AMERICAN army veterans have backed claims of a cover-up over the latest massacre of civilians in Afghanistan.
Corporate media have obediently stuck to the official US damage-limitation line that one ‘rogue’ sergeant carried out the murders of 16 people, including 9 children, totally ignoring eye-witness reports of a group of drunken laughing Americans.
But the Veterans Today site draws attention to a series of inconsistencies in this account, including the fact that a vehicle would have been needed to transport the jerrycan of petrol needed for the reported burning of the victims’ bodies.
Senior editor Gordon Duff talks in this video about a ‘patsy’ taking the blame for what happened and of the US bribing people to keep quiet about the truth.
And he writes on the website that “we can safely assume” the following points.
* More than one American was involved as no single soldier would have been allowed outside the compound, heavily armed with a vehicle.
* Gate security received authorization for the “mission” from the watch officer at the “Combat Operations Center” at the base, the 24 hour nerve center than coordinates both offensive and defensive missions for even the smallest commands.
* No “reaction force” was sent to investigate though this was right outside the gates. Radio contact would have been attempted, and there would be recorded records of this and all other activities, as required by normal procedures.
Adds one user of the site: “I saw this story first thing this morning as one of the lead stories on my homepage. I spent much of the day looking for additional ‘facts’…and of course found none. I believe your assesment is as close to the truth as I, or anyone else will likely encounter.
“There is an ‘ill and atrocious wind blowing’ around this ‘incident’. The propaganda machine is already running at full speed. Sad and demoralizing beyond words.”
Says another: “I’ve been out with several…..shit, maybe a hundred Iraq/Afghan vets drinking and also shooting out in the hills of Colorado. Mostly marines, a few Army rangers, 2 Seals and the bravest of the brave….medics.
“Boil them down after a few weeks of talking, they all say the same things. The same things my good buddy tells me his Nam buddies all told him – ‘it became addicting, god help me?’.
”I tend to agree with your assesment however, this happened on purpose. The group supported SF troops and it wouldn’t suprise me if another group was outside the wire conducting ‘phoenix’ type operations. Same thing with the timing of Iraqi atrocities when we felt we weren’t needed as much and were leaving amidst ‘success’. First reports were a Seal or two, then a nobody, well fed with Psychotics and other scrip meds.”
‘Lone’ soldier line described as a lie
THE AMERICAN claim that only one ‘rogue’ soldier was behind the massacre in Afghanistan on Sunday is being described as a lie.
The line that a sole deranged individual carried out the murder of 16 civilians, including children, has been repeated by global media and seemingly accepted as true.
Obviously, this version of the story is less damaging to the reputation of the US’s army of occupation.
But eye witness reports spoke of a group of American soldiers who were laughing and appeared drunk.
And AP reported on Monday morning: “Afghans are expressing growing skepticism that a shooting rampage that killed 16 civilians was carried out by a single US soldier.
“Abdul Rahum Ayubi, who is a lawmaker from Kandahar province where the tragedy occurred, said Monday it seemed impossible for one soldier to cover the ground between the houses that were attacked — over a mile (2 kilometers) — and also burn the dead bodies.
“Bismullah Afghanmal, a parliament member, said the reports he received from villagers indicate the shooting before dawn Sunday came from several directions.”
Bacha Agha of Balandi village told AP: “One man can’t kill so many people. There must have been many people involved.
“If the government says this is just one person’s act we will not accept it. … After killing those people they also burned the bodies.”
In a statement, Afghan President Hamid Karzai left open the possibility of more than one shooter.
He initially spoke of a single US gunman, then referred to “American forces” entering houses. The statement quoted a 15-year-old survivor named Rafiullah, who was shot in the leg, as telling Karzai in a phone call that ‘soldiers’ broke into his house, woke up his family and began shooting them.
“This is an assassination, an intentional killing of innocent civilians and cannot be forgiven,” Karzai said.
The original news report from Reuters, later modified to include the official US account, said: “Witnesses told Reuters they saw a group of US soldiers arrive at their village in Kandahar’s Panjwayi district at around 2am, enter homes and open fire.”
Woody Guthrie - 1913 Massacre
Kazakh authorities have said that 14 people were killed in the violence on December 16 and more than 80 wounded. Protesters have said the death toll is much higher, although their claims can not be independently verified.
The video shows protesters and passersby moving away from the police, who are not yet in the frame. Some of the protesters are throwing rocks at the police.
The sound of shooting can then be heard with police officers advancing behind riot shields. Some protesters are shot as they try to flee. After the shooting, one man lies motionless on the ground, while another limps away. Riot police then move in, some of them drawing weapons and beating protesters on the ground.
The Kazakh authorities have defended their use of force against “hooligans,” including the decision to use firearms.
As a US marine who lost close friends in the siege of Fallujah in Iraq seven years ago, I understand that we were the aggressors.
12/22/2011
By Ross Caputi
It has been seven years since the end of the second siege of Fallujah – the US assault that left the city in ruins, killed thousands of civilians, and displaced hundreds of thousands more; the assault that poisoned a generation, plaguing the people who live there with cancers and their children with birth defects. It has been seven years and the lies that justified the assault still perpetuate false beliefs about what we did.
The US veterans who fought there still do not understand who they fought against, or what they were fighting for.
I know, because I am one of those American veterans. In the eyes of many of the people I “served” with, the people of Fallujah remain dehumanised and their resistance fighters are still believed to be terrorists. But unlike most of my counterparts, I understand that I was the aggressor, and that the resistance fighters in Fallujah were defending their city.
It is also the seventh anniversary of the deaths of two close friends of mine, Travis Desiato and Bradley Faircloth, who were killed in the siege. Their deaths were not heroic or glorious. Their deaths were tragic, but not unjust.How can I begrudge the resistance in Fallujah for killing my friends, when I know that I would have done the same thing if I were in their place? How can I blame them when we were the aggressors? It could have been me instead of Travis or Brad.
I carried a radio on my back that dropped the bombs that killed civilians and reduced Fallujah to rubble. If I were a Fallujan, I would have killed anyone like me. I would have had no choice. The fate of my city and my family would have depended on it. I would have killed the foreign invaders. Travis and Brad are both victims and perpetrators. They were killed and they killed others because of a political agenda in which they were just pawns.
They were the iron fist of American empire, and an expendable loss in the eyes of their leaders. I do not see any contradiction in feeling sympathy for the dead US Marines and soldiers and at the same time feeling sympathy for the Fallujans who fell to their guns.
The contradiction lies in believing that we were liberators, when in fact we oppressed the freedoms and wishes of Fallujans. The contradiction lies in believing that we were heroes, when the definition of “hero” bares no relation to our actions in Fallujah. What we did to Fallujah cannot be undone, and I see no point in attacking the people in my former unit. What I want to attack are the lies and false beliefs. I want to destroy the prejudices that prevented us from putting ourselves in the other’s shoes and asking ourselves what we would have done if a foreign army invaded our country and laid siege to our city.
I understand the psychology that causes the aggressors to blame their victims. I understand the justifications and defence mechanisms. I understand the emotional urge to want to hate the people who killed someone dear to you. But to describe the psychology that preserves such false beliefs is not to ignore the objective moral truth that no attacker can ever justly blame their victims for defending themselves. The same distorted morality has been used to justify attacks against the native Americans, the Vietnamese, El Salvadorans, and the Afghans.
It is the same story over and over again. These people have been dehumanised, their God-given right to self-defence has been delegitimised, their resistance has been reframed as terrorism, and US soldiers have been sent to kill them. History has preserved these lies, normalised them, and socialised them into our culture: so much so that legitimate resistance against US aggression is incomprehensible to most, and to even raise this question is seen as un-American.
History has defined the US veteran as a hero, and in doing so it has automatically defined anyone who fights against him as the bad guy. It has reversed the roles of aggressor and defender, moralised the immoral, and shaped our societies’ present understanding of war. I cannot imagine a more necessary step towards justice than to put an end to these lies, and achieve some moral clarity on this issue. I see no issue more important than to clearly understand the difference between aggression and self-defence, and to support legitimate struggles. I cannot hate, blame, begrudge, or resent Fallujans for fighting back against us.
I am sincerely sorry for the role I played in the second siege of Fallujah, and
I hope that some day not just Fallujans but all Iraqis will win their struggle.
Bloody Sunday (Irish: Domhnach na Fola)—sometimes called the Bogside Massacre—was an incident on 30 January 1972 in the Bogside area of Derry, Northern Ireland, in which twenty-six unarmed civil-rights protesters and bystanders were shot by soldiers of the British Army. Thirteen males, seven of whom were teenagers, died immediately or soon after, while the death of another man four-and-a-half months later was attributed to the injuries he received on that day. Two protesters were also injured when they were run down by army vehicles. Five of those wounded were shot in the back. The incident occurred during a Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association march; the soldiers involved were members of the First Battalion of the Parachute Regiment (1 Para).
Two investigations have been held by the British government. The Widgery Tribunal, held in the immediate aftermath of the event, largely cleared the soldiers and British authorities of blame—Widgery described the soldiers’ shooting as “bordering on the reckless”—but was criticised as a “whitewash”, including by Jonathan Powell. The Saville Inquiry, chaired by Lord Saville of Newdigate, was established in 1998 to reinvestigate the events. Following a twelve-year inquiry, Saville’s report was made public on 15 June 2010, and contained findings of fault that could re-open the controversy, and potentially lead to criminal investigations for some soldiers involved in the killings. The report found that all of those shot were unarmed, and that the killings were both “unjustified and unjustifiable.” On the publication of the Saville report the British prime minister, David Cameron, made a formal apology on behalf of the United Kingdom.
