and joined combat to help LTC Erik Kurilla, who had been shot three times by an insurgent while CSM Robert Prosser was engaged in hand-to-hand combat with another insurgent. For inserting himself into battle (which violated embed rules) to help fallen American soldiers, and then having the gall to write about it, Brooks tried to kick Yon our of Iraq.
Brooks is back in Iraq, this time as deputy commanding general – support for Multinational Division-Baghdad, and he still obviously carries his grudge against Yon. I confirmed last night with Michael Yon that it is this same General Vincent K. Brooks that sent Yon the email threatening to kick him out of Iraq.
I don’t think I need to tell you how important Yon’s reporting is. He has been favorably compared to WWII’s premier combat correspondent Ernie Pyle, in part because Yon, like Pyle, is brutally honest in his reporting. When he sees problems he reports them, and when he sees progress, he reports that as well. Yon has, if I am correct, spent more time embedded in U.S. combat units in Iraq than any journalist for any news organization. Period. He plans to spend the next year on the ground with our soldiers in Iraq. He braves bullets and IEDs with our troops out on patrol, and was once targeted to be kidnapped and killed by insurgents because of his reporting. Through it all, Yon has pushed on, and now a General on our side appears to be trying to silence him.
I don’t think anyone will dispute that the terrorists in Iraq are convincingly beating us in the media war, and Yon’s front-line writing has been one of the few bright spots in the coverage of this war in the western media. That vital reporting is now under assault by a General that is apparently threatened by Yon’s honesty.
Michael has been stuck in a U.S. base for over a week now. I strongly feel that Brooks is behind Yon’s “grounding,” and the threatening email he sent Yon seems to strongly support that contention.
I’m asking you to help turn up the heat on General Brooks and the U.S. Army, so that Yon can continue to bring us dispatches from the front line. Please consider writing about this attempt at censorship by General Vincent Brooks.
If there is any information I can provide you to help write your story, if you choose to write one, please let me know.
Don’t let one of the best combat reporters of our generation be silenced by a General with a grudge.
Sincerely and Respectfully,
Good luck with that – Vince Brooks’ brother Leo was one of Petraeus’ battalion commanders when Petraeus commanded the 504th PIR at Bragg. If Yon has crossed Vince Brooks, he has crossed one of the best-connected and best-regarded general officers in the Army. Saying “a general” wants to kick Yon out is one thing – saying it’s Vince Brooks changes things a whole lot. A lot of people who would be disposed to sympathize with Yon – myself included – will start to wonder what we don’t know when we hear it’s Brooks who’s upset.
I can see a couple of reasons why the well-connected general may want Yon out. Not all of them are even derogatory.
I have mixed feeling about Yon’s presence (not about Yon himself – both and excellent journalist and an excellent person), for a variety of reasons – mainly because he’s a pretty fearless person (Green Beret for crying out loud) and that means he puts himself in danger – and I hate when the best of the best have to die in the field instead of a long life at home.
But back to the general – there are a number of very good reasons why embeds should not be involved in combat – and I’m sure Brooks has been under pressure from other journalists about Yon. Then again, there’s an exception for every rule, and I’m sure LtC. Kurilla has the same “You shouldn’t have done that, but thanks!” response.
Especially given the context of this particular war, with the enemy being primarily non-uniform “enemy combatants,” and the Geneva convention being at play and in discussion every day, there are real problems with a Western civilian taking up arms in Iraq – I think what Yon did was morally correct, and possibly even tactically correct, but I’m kind of surprised at how tame the official response was – I guess the fact that the enemy isn’t really a national entity has something to do with that – even with the UN’s terror sympathies, Al Qaeda can’t exactly go there and complain about the US using non-uniformed troops.
I can’t emphasize enough the restrictions agains non-uniform combatants, because the whole point of this war is to protect innocent civilians, and that rule exists for that purpose. Again, that being said, I have no moral problems with a photographer (or a priest or pauper) taking up arms to protect his friends and himself. I think it probably should have had a more thorough and official review at the time, and then the issue MIGHT not be hanging over him today.
Yon has probably also yanked the chains of more than a few commanders, and has definitely yanked the chains of a lot of other journalists.
