. . . May be this is why they hate us!!!
All Posts post a reply | post a new topic

AuthorTopic: . . . May be this is why they hate us!!!
topic by
nemesis
1/8/2002 (9:59)
 reply top

Afghan horror, toll of US bombing


By Rory Carroll

QALAYE NIAZI: The attack here was as sudden and devastating as the Pentagon intended. American special forces on the ground confirmed the target and three bombers, a B-52 and two B-1Bs, did the rest , zapping Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders in their sleep as well as an ammunition dump.

The war on terrorism came no cleaner and Commander Matthew Klee, a spokesman at the US central command in Tampa, Florida, had reassuring news: 'Follow-on reporting indicates that there was no collateral damage.'

Some of the things his follow-on reporters missed: bloodied children's shoes and skirts, bloodied school books, the scalp of a woman with braided grey hair, butter toffees in red wrappers, wedding decorations.

The charred flesh sticking to rubble in black lumps could have been Osama bin Laden's henchmen, but survivors said it was the remains of farmers, their wives and children, and wedding guests. They said that more than 100 civilians died at this village in eastern Afghanistan.

Survivors lacked the bewilderment common to those who have been bombed, because they had an explanation: a tribal rival had manipulated the Americans into attacking here to further his political ambitions in Paktia province.

The Pentagon said that it had indications senior Taliban and Al Qaeda officials were at the site and that two surface-to-air missiles were fired at the aircraft during the December 29 raid. The bombs set off secondary explosions consistent with stockpiled ammunition.

The Pentagon has produced no evidence that missiles were fired at the planes but there was a stockpile. From the ruins of two houses yesterday (SUN) spilled boxes of Russian, Chinese and Iranian rockets.

Diehard Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters are said to still rove Paktia and its neighbouring provinces of Paktika and Khost, where a US soldier was killed at the weekend. Qalaye Niazi's role seemed clear to Commander Klee: 'You have a known Al Qaeda-Taliban leadership compound.'

But survivors say they stored the ammunition six weeks ago on the orders of retreating Taliban troops. When the regime fell they notified authorities but no one came to collect the ammunition. 'We left it. What else were we supposed to do with it?' said Taj Mohammad, the village elder.

It was stored in two unfinished houses in a five-house complex six miles (10km) north of the collection of mud-brick compounds which passes for Qalaye Niazi's centre. The complex housed 10 families who grew wheat, apples and grapes, said Mohammad.

About two dozen guests had crammed into the three occupied houses for a wedding, raising the number of occupants to more than 100, said the elder. The bombers came early in the morning.

Precision-guided bombs vaporised all five buildings and a second wave an hour later hit people digging in the rubble and, judging from hair and flesh on the edge of three 40 feet holes some distance from the complex, those trying to flee.

Two days later villagers with shovels and tractors extracted the remains. A hand, an ankle, a bit of skull, sometimes an entire torso. They buried some in 11 graves, each said to contain several people, and relatives from Khost took some for burial in the mountains.

One villager said 32 died. The United Nations said 52, including 10 women and 25 children. Mohammad said at least 80. Other villagers said 92. Staff at the hospital in Gardez said 107.

Innumeracy, rapid burial, damage to bodies, propaganda, remoteness - they all conspire to shred certainty in this and other bombings. It is no one's job to count the dead.

The UN said that its envoy to Afghanistan, Lakhdar Brahimi, would discuss this village with US diplomats. The Pentagon has shifted slightly from its initial certitude and promised to investigate a raid which Donald Anderson, chairman of the House of Commons foreign affairs select committee, denounced as a massive failure of intelligence.

That civilians were present there can be little doubt. Taliban and Al Qaeda too? Survivors swear not. Yet there is little venom for the US. 'They were given bad information by bad Afghans,' said Hinzer Gul, echoing neighbours.

Haji Saifullah, head of Paktia's shura, or tribal council, said: 'Our local enemies are delivering this information to the Americans as if Taliban or Al Qaeda people are here, and Americans just bomb without any search.'

The finger was collectively pointed at Aghi Badshah Khan Zadran, 58, an anti-Taliban commander who controls Khost province and is lobbying the interim government to add Paktia and Paktika provinces to his fiefdom.

The Guardian News Service.
reply by
Barb
1/8/2002 (14:54)
 reply top
I don't care IF / WHY they (murdering terrorists) 'hate us' frankly. All I care about is if they try to attack us again. Period.
reply by
nemesis
1/8/2002 (17:07)
 reply top
And precisley that is what makes the difference!

