The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army’s 82nd Airborne with a dead insurgent’s hand on his shoulder. It said it was one of 18 photographs of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne’s 4th Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C.
The paper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.
The story was later posted to the paper’s Web site with another photograph of soldiers posing with dismembered legs held upright by ropes.
The photographs were believed to have been taken in 2010, according to a spokeswoman for international forces in Afghanistan. She said it was not yet clear where the photographs had been taken, the number of service personnel involved nor whether they were still serving in the U.S. military.
According to the newspaper, the photographs were taken in Zabul Province in 2010. Zabul is in the south of the country and is one of Afghanistan poorest provinces where the Taliban has a strong presence.
The story said in one photograph two soldiers posed holding a dead man’s hand with the middle finger raised.
The revelation of the photographs followed video uncovered in January of four United States Marines urinating on dead Taliban fighters and appeared likely to complicate an already tense atmosphere for American forces in Afghanistan. There are three major investigations underway into the burning of Korans at Bagram Air Force base in February that touched off deadly protests.
The military is also investigating the killing last month of 17 Afghan villagers, including women and children, by a rogue United States soldier in Kandahar Province, also in the south.
Mr. Panetta said in an emailed statement that the photographs did not represent the “professionalism of the vast majority of U.S. troops serving in Afghanistan today.” He also voiced displeasure at the newspaper for publishing the images, saying he was “disappointed that despite our request not to publish these photographs, the Los Angeles Times went ahead.”