I guess the way I’d say it is I’d hate to lose out on Yon’s reporting from Iraq, but I’d love for him to be safe at home.
I don’t know if it would help if Yon could find a way to sit in a room with Brooks and have a conversation – it’s something a lot of people don’t think to try these days, especially where politics are concerned. Mass pressure on Brooks may force him to play hard-ass to justify his earlier decisions.
I’d like to see the “theatening e-mail” before passing judgement. A true dilemma, as I have some repect for both – while my initial leaning is to tyr to accomodate Yon’s reporting. He is what you want – someone who goes out and sees it all first hand, and knows of what he speaks. The soldiers feel fine talking with him, and he sure isn’t going to sit around the Palestine Hotel crabbing about room service while waiting for the Ba’athist stringer to bring him the latest report form Jamil Hussein…
Man, I hope this works out.
What Major John said. I have all the respect in the world for Mike Yon, but if you’re in Gen. Brooks’ shoes, and you’ve got a war to run and a “loose cannon” who isn’t supposed to be shooting at people shooting at people, and you’re the guy who has to deal with any potential fallout from that…well, let’s just say it may not be as cut and dried as it appears at first blush.
Then again, if you were Yon in the “Gates of Fire” incident, what would you have done? Bagging jihadis comes immediately to mind.
This just sucks all around. Why can’t war be perfect?
If I ”were Yon in the ‘Gates of Fire’ incident”, I’d be a hellava better writer than I can ever hope to be, and really glad to be alive.
That aside, Yon’s mistake there, IMHO, was in reporting on his actions during the incident. Grabbing the rifle, shooting the bad guys–no problem. My guess is that the guys involved would have, as mentioned here above, said “Thanks, but I’ll have to kick your ass if you do that again”. “Gates of Fire” is a great story (and if I’m not mistaken Bruce Willis has bought the rights to the movie and will play Kurilla). The story would still be great without knowing of Yon’s participation.
Not that the Islamists have any qualms with killing any westerner, but Yon’s actions in “Gates” place other journalists (and other Western non-combatants) in more jeopardy than they otherwise might be in (at least according to the rules that we play by).
The General, regardless of being a slimy PAO or who his brother might be, has a responsibility to see that those rules are upheld. I’d hate to see Yon lose his access to the war because he couldn’t live within the rules. He’s one of the few who bring anything of value.
If it is the General that is threatening Yon, he’s going to be conflicted by his duty to present moral leadership/respect for rules and the utility of having someone who connects to the American public.
I just posted an interview with a soldier who is in the battle space. CENTCOM is trying to reach out through blogs to make a connection between soldiers and people. My prior service helped me land the interview; Yon’s prior service has likely given him greater access than the pogues who sit in hotels and report.
Tough decision for a leader to make. There is no requirement to make popular decisions when you lead.
I hate that. They cut off journalists heads off there. He put them in more jeopardy that they otherwise might be in? Are you kidding me? Do you really think the IED’s and snipers make any effort to discriminate between combatants and journalists? As a journalist he has no moral obligation to commit suicide or watch the soldiers he is embedded with being killed. If he was participating in battles and was another soldier with journalism credentials, then you might have a point.
That’s entirely my point. Maybe those soldiers wouldnt have “LIVED” within those rules.
Wasn’t there a controversy early in the war when an embed pointed out enemy positions while riding with US troops? Other journalists huffed that he was “getting involved in the story” —on the wrong side, clearly, because they have no beef reporting things that help the jihadis.
I hate that. They cut off journalists heads off there. He put them in more jeopardy that they otherwise might be in? Are you kidding me? Do you really think the IED’s and snipers make any effort to discriminate between combatants and journalists?
I guess I can see both sides of this argument here. On the one hand, ‘by the rules that we play by’ , he may indeed place other journalists in more danger. (Of course, the terrorists don’t play by our rules and in fact use our rules against us, so emotionally I say ‘I don’t care if we bend the rules to defeat these animals’. Geopolitcally, there may be good reason to care how we do it, though.)
OTOH, I think the main reason that journalists haven’t been targetted more is because the Jihadis see them as useful idiots, sowing dissent and helping to demoralize America and the West. If we had more balanced reporting or a media that was actually out-and-out anti-terrorist (hah!), I think there would be many more journalists targetted.