PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Kills 40 At Wedding


shemp
19th May 2004, 11:23 AM
Maybe because we weren't invited? Maybe because our soldiers can't tell partygoers from terrorists? Or maybe because the Bush Re-Election War[TM] needed some fresh victims?

source (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml)

(CBS/AP) A U.S. helicopter fired on a wedding party Wednesday in western Iraq, killing more than 40 people, Iraqi officials said. But the U.S. military said it could not confirm the report and was investigating.

Lt. Col Ziyad al-Jbouri, deputy police chief of Ramadi, said between 42 and 45 people were killed in the attack, which took place about 2:45 a.m. in a remote desert area near the border with Syria and Jordan. He said the dead included 15 children and 10 women.

Dr. Salah al-Ani, who works at a hospital in Ramadi, put the death toll at 45.

Associated Press Television News obtained videotape showing a truck containing bodies of people who were allegedly killed in the incident. Most of the bodies were wrapped in blankets and other cloths, but the footage showed at least eight uncovered, bloody bodies, several of them children. One of the children was headless.

shemp
19th May 2004, 11:26 AM
Tried to find my sock
No good it's lost
Something's gone wrong again
Need a shave
Cut myself need a new blade
Something's gone wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something's gone wrong again
Something's gone wrong again

Tried to fry an egg
Broke the yolk no joke
Something's gone wrong again
Look at my watch just to tell the time
But the hand's come off mine
Something's gone wrong again
Something's gone wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something's gone wrong again
Something's gone wrong again

Nothing ever happens to people like us
'Cept we miss the bus
Something goes wrong again
Need a smoke use my last 50p
But the machine is broke
Something's gone wrong again
Something goes wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again

[Solo]

Something goes wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again

Nothing ever happens to people like us
'Cept we miss the bus
Something goes wrong again
Need a smoke use my last 50p
But the machine is broke
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again

Turn up early in time for our date
But then you turn up late
Something goes wrong again
Need a drink go to the pub
But the bugger's shut
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again
And again and again and again again and
Something goes wrong again
Ah something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again
Something goes wrong again

Something's Gone Wrong Again -- The Buzzcocks

Tmy
19th May 2004, 11:31 AM
Well theres no way we were gonna be outdone by the Israelies!!!



Israelis fire on crowds in Gaza

Dozens of injured were carried to hospital
Israeli troops have opened fire during a protest by Palestinian demonstrators in the town of Rafah in southern Gaza.
At least 10 people were killed and 60 injured, though some reports put the number of casualties higher.



http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3728681.stm


(cheap shot but I coulnd help myself. Plus Im suprisedno one has mentioned this story.)

shemp
19th May 2004, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by Tmy
Well theres no way we were gonna be outdone by the Israelies!!!



Israelis fire on crowds in Gaza

Dozens of injured were carried to hospital
Israeli troops have opened fire during a protest by Palestinian demonstrators in the town of Rafah in southern Gaza.
At least 10 people were killed and 60 injured, though some reports put the number of casualties higher.



http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3728681.stm


(cheap shot but I coulnd help myself. Plus Im suprisedno one has mentioned this story.)

Yeah, I just noticed that one. I'll stick around to see what sort of explanation Skeptic has for that one.

subgenius
19th May 2004, 11:41 AM
Have we worn out our welcome yet?

headscratcher4
19th May 2004, 11:45 AM
Obviously, we are becoming a "savage nation" and putting Micheal Savage's strategy into practice. You go for a wedding party 'cause you can get a lot of them, and it eliminates at least one breeding pair....afterall, they are sub-human (according to micheal Savage).

Skeptical Greg
19th May 2004, 11:47 AM
A wedding at 2:45 a.m.?


Sounds to me, like we really have all the facts in this case..:rolleyes:

c0rbin
19th May 2004, 11:47 AM
"Dr" Savage wouldn't know a sub-human even if he were looking into a mirror.

Edited to ad "n't"

headscratcher4
19th May 2004, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Diogenes
A wedding at 2:45 a.m.?


Sounds to me, like we really have all the facts in this case..:rolleyes:

possibly, and facts are confused on the ground over there, so we'll have to wait. If it is a wedding, it is surely a most unfortunate accident....however, to your point: I know that my wedding was still going strong at 2:30 am...when my bride and I left, and I am told it went to at least 6 in the morning. Of course, that was war-torn Detroit, so conditions were at least as bad as Iraq....

Charlie Monoxide
19th May 2004, 12:32 PM
If the US keeps "freeing and liberating" these Iraqis from the tyranny of Saddam, soon there'll be no more Iraqis left.

