Documentary sheds light on Biden's reactions to Shireen Abu Akleh's killing
A documentary film has shed new light on how the administration of United States President Joe Biden responded to the killing of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, suggesting Washington had evidence indicating her shooting death was likely intentional.
An Israeli sniper fatally shot Abu Akleh nearly three years ago while she reported from the Jenin refugee camp in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on May 11, 2022.
The new film — a 40-minute investigative documentary from the Washington, DC-based media company Zeteo — was released on Thursday just ahead of the anniversary of her death.
Under the title Who Killed Shireen?, the documentary explores not only who pulled the trigger but why justice has been so elusive in Abu Akleh's case. It also offers the clearest picture yet of the Biden administration's political manoeuvring as public pressure mounted for accountability.
Abu Akleh was a US citizen, and during her final reporting assignment, she wore both a helmet and a blue vest clearly labelled with the word 'press' to indicate her status as a journalist.
In the aftermath of her killing, the Biden administration faced pressure to investigate the circumstances of her death and whether the shooting was intentional.
But while the administration initially called for an 'independent, credible investigation', it shifted its stance as the months progressed. It walked back calls for the killer to be 'prosecuted' and eventually described the shooting as 'the result of tragic circumstances'.
It also eased its scrutiny of the Israeli military, calling for accountability only in the form of a review of its 'rules of engagement'.
The documentary Who Killed Shireen? features interviews from former Washington insiders about why the Biden administration made such a pivot. Its most damaging testimony comes from an anonymous official, who spoke with his face and voice obscured.
In the film, the official claims the evidence available to the Biden administration indicated that Abu Akleh's death 'was an intentional killing'. He said that assessment was based on the 'visual capabilities of that day' and the distance between the Israeli snipers and the journalists who were shot.
Another journalist, Ali al-Samoudi, was also wounded at the same time as Abu Akleh, though he survived his gunshot.
'Whether or not they knew it was her [Abu Akleh] or not can very well be debated, but they would have absolutely known it was a media person or a noncombatant at a minimum that [the Israeli soldier] shot and killed,' the anonymous Biden official said.He added that it was his 'belief' that the shooter would have been able to see Abu Akleh's blue 'press' jacket.
The official acknowledged the shift in the Biden administration's position, from viewing the shooting as 'an intentional killing' to describing it as 'a tragic accident'. He linked that about-face to the historically close ties the US has shared with Israel.
'Ultimately, I think what it came down to was different pressure within the administration to not try to anger the government of Israel too much, by trying to force their hand at saying they intentionally killed a US citizen,' the official said.
Another former US official, Andrew Miller, also spoke to filmmakers as part of the documentary. Miller served as the deputy secretary of state for Israeli-Palestinian Affairs from 2022 to 2024, and he indicated that the Biden administration had not been forthcoming about the stonewalling it faced from the Israeli government.
He said the government of then-Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett refused to allow the US access to the soldier who fired the fatal shot, even for 'informal' questioning.
Miller also cast doubt on Israeli claims that Abu Akleh was shot during a crossfire with Palestinian fighters. He explained that the Biden administration had information from the start that contradicted those claims.
'The fact that the official Israeli position remains that this was a case of crossfire … [that] the entire episode was a mistake — as opposed to potentially a mistake in identification or the deliberate targeting of this individual — points to, I think, a broader policy of seeking to manage the narrative,' Miller said.The Biden administration had never publicly contradicted Israel's assessment. Instead, when the Israeli military released its final report on the killing in September 2022, it said it 'welcomed' the assessment.
That report asserted that Abu Akleh was 'accidentally hit' by an Israeli bullet 'during an exchange of fire in which life-risking, widespread and indiscriminate shots were fired toward' Israeli soldiers.
To date, the US government has never declassified a State Department report on the killing or confirmed media reports that the Department of Justice was conducting a separate probe.
Rights groups, press freedom organisations, and lawmakers have long called the Biden administration's response inadequate, appealing for greater transparency and for the US to withhold aid to the military unit responsible.
Advocates said the latest revelations underscore a continued cycle of impunity.
'The US government has acted as an accomplice to Israeli war crimes, not only against Palestinians but Americans, too, trumping loyalty to its own laws and citizens,' said Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at the human rights organisation Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), in a statement responding to the documentary.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
European leaders seek ‘digital sovereignty' over tech infrastructure
June 21 (UPI) -- Leaders of many European nations say they need to do more to develop technological infrastructure to ensure digital sovereignty instead of relying on services from global tech firms. A recent forum discussion on the market dominance of global corporations assessed the "blurring of the boundaries between economic and political control" among European nations by tech firms. A consensus of attendees at the ongoing Berlin Summit 2025 agreed European nations need to coordinate their efforts to develop infrastructures to "avoid path dependencies and long-term dependence on global platform players," Forum New Economy reported on Friday. "European countries are highly dependent on companies from the USA and China in a variety of technological infrastructures, from cloud services and social media to generative artificial intelligence," Forum New Economy reported. Such companies dominate European markets and are increasing their control of digital infrastructures, innovation networks, supply chains, data flows and research agendas. An example is Microsoft earlier this year suspending the business email account for International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan. The action occurred within months of the ICC issuing a warrant for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Although the tech firm suspended Khan's ICC email account, Microsoft officials said it still is providing services for the ICC. The company also announced their intent to support the digital sovereignty of European nations. "We've operated in Europe for more than 40 years, and we have been and always will be a steadfast partner to Europe," Microsoft Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella said in a social media post on Friday. Microsoft is supporting European sovereignty and that of its respective nations with several existing and new tech offerings, Nadella said. The services include Microsoft Sovereign Cloud, Data Guardian, External Key Management and Sovereign Private Cloud. The existing and new offerings "bring digital sovereignty to all European organizations" and"unlock new sovereign ways to run private sovereign clouds," Nadella said. "These new offerings build on decades of pioneering work in sovereign cloud solutions by ourselves and to our partners," he added. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
How The Big Beautiful Bill Will Handicap Clean Energy
The Capitol Building, home of the United State Congress. Green Technologies At Risk In Current Mega Bill As it was written, the Big, Beautiful Bill (Mega Bill) passed by The House of Representatives in May would handicap certain green projects (solar, wind, and batteries) that are in line to receive tax credits made available by the Biden government. The handicap is hard to understand because in the U.S. over 90% of new energy projects in 2023 and 2024 was generated by solar, wind, and batteries. What is the handicap? The Mega Bill mandates that such projects must begin within two months of passage of the bill, and would have to be completed, and in service, by the last day of 2028, or the tax credits would be canceled. To see what impact this would have on green projects, one analysis looked at clean electrical projects that are currently in the interconnection queue, and due to go online during 2028 or later (it wouldn't be uncommon for projects slated to complete in 2028 to spill over to 2029, which would cancel the tax credits.) The total for all these at-risk projects in Figure 1 amounts to 600 GW (gigawatts). The largest three projects are CAISO of California at 183 GW, ERCOT of Texas at 128 GW, and MISO (Midwest and South) at 111 GW. Figure 1. The truth is, current electrical production in U.S. is 1200 GW, and this will need to grow rapidly to power new AI data centers. So, if all these seven green projects lost their tax credits and dropped out of the interconnection queue, it would represent a huge loss that is 50% of current electrical production in the U.S. This loss would be like tossing away 600 traditional power plants that added up to 50% of current U.S. electricity supply. Granted, a number of projects in Figure 1 would drop out of the queue anyway, due to other factors such as financial commitments that fall through. But still, a loss of remaining projects that would stand to boost current U.S. power by 30% or 40% or 50% would be an unforgiveable loss—especially since solar, wind and battery projects have all the market momentum in the past few years. Speaking of momentum, in 2023 and 2024 in the U.S., the vast majority (93%--94%) of new energy sources were solar, wind, and batteries. The only commercially proven competitor is gas-fired power plants, which are facing serious delays, and they cost more. What if projects that lost their tax credits were to go ahead to completion? They might, but it's obvious this would translate to higher cost of electricity for consumers. Mega Bill Changes Suggested By Senate. The House Mega Bill has gone to the Senate, and on Monday June 16 they have proposed some changes. UtilityDive reports that the harsh 'start by – complete by' House requirement to access the tax credits has been removed. In one box, nuclear, geothermal and hydropower can claim the tax credits so long as they start construction by 2033. But in another box, wind and solar can obtain only 60% of the tax credits and only if they break ground by 2026. Or 20% if by 2027. Or zero if after that. This is a serious handicap for the frontrunners, solar and wind, that have provided over 93% of new electrical capacity in 2023 and 2024. And it comes at a crucial time, because the U.S. needs to quickly boost its power capability by a massive amount to supply AI data centers. One positive: battery storage or BESS (battery energy storage systems) can access tax credits until 2036, although the credits will be tapered down, according to Canary Media. Also, some solar and wind projects would be able to keep the tax credits beyond the end of 2028—provided they exist on federal land, generate 1 GW or more power, and have obtained right-of-way approval from the BLM (Bureau of Land Management). The next steps are: the Senate as a whole has to pass these changes, and then attempt to reconcile with the House. The timeline is short as the goal is to get the final version of the Mega Bill to President Trump's desk by July 