Given a problem, some will be exclusively concerned about the *symptom* while others will be concerned about the *cause* as well.
reply by
suspect
1/8/2002 (18:39)
 reply top
They have attacked again, in florida this time. The method was the same, links to bin Laden have been found. It's time to start carpet bombing the USA. For years this terrorist organisation has been launching attacks on schools an d such across the country, but people are too blind to see. Or worse still 'He was just a loner. A lone gunman. A lone Bomber. They were just a couple(?!) of loners'. Ok there may be some collateral damage, but remember it's just people from somewhere else in the country. If you can ignore the liquified bodies of a couple of 12 year girls in a liberated afghan village which is subsquently bombed by the US for no reason, you are inhumane enough to ignore them at home too. After all 'Happy news for Happy people' will make sure you don't get to hear anything bad/ 'unamerican'. Just shut up and shop.
reply by
Barb
1/8/2002 (21:51)
 reply top
When this thing started out, I DID care why they 'hated us.' Now that I've learned more, I don't care WHY anymore. And, believe me, I speak for many.
reply by
nemesis
1/9/2002 (10:40)
 reply top
I am sure you speak for many. And, that is the tragedy!!
reply by
Barb
1/9/2002 (15:11)
 reply top
Yea, and you don't try to get revenge by killing 5,000 Americans who were simply going to/at work.
reply by
nemesis
1/9/2002 (15:19)
 reply top
How about this revenge by a 'civilized' people:

'About two dozen guests had crammed into the three occupied houses for a wedding, raising the number of occupants to more than 100, said the elder. The bombers came early in the morning.

Precision-guided bombs vaporised all five buildings and a second wave an hour later hit people digging in the rubble and, judging from hair and flesh on the edge of three 40 feet holes some distance from the complex, those trying to flee.

Two days later villagers with shovels and tractors extracted the remains. A hand, an ankle, a bit of skull, sometimes an entire torso. They buried some in 11 graves, each said to contain several people, and relatives from Khost took some for burial in the mountains.

One villager said 32 died. The United Nations said 52, including 10 women and 25 children. Mohammad said at least 80. Other villagers said 92. Staff at the hospital in Gardez said 107. '
reply by
suspect
1/9/2002 (19:25)
 reply top
No one has killed 5000 americans except other americans with guns (only a fraction of their yearly quota). Figures have been around 3000 for a long time now (elsewhere in the world anyway). Something like 2893 in the buildings and several hundred more for the planes. In the WTC 619 confirmed dead, while 309 missing, and 1,965 unidentified. So it's not even around about the figure for the number of people killed in Bhopal, India in the Union Carbide massacre of 1984.
And of this 3000 odd quite of few were not americans. And none of these deaths were worth the death of a single civilian more in the pursuit of so-called 'revenge' (or oil pipelines).

5000 Afghan civilians killed just trying to survive however is very possible, though the official US figure will probably be 500, just like Panama all over again. Though gone are the days of wars like Vietnam where the gory details are brought to your living room with something like 6 Corporations now providing 80% of the world news they may try to bring that figure down to something more palatable like 5 civilian deaths, sorry I mean pieces of collateral damage.
reply by
TheAZCowBoy
1/10/2002 (2:44)
 reply top
WTC and the truth as the world sees it.

Remember, the 3,000,000 massacred civilians of Vietnam in the 1970's by the US? Then the 19 million gallons of Agent Orange that turned SE Asia into the worst environmental disaster in the history of mankind? Then an alleged 350,000+ dead civilians in the US' 'illegal' bombing of Cambodia and Laos? Of course there were the 'little' wars like the 5,000 civilians massacred by the US in the invasion of Panama ( all buried in mass graves in the middle of the night by US soldiers so the victims could not be identified, thus helping the US avoid being sued for these deaths by the next-of-kin ).

I'll skip the 100,000+ dead civilians in Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatamala during those 'wonderful' Reagan years and what do you have?

The new 'Riddle of the Sphinx,' Oh my, Oh my, why do they hate us?!

Humm, maybe a algorithim could be invented that would make us look like the much admired US 'Dog Faces' of WW II--NOT!

TAC, (:Þ~
reply by
Barb
1/10/2002 (15:30)
 reply top
Vietnam was a military war. 9/11 was not.
reply by
suspect
1/10/2002 (19:37)
 reply top
What?!!! I thought everyone knew this now.

--------
Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched
Vietnam War

By Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon
July 27, 1994

Thirty years ago, it all seemed very clear.

'American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New
Aggression', announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.

That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: 'President Johnson has ordered retaliatory
action against gunboats and 'certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam' after renewed attacks against
American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.'

But there was no 'second attack' by North Vietnam -- no 'renewed attacks against American destroyers.' By
reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam
War.

A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media...leading to over 50,000
American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties.

The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an 'unprovoked attack' against a U.S.
destroyer on 'routine patrol' in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 -- and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with
a 'deliberate attack' on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive
intelligence-gathering maneuvers -- in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese
navy and the Laotian air force.

'The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place,' writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those
assaults were 'part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been
pursuing since early 1964.'

On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had
occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf -- a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that
evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.

But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to 'retaliate' for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened.