Charlie (perhaps the helicopter pilot saw a WMD) Monoxide

subgenius
19th May 2004, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by headscratcher4


possibly, and facts are confused on the ground over there, so we'll have to wait. If it is a wedding, it is surely a most unfortunate accident....however, to your point: I know that my wedding was still going strong at 2:30 am...when my bride and I left, and I am told it went to at least 6 in the morning. Of course, that was war-torn Detroit, so conditions were at least as bad as Iraq....
I too was puzzled that someone would be surprised that a wedding would go long into the night.
Glad to see that you personally upheld Detroit's party rep.
"Ain't no party like a Detroit party, cause a Detroit party don't stop."

SRW
19th May 2004, 01:01 PM
I recall the same thing happened in Afghanistan, where the wedding guests were shooting guns into the air and U.S. plane "returned fire". It might be a good Idea if the practice of shooting off guns for celebratory purposes be stopped while fighting is going on. Just a thought.

Number Six
19th May 2004, 01:30 PM
The Pentagon says it was a military operation on a safe house for enemy fighters. I wish it were easy to determine the truth in these things. Maybe I'm biased but at this point I'm leaning towards believing the US.

Mr Manifesto
19th May 2004, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by SRW
I recall the same thing happened in Afghanistan, where the wedding guests were shooting guns into the air and U.S. plane "returned fire". It might be a good Idea if the practice of shooting off guns for celebratory purposes be stopped while fighting is going on. Just a thought.

Do you have a source for this one?

I'd be interested to know a few other things as well. Such as, how did the planes know they were being fired upon? Were the guns a notable risk (short of a lucky shot) to the planes? Could they not have confirmed their target before returning fire? Touchy-feely questions, I know, but remember the US does all it can to avoid civilian casualities. Or so they reckon.

HarryKeogh
19th May 2004, 02:06 PM
I have a feeling when all is said and done the title of this thread will have two factual errors (body count and where it happened).


(please note: my stating the above does not deter from my opinion that GWB is the biggest douchebag ever)

Sane
19th May 2004, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Do you have a source for this one?

I'd be interested to know a few other things as well. Such as, how did the planes know they were being fired upon? Were the guns a notable risk (short of a lucky shot) to the planes? Could they not have confirmed their target before returning fire? Touchy-feely questions, I know, but remember the US does all it can to avoid civilian casualities. Or so they reckon.

From the cnn article here (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/iraq.main/index.html), it appears that coalition forces on the ground came under fire and air support was called in.

Mr Manifesto
19th May 2004, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by Sane


From the cnn article here (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/iraq.main/index.html), it appears that coalition forces on the ground came under fire and air support was called in.

I'm talking about the wedding in Afghanistan, not this latest episode.

SRW
19th May 2004, 03:15 PM
Wedding in AF. (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/07/01/afghanistan.bombing/)

Mr Manifesto
19th May 2004, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by SRW
Wedding in AF. (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/07/01/afghanistan.bombing/)

The aircraft were "engaged by anti-aircraft fire from the ground" by what were described as "anti-aircraft guns, heavy weapons." The planes returned fire, including dropping bombs, he said.

Doesn't sound like the sort of guns fired at wedding parties in Afghanistan. I'd say this was more of a case of, "Oops! We missed!" which has been too common in the Afghanistan/Iraq wars.

a_unique_person
19th May 2004, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Tmy
Well theres no way we were gonna be outdone by the Israelies!!!



Israelis fire on crowds in Gaza

Dozens of injured were carried to hospital
Israeli troops have opened fire during a protest by Palestinian demonstrators in the town of Rafah in southern Gaza.
At least 10 people were killed and 60 injured, though some reports put the number of casualties higher.



http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3728681.stm


(cheap shot but I coulnd help myself. Plus Im suprisedno one has mentioned this story.)

What's the point, it's not a massacre.

SRW
19th May 2004, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by Mr Manifesto




Doesn't sound like the sort of guns fired at wedding parties in Afghanistan. I'd say this was more of a case of, "Oops! We missed!" which has been too common in the Afghanistan/Iraq wars.

Also the wedding guest were shooting in the air at the time, so it is possible that a bomb was misdirected toward them because of the muzzle flashes. Shooting in the air while there is a fire fight going on is not the best way to celebrate a wedding.

a_unique_person
19th May 2004, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by SRW
I recall the same thing happened in Afghanistan, where the wedding guests were shooting guns into the air and U.S. plane "returned fire". It might be a good Idea if the practice of shooting off guns for celebratory purposes be stopped while fighting is going on. Just a thought.

If they made me dictator of the middle east, that is the first law I would pass. Goddam guns.

Bikewer
19th May 2004, 05:18 PM
Reuters reported the US commander as stating his forces had engaged a "safe house" situation with satelite links, large quantities of money, weapons, and so forth.


