EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
NATO Admits Shooting Victims Were 4 Afghan Civilians Not 'Known Insurgents'
KABUL - NATO acknowledged Wednesday that four unarmed Afghans who were killed this week when a military convoy opened fire on their vehicle were all civilians, correcting an earlier claim that two of the dead were "known insurgents."
Afghans carry bodies of four people killed when they ignored warnings to stop by one of NATO's convoys in Khost province late Monday, southeast of Kabul, Afghanistan, Tuesday, April 20, 2010. NATO said two of those killed in the incident were later identified as "known insurgents," although the provincial chief of police said the dead were all civilians, and included a 12-year-old child. (AP Photo) The shooting Monday night in Khost province sparked an immediate outcry from the victims' family, who insisted that all four were civilians driving home from a volleyball game. The youngest boy was just 13, said Rahmatullah Mansour, whose two sons and two nephews were killed in the shooting.
On Wednesday, NATO said it had described two of the victims as insurgents because their fingerprints matched those in a military biometric database. But their presence in the database does not necessarily mean they were insurgents.
"The term 'insurgent' should not have been used," NATO said in a statement. Lt. Col. Todd Vician, a NATO spokesman in Kabul, confirmed all four were civilians.
NATO said it fired on the car because it kept accelerating toward the military convoy despite attempts to flag the vehicle down by flashing lights and firing warning shots. The victims were unarmed and no weapons were found in the car.
Civilian deaths at the hands of U.S. and other international forces are believed to fuel resentment of the Afghan government and generate sympathy for the insurgency. Earlier this month, U.S. forces fired on a civilian bus outside the southern city of Kandahar, killing four Afghans and stoking anger over the international presence.
Mansour said that the victims in Monday's shooting were his sons Faizullah, 13, and Nasratullah, 17; and nephews Maiwand and Amirullah, both 18. He said all were students except Amirullah, who was a police officer.
"Nobody can imagine what is going on in my family," Mansour told The Associated Press. "My two brothers and I lost sons. It was difficult even to recognize their bodies because there were bullet holes in their face, chest, hands and feet."
The United Nations has called for better protection of Afghan civilians after the civilian death toll in violence rose last year to its highest level since the 2001 fall of the Taliban regime. Some 2,412 civilians were killed in 2009 - a 14 percent increase over the 2,118 who died in 2008, according to the U.N.
Nearly 70 percent of civilian deaths last year, or 1,630, were caused by the insurgents, the U.N. said.
International and Afghan forces, meanwhile, continued operations targeting individuals and networks responsible for making and placing roadside bombs responsible for most military casualties and large numbers of civilian deaths.
NATO said a suspected Taliban bomb-maker was captured in Kandahar's Arghandab district in a raid Tuesday night, along with nearly a dozen other suspected insurgents.
One person was detained in the operation.
On Wednesday, the Afghan army destroyed a cache of ammonium nitrate fertilizer in a controlled explosion in Kabul province. Ammonium nitrate is widely used by the Taliban as an ingredient of roadside bombs, and its use by farmers has been banned in Afghanistan.
A day earlier, Afghan border police inspecting vehicles along Kandahar's frontier with Pakistan discovered more than 3,200 pounds (1,450 kilograms) of ammonium nitrate along with 12 sticks of a substance believed to be TNT and 800 blasting caps, NATO said.
Also Wednesday, Afghan and NATO officials announced that authorities captured a local Taliban commander, Mullah Faqir, earlier this month after a gunbattle in Uruzgan province.
He was believed to have been responsible for attacks against local and coalition forces, said Gen. Juma Gul Himat, the provincial police chief.
Associated Press writers Rahim Faiez and Christopher Bodeen in Kabul contributed to this report.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
21 Comments so far
Show AllWhat's the difference between the imperial forces occupying Iraq and Afghanistan and the German Wehrmacht? The Germans had cooler uniforms.
Eagle Bill -
Let's extend your analogy.
What is the difference between JSOC special ops units and the Waffen SS? What is the difference between rendition and torture practices of the CIA, and the tactics of the Gestapo? What is the difference between Maliki's death squads and the Einsatzgruppen? What is the difference between brown shirt auxiliaries busting up beer hall rallies and the orchestrated spectacle of chanting, gun worshipping Teabaggers taking over Congressional health care reform town hall meetings?
Along that dark and sinister continuum, the German regular army Wehrmacht - cool uniforms and all - basically constituted the reasonable, responsible center of the Nazi movement's power heirarchy. It was those traditional Prussian-Wehrmacht types that the allies eventually negotiated with to secure surrender terms, with the SS consistently treated more as war criminals.
Bill from Saginaw
Because NATO nations are afraid to say that the 9-11 events look like an inside job, a false-flag operation, therefore, Afghani civilians have to be killed. Because the USA is afraid to say that it was a mistake to invade Afghanistan, therefore, Afghani civilians have to be killed. This is a war without reason, being continued only because stopping it requires admitting national mistakes, or national treason. And therefore, Afghani civilians have to be killed.