Prior to the U.S. air strikes, top officials in Washington had reason to doubt that any Aug. 4 attack by North
Vietnam had occurred. Cables from the U.S. task force commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick,
referred to 'freak weather effects,' 'almost total darkness' and an 'overeager sonarman' who 'was hearing ship's
own propeller beat.'

One of the Navy pilots flying overhead that night was squadron commander James Stockdale, who gained fame
later as a POW and then Ross Perot's vice presidential candidate. 'I had the best seat in the house to watch
that event,' recalled Stockdale a few years ago, 'and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets --
there were no PT boats there.... There was nothing there but black water and American fire power.'

In 1965, Lyndon Johnson commented: 'For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.'

But Johnson's deceitful speech of Aug. 4, 1964, won accolades from editorial writers. The president, proclaimed
the New York Times, 'went to the American people last night with the somber facts.' The Los Angeles Times
urged Americans to 'face the fact that the Communists, by their attack on American vessels in international
waters, have themselves escalated the hostilities.'

An exhaustive new book, The War Within: America's Battle Over Vietnam, begins with a dramatic account of the
Tonkin Gulf incidents. In an interview, author Tom Wells told us that American media 'described the air strikes
that Johnson launched in response as merely `tit for tat' -- when in reality they reflected plans the administration
had already drawn up for gradually increasing its overt military pressure against the North.'

Why such inaccurate news coverage? Wells points to the media's 'almost exclusive reliance on U.S. government
officials as sources of information' -- as well as 'reluctance to question official pronouncements on 'national
security issues.''

Daniel Hallin's classic book The 'Uncensored War' observes that journalists had 'a great deal of information
available which contradicted the official account [of Tonkin Gulf events]; it simply wasn't used. The day before the
first incident, Hanoi had protested the attacks on its territory by Laotian aircraft and South Vietnamese
gunboats.'

What's more, 'It was generally known...that `covert' operations against North Vietnam, carried out by South
Vietnamese forces with U.S. support and direction, had been going on for some time.'

In the absence of independent journalism, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution -- the closest thing there ever was to a
declaration of war against North Vietnam -- sailed through Congress on Aug. 7. (Two courageous senators,
Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska, provided the only 'no' votes.) The resolution authorized
the president 'to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States
and to prevent further aggression.'

The rest is tragic history.

Nearly three decades later, during the Gulf War, columnist Sydney Schanberg warned journalists not to forget
'our unquestioning chorus of agreeability when Lyndon Johnson bamboozled us with his fabrication of the Gulf of
Tonkin incident.'

Schanberg blamed not only the press but also 'the apparent amnesia of the wider American public.'

And he added: 'We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the
government is telling us the truth.'
reply by
scot
1/13/2002 (21:02)
 reply top
barb you cannot argue with these fools, don't waste your time. they hide behind the united states and gripe about problems. they want someone else to solve all their problems. To them the jew and the united states occupy all their thinking time. No wander the palestinians are in such a mess. they have no time left to run a company. The ones here in this country will not go home to help their brothers by useing the education they recieved here. so screw em!
reply by
Barb
1/14/2002 (23:02)
 reply top
Some of them talk with intelligent prose, but none of it is logical.
reply by
DJFLux
1/15/2002 (5:48)
 reply top
I have reason to believe that Vietnam was actually an invasion done on the part of the United States, and not just a military war.

reply by
KOZ
1/15/2002 (6:45)
 reply top
more than a million people, many of them young kids, have died in Iraq beacause of the 'it was worth it'sanctions imposed upon them, how is the death toll of the WTC comparable to that?Yeps Barb, i'm sure you speak a hundred times more logically than most on these boards, you being american and all.
reply by
KOZ
1/15/2002 (6:46)
 reply top
more than a million people, many of them young kids, have died in Iraq beacause of the 'it was worth it'sanctions imposed upon them, how is the death toll of the WTC comparable to that?Yeps Barb, i'm sure you speak a hundred times more logically than most on these boards, you being american and all.
reply by
Barb
1/15/2002 (14:22)
 reply top
Saddam Hussein is trying to make the U.N. and the U.S. look like they are responsible for his people's deaths. What bullshit! Hussein is quite capable of taking care of his own people, but instead, he chooses to build more palaces with his own money. Put the blame where it belongs-- on their own leader's HEAD!
reply by
KOZ
1/16/2002 (3:36)
 reply top
well they are responsible.the enemy is hussein, fine, but what part do innocent people, children play? you get a person who plots a murder, then gets someone else to carry it out.both are guilty.
reply by
Barb
1/16/2002 (22:16)
 reply top
Hussein may be deviant, but he's certainly not stupid. He knows that by doing nothing to help his people that are affected by the sanctions people will say, 'See? It's the U.N. sanctions!' Please. Again, Saddam is MORE than capable of taking care of his own people but has other interests at heart.