4. Coming out of all the discussion and debate, it seems the Mega Bill wants to handicap wind and solar and batteries. But why? Reasons Why The Mega Bill Would Handicap Wind And Solar Energy. First, the Bill will cause electricity prices to rise. If cheap wind, solar and batteries are handicapped in preference to expensive almost-defunct coal power plants, commercially unproven SMRs (small modular nuclear reactors), and next-gen geothermal methods, then prices of electricity will rise. Table 1 lays this out, using the most recent LCOE data from Lazard. Table 1. Most recent LCOE estimates for various electrical sources. With tax credits and based on a utility scale, solar PV + BESS and wind + BESS are cheaper than geothermal with tax credits, and much cheaper than gas-fired power, nuclear, and coal. If the Mega Bill handicaps wind and solar in the race, electrical costs will zoom upwards. Second, the Bill seems to be unaware of green energy success in Australia. In the state of South Australia renewables plus batteries have been providing 72% of grid electricity continuously for three years, and this is expected to rise to 100% by 2027. Solar, wind, and batteries have proven the stability and reliability of renewables commercially. The first grid-scale BESS was started in 2017 by Elon Musk in South Australia, and BESS are expanding rapidly in the U.S. as well as in Australia. Intermittent power is no longer a reason to dismiss renewables, despite what the Energy Secretary says, because BESS have solved this problem and electricity from solar and wind renewables with BESS is dispatchable. Third, the Bill assumes new investments in old energy (coal, natural gas, and nuclear) will be embraced by the U.S. population. However, global spending on low-carbon power has doubled in the past five years. Solar PV is the leader in this space, with investments that will reach $450 billion in 2025. Coal is too dirty when it burns, and in the U.S. the market share has dropped from 50% in 2011 to 11% in 2024. Natural gas burns cleaner than coal, but the market for new gas-fired power plants has dropped out in the past two years, due to cost and delays in permitting and supply chains. The cost of new nuclear reactors, whether traditional reactors or SMRs, is substantially higher than renewable energies (Table 1). There is also the ubiquitous threat of being exposed to nuclear radiation, either from nuclear accidents or from underground storage of nuclear waste. It has been reported that U.S. nuclear reactors that were decommissioned some time ago can be recommissioned, but at a heavy cost of around $1 billion per unit. Fourth, the Bill enables China to forge ahead with a green energy economy, while the U.S. goes backward. Energy from solar, wind, and batteries is cheap, and has a short new-build time. It will continue to provide jobs and grow the economy, and benefits include lower electricity prices and less pollution. A key advantage is already-commercialized power for data centers that will enable the U.S. to compete with China in the race for AI. The handicap and setbacks of a thriving clean industry in the U.S. would be China's gain. Fifth, the Bill will force job losses by handicapping green industries. If projects in the above list of seven in Figure 1 were to be canceled due to the Mega Bill handicaps, there could be serious job losses. To illustrate by results in 2024, one report quotes $80 billion invested in clean power in 2024, which supported 1.4 million jobs in the U.S. Another answer is that current tax credits would enable strong economic growth by 2035: almost $2 trillion of monetary growth and almost 14 million jobs. This amounts to a return on the federal investment by four-times. The green energy benefits and financial returns of wind and solar with battery storage apply to both Republican and Democratic states in the U.S.. But so do the losses, if Congress decides to handicap wind and solar renewables. The biggest losses may be soaring electricity costs in the U.S., and the U.S. bending to China's clean energy boom of surging solar and BESS projects that will reliably service their AI data center programs.
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
European leaders seek 'digital sovereignty' over tech infrastructure
1 of 3 | Jensen Huang, founder and chief executive officer of NVIDIA, unveils the latest RTX 5070 laptop processors on stage during the 2025 International CES at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas on January 6. File Photo by James Atoa/UPI | License Photo June 21 (UPI) -- Leaders of many European nations say they need to do more to develop technological infrastructure to ensure digital sovereignty instead of relying on services from global tech firms. A recent forum discussion on the market dominance of global corporations assessed the "blurring of the boundaries between economic and political control" among European nations by tech firms. A consensus of attendees at the ongoing Berlin Summit 2025 agreed European nations need to coordinate their efforts to develop infrastructures to "avoid path dependencies and long-term dependence on global platform players," Forum New Economy reported on Friday. "European countries are highly dependent on companies from the USA and China in a variety of technological infrastructures, from cloud services and social media to generative artificial intelligence," Forum New Economy reported. Such companies dominate European markets and are increasing their control of digital infrastructures, innovation networks, supply chains, data flows and research agendas. An example is Microsoft earlier this year suspending the business email account for International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan. The action occurred within months of the ICC issuing a warrant for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Although the tech firm suspended Khan's ICC email account, Microsoft officials said it still is providing services for the ICC. The company also announced their intent to support the digital sovereignty of European nations. "We've operated in Europe for more than 40 years, and we have been and always will be a steadfast partner to Europe," Microsoft Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella said in a social media post on Friday. Microsoft is supporting European sovereignty and that of its respective nations with several existing and new tech offerings, Nadella said. The services include Microsoft Sovereign Cloud, Data Guardian, External Key Management and Sovereign Private Cloud. The existing and new offerings "bring digital sovereignty to all European organizations" and"unlock new sovereign ways to run private sovereign clouds," Nadella said. "These new offerings build on decades of pioneering work in sovereign cloud solutions by ourselves and to our partners," he added.