Apache helicopter pilots' company members issue apology for Iraqi massacre>
http://www.prisonplanet.com/u-s-troops-apologize-for-wikileaks-massacre-video.html
Unfortunately, we crossed the Rubicon years ago. Now, our global policy is that any person or group who resents, protests, or defends itself against American aggression or occupation is, by definition, an insurgent or terrorist and thus open season is declared.
If the shoe were on the other foot, and we were invaded and occupied by an enormously stronger force, who said we were to follow their rules of conduct, perhaps their religion; who put a quisling government in charge of the country to run it for them, I imagine a lot of us would fight back, thereby becoming terrorists or insurgents, to be killed at will.
We, however, would look upon ourselves as patriots. This could conceivably happen if our "own" government becomes even more repressive. And, that seems to be the trend.
National liberation, it is then, rolling back US invaders and an expanding North Atlantic Ocean.
Merkel's Defense Minister should be wearing one of his supposed blue blood ancestors' Knights Templar or Crusader crosses on his chest.
Makes a good target.
Like the Apache helicopter massacre video from Iraq, this latest shooting of four adolescent Afghans on their way home from a soccer game in Khost by US/NATO military forces highlights how hi tech firepower breeds war crime and tragedy.
"NATO said it fired on the car because it kept accelerating toward the military convoy despite efforts to flag the vehicle down by flashing lights and firing warning shots."
"It was difficult even to recognize their bodies because there were bullet holes in their face, chest, hands and feet."
Helicopter gunship technology like that of the Apache was originally developed for use in a traditional field combat environment against rival mechanized military units - against foot soldiers, trucks, armed personnel carriers, even tanks. The evolution of semiautomatic and fully automatic assault rifles for standard infantry use has made Sgt. York the eagle eye sharpshooter a thing of the past (except, of course, for the special ops sniper/assassination teams). Instead of precision and accuracy, a high rate and volume of fire, and high velocity penetrating capacity, is now the name of the new game in town.
Since when does the US Army authorize 30 calibre machine gun fire to be directed at a van whose occupants are trying to provide emergency medical assistance to wounded civilians writhing about on a sidewalk in broad daylight?
Since when does NATO fire at cars, rather than fire at an identifiable enemy?
Transpose those ultra-modern firepower salvos from the traditional battlefield setting into an urbanized, civilian occupation environment, and the rules of engagement literally cause war crimes to take place.
Don't try to pin blame for either of these incidents on the fog of war.
Bill from Saginaw
See Scott Horton's "The Law of Armed Conflict: Six Questions for Gary Solis"*
_________________________________
Solis' name doesn't ring a bell with me, but he's excruciatingly dismissive of drawing negative inferences from the justly infamous Apache helicopter massacre video:
"...Based on the circumstances seen on the videotape, and given their context, I believe it unlikely that a neutral and detached investigator would conclude that the helicopter personnel violated the law of armed conflict. Legal guilt does not always accompany innocent death. Judgments made in front of a television set are not as easily formed in a combat zone."
Re-reading it just now set my teeth on edge again. He may be correct-- one can't argue with the closing platitudes-- but he's certainly not right. IMO, his own professional detachment is inherently supercilious, and evidences an Eichmannesque meta-fallacy of not seeing the forest for the trees.
* http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/04/hbc-90006912
How can this be a 'combat zone' when the Afghans have/had no formal modern military, never declared war on the US or NATO 'allies' - and the US did not even declare war against Afghanistan. (On what grounds could they do that anyway? The Afghans offered to send all 'terrorist suspects' to an international court - where they could obtain justice, instead of being tortured and murdered. It is the US that refused international law and civil - criminal - trials that might expose their own complicity...)
to the afghan civilians:
if you stop your vehicle by the roadside, you are a threat. if you accelerate towards our convoy, you are a threat. if you accelerate away, you are up to no good. if you drive a large vehicle, that is suspicious. if there are kids, we know you are bringing them as a cover to the battle. giving aid to the wounded - you are bringing succor to the enemy. (by definition - everyone we shoot is the enemy.)driving at night, why would you? driving in a convoy - how suspicious is that? if you are celebrating, that may mislead us. if you are just sleeping in your house, we may still find you at fault.
do not drive. do not sleep. do not celebrate. we are zeus. we are watching.
seasalt -
Wonderful post. It reminds me of the paradigm example of drug courier profiling at airports a few years ago, when the psuedo-scientific basis for the various DEA and state narcotics agencies profiles were articulated, actually studied, and exposed.
Walking too fast was suspicious. Walking too slow was suspicious. Having lots of luggage was suspicious. Having very little luggage was suspicious. Sweating on a hot day was suspicious. Not sweating on a hot day was suspicious. Shifting eye focus furtively about was suspicious. Tunnel vision, eyes straight forward was suspicious.
Appearing confused, nervous or anxious was suspicious. Looking cool, calm and deliberate was suspicious. Dressing down meant suspicion of being a low end mule. Dressing stylish meant suspicion of being a drug kingpin. Traveling alone was suspicious. Traveling with a companion or in a group was suspicious.
And dressing normal, acting normal, trying to blend in with the crowd - why, that could be the most suspicious profile of all.
Bill from Saginaw
The first comment I read was so powerful I wanted to respond. But then I read the second comment, and...wanted to respond. Third comment, fourth comment, fifth comment...
...all the way to the end. Wanted to respond, wanted to respond, wanted to respond.
So what I'll do instead: Thanks Eagle Bill, Bill from Saginaw, SeriousCitizen, geo7101, Randolfski, minitrue, Eugene Costa, seasalt.
You inspire me knowing...you're out there.
I fail to see what all the fuss is about. The figures I'm seeing here, 2,400 civilian casualities in 2009 and 2,100 in 2008. This is hardly anything for the Afghan people to get excited over.
At that rate, we are still a far cry from the over 80,000 civilian deaths in Iraq that were a result (directly or indirectly) of our occupation in their country.
When the figure in Afghanistan gets close to maybe 40,000, then come back and talk to me about it. In the meantime, just chalk it up to how wonderful we are making your country for you.
And what's with these elders and tribal leaders I'm hearing about who want to negotiate with the Taliban for a possible peaceful settlement. Hillary Clinton and Bob Gates are against it, while Obama appears to be leaning toward that view. Who the hell does he think he is....the President?
Let us continue our path of destruction through as much of the Middle East as is physically possible, including possibly attacking Iran just to please the Israelis.
"80,000 civilian deaths in Iraq"? 40,000 in Afghanistan?
Pentagon estimate? Whitehouse estimate? Iraq Body Count?
Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly, etc. take value Pentagon and Whitehouse estimates at face value, as if they were plausible. They would not be interested in truth. The Iraq Body Count is not an estimate, but essentially a COUNT of Iraqi deaths documented in at least two western media outlets. It is far from useless, but could not be an estimate of the actual number of deaths unless you contend that the western media reported every Iraqi death. So far, I have not mentioned a plausible estimate of deaths in Iraq.
The study published in the Lancet, on the other hand IS an estimate of the number of deaths, and is based on proven statistical extrapolation. Media attempts to discredit this are numerous, but there have been no "serious" challenges to the study. That study, the only independent study until then put the number at 1.2 million deaths due to the invasion and the occupation between 2003 and 2006. Also, Syria has taken 4 million refugees and there are estimated to be 1.5 million internally displaced.
All of the above does not count the 1.5 estimated million people that died due to dyssenty, cholera and other water borne diseases which were caused by bombing the water processing facilities and the power stations that powered them and then classifying parts needed to repair them as "dual use" in the sanctions between 1991 and 1996.
Now, we do not have any such study of the casualties in Afghanistan, but we have every reason to suspect that the numbers would in fact be greater than those of Iraq, because of the carpet bombing during the invasion, because of the DU used, and because the USA has been bombing villages from above for a whole decade now.
Excuse me, Nearly 70% of civilian deaths were caused by insurgents. Does this in someway justify what happened, maybe take the spotlight off of the crime. This is murder plain and simple. I wonder if our troops or NATO troops know we are wrong and kill indiscrimintly because of fear. I have know idea how to fix this. We should just leave. How we will ever save face is beyond me. It's too deep!
Imagine how YOU would feel if the local police gunned down your innocent children on their way home from a sporting event - and just riddled them with bullets. Just imagine - there would be lawsuits and an awful outcry even on the MSM. Nobody else commented on the horrific comparison of what is being done in Afghan neighborhoods compared to how we would react if it happened in OUR neighborhood... Americans (and their allies) are the worst of savage barbarians the world has ever seen.
Each one of these horrific acts reminds me why my father quit the military after our history of service - it was the Nazified character of the 'new' US military to which he objected. Eisenhower warned us - and now look what we have done. And most people couldn't care less. That is what is REALLY REALLY SICK. Each one of these horrific crimes should be on our evening news - every single time - and followed up with days and days of interviews with the grieving families and friends of all these murder victims - and calls for justice and prosecution of the perps.
NATO killed these four young people for going to a volleyball game.
Ho hum.
US/NATO forces kill more innocent civilians in Afghanistan.
If it's another Western atrocity, it must be Wednesday. Or Monday. Whatever.
This will not end until the criminal invasion and occupation of the sovereign state of Afghanistan is ended, and the criminals of the Bush and Obama government and the US Military are held to account for their war crimes and crimes against humanity. If these actions cripple and destroy the nation known as the United States of America, so be it.
These stormtroopers are trained to slaughter.
The difference between the Germans and the US---
One killed for land and Power,
the other for Oil and Power,---
no matter how many die.
It seems the more Arabs die the better chance to overpower and conquer, innocent, or not!---------
and the crime keeps running rampent in America.