I concur with the statement above regarding the intelligence of firing weapons in a war zone as part of a celebration.

shemp
19th May 2004, 05:33 PM
Guns don't kill people, weddings kill people.

ssibal
19th May 2004, 06:08 PM
You have to be a real moron to be shooting into the air in a populated area, warzone or not.

a_unique_person
19th May 2004, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by Bikewer
Reuters reported the US commander as stating his forces had engaged a "safe house" situation with satelite links, large quantities of money, weapons, and so forth.


I concur with the statement above regarding the intelligence of firing weapons in a war zone as part of a celebration.

Sounds like a typical texan house to me.

Electron #1
19th May 2004, 08:09 PM
So if you cant use small arms in a war zone what are you suppose to do if your being robbed by looters?..Why are Iraqis >>>allowed<<< to have small arms if they cant use them?
What kind of response is reacting to muzzle flashes with air supoort? In a "populated area"?

The Central Scrutinizer
19th May 2004, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Number Six
The Pentagon says it was a military operation on a safe house for enemy fighters. I wish it were easy to determine the truth in these things. Maybe I'm biased but at this point I'm leaning towards believing the US.

Same here.

Regnad Kcin
19th May 2004, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by HarryKeogh
...my opinion [is] that GWB is the biggest douchebag ever... More so than John Edwards? Whoa!

The Central Scrutinizer
19th May 2004, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by Regnad Kcin
More so than John Edwards? Whoa!

That is quite a charge he is making!

Kopji
19th May 2004, 09:52 PM
Most of the bodies on the APTN videotape were wrapped in blankets and other cloths, but the footage showed at least eight uncovered, bloody bodies, several of them children. One of the children was headless.

“We received about 40 martyrs today, mainly women and children below the age of 12,” Hamdy al-Lousy, the director of Qaim hospital, told the Dubai-based satellite television station Al-Arabiya, which reported that 41 people were killed and 10 injured in the attack. “We also have 11 people wounded, most of them in critical condition.”

Al-Arabiya showed pictures of several shrouded bodies lined up on a dirt road. Men were shown digging graves and lowering bodies, one of a child, into the pits while relatives wept.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5013551/


Was the target value of whatever MIGHT have been there really worth it? The mideast is spiraling out of control and here we are with our hands on the flusher.

peptoabysmal
19th May 2004, 10:03 PM
From the story:


The coalition troops came under hostile fire and "close air support was provided," the statement said. The troops recovered weapons, Iraqi and Syrian currency, some passports and some satellite communications gear, it said.


Something borrowed, something blue...?

Was it mistaken celebratory gunfire again? You'd think that in the middle of a war zone, they might think twice about shooting in the air.

Skeptic
20th May 2004, 09:33 AM
Er, some Iraqis claim it is a wedding; the US is claiming otherwise--that it's a safehouse. Right now nobody (except those there) really know.

The fact that it was 2:45 at night also means the chance of mistaken identity, if in fact it WAS a wedding, escalate.

All this goes to prove the old adage: friendly fire ain't.

Skeptic
20th May 2004, 09:34 AM
The coalition troops came under hostile fire and "close air support was provided," the statement said. The troops recovered weapons, Iraqi and Syrian currency, some passports and some satellite communications gear, it said.

Er... wedding presents?

c0rbin
20th May 2004, 09:55 AM
Sounds like a typical texan house to me.

Have you ever been to Texas?

subgenius
20th May 2004, 10:04 AM
Regardless of the circumstances the pics of headless children are unlikely to improve our image.

fishbob
20th May 2004, 01:35 PM
1 (please note: my stating the above does not deter from my opinion that GWB is the biggest douchebag ever)

Wait just a darn minute. That is my opinion and I want it back.

2 Sounds like a typical texan house to me. You are certainly mistaken there. When I lived in Texas we always shot at stuff, not into the air.

karl
20th May 2004, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by Skeptic
The coalition troops came under hostile fire and "close air support was provided," the statement said. The troops recovered weapons, Iraqi and Syrian currency, some passports and some satellite communications gear, it said.

Er... wedding presents?

What I find really disturbing is that so many news sources uncritically accept the findings of foreign passports, large amounts of currency and satellite communications gear as proof of terrorist activity.

Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been living in exile for many years, and quite a few of them are eager to return home now that Saddam is gone. Those who have changed their citizenship -- or those who have been living in countries that accept dual citizenship (for example Sweden) -- will have non-Iraqi passports. And whether they plan to return permanently or have only come back to help their relatives, odds are they will need to bring a lot of cash. And if they have grown accustomed to satellite TV and broadband, in most of Iraq they have no choice but to bring their own communications gear.

As for the weapons -- well, Iraq had a fairly well-armed civilian population under Saddam. It was one of the reasons the pessimists claimed the war would be difficult to win. People were instructed to hand their weapons over to the authorities (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/924229/posts) after the war, but as Americans say, "then only outlaws would have guns."

I'm not saying this case was necessarily an innocent wedding. My point is just that you are likely to find most of these things quite legitimately in every Iraqi household that's had one or more members return from exile. So it's pretty stupid to use them as terrorist criteria.

TAILGUNNER
20th May 2004, 02:09 PM
wedding planning can get complicated

food and drinks need a caterer

dress by whomever

flowers by local people

photos by concealed watch team

dispersment at the end of an evening by laser guided missle

its a day they will never forget

more cynasism anybody or is war just that, war! casualties are not optional

Renfield
20th May 2004, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Number Six
The Pentagon says it was a military operation on a safe house for enemy fighters. I wish it were easy to determine the truth in these things. Maybe I'm biased but at this point I'm leaning towards believing the US.

Can't say that I do. Not that I trust the Iraqi's either, but I certainly don't trust our current leadership.

a_unique_person
20th May 2004, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by c0rbin


Have you ever been to Texas?

I'm aware there was once a show called "Dallas" on TV.

PygmyPlaidGiraffe
20th May 2004, 06:13 PM
US Miliitary says attack on wedding party was no mistake. (http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/05/20/world/iraq040520)

Skeptic
20th May 2004, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by a_unique_person


I'm aware there was once a show called "Dallas" on TV.

But that doesn't stop you from having a strongly-held opinion on precisely what's wrong with Texas.

subgenius
20th May 2004, 06:29 PM
Graffitti in outhouse:
"Here I sit, cheeks a flexin'
Look out world, another Texan."

Wyvern
20th May 2004, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by Regnad Kcin
More so than John Edwards? Whoa!
John Edwards is "il douche" - trademark courtesy of brown, may he rest in peace.

So GWB can go ahead and be "the biggest douchebag ever." HarryKeogh should trademark that. Er, fishbob. Or whoever said it first.

dmarker
20th May 2004, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by a_unique_person


I'm aware there was once a show called "Dallas" on TV.

AUP, I hope you don't base your impression of the US solely on our TV shows.

subgenius
20th May 2004, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by dmarker


AUP, I hope you don't base your impression of the US solely on our TV shows.
Two words: dry wit.

Nie Trink Wasser
20th May 2004, 10:13 PM
who has a wedding at 240am in the middle of the desert in hostile terrirory ?

the military had been watching this place for a while.........Im not buying the "wedding" story........

we'll see what happens

funny so many news agencies bought this story up with absolutely no skepticism.........and then had so much skepticism for the berg video

peptoabysmal
20th May 2004, 10:16 PM
Yeah, we should hurry up and turn Iraq over to the UN, so they can get on with turning young Iraqi girls into prostitutes.

Refugee sex scandal triggers U.N. reforms (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=06052002-120010-8977r)

Do a little Googling for "UN sex scandal" and see what pops up.

To be fair, the UN is launching an investigation. I hope they conduct it a little faster and better than the investigation into Saddam's activities.

subgenius
20th May 2004, 10:22 PM
Headless children.
You don't have any kids, I would guess.
Yes I know they're just collateral damage.

peptoabysmal
20th May 2004, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by subgenius
Headless children.
You don't have any kids, I would guess.
Yes I know they're just collateral damage.

Next time you meet with Syrian insurgents, don't take the kids.

Kevin_Lowe
20th May 2004, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by peptoabysmal
Yeah, we should hurry up and turn Iraq over to the UN, so they can get on with turning young Iraqi girls into prostitutes.

Surprise, surprise. A right-wing threadjack. ;)

"Look over there!".

Kerberos
21st May 2004, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by dmarker


AUP, I hope you don't base your impression of the US solely on our TV shows.
Why not, I'm going to Sunnydale in a few years to hunt vampires.

P.S. Has anybody actually seen Ashcroft in sunlight? :D

Mr Manifesto
21st May 2004, 05:43 AM
Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
who has a wedding at 240am in the middle of the desert in hostile terrirory ?



Cripes, he's an expert on Middle-East culture, now! :eek: Is there no end to this boy's talents?

c0rbin
21st May 2004, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by a_unique_person


I'm aware there was once a show called "Dallas" on TV.

I don't remember any of them shooting into the air for any reason. Sure, JR got shot, but he "needed killin'"

Now, if you have any other prejudices you'd like to air out, feel free.

Skeptic
21st May 2004, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by subgenius

Two words: dry wit.

It's not "wit" if it's also true. Jocking about your ignorance doesn't make it go away.

coalesce
21st May 2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by peptoabysmal
Yeah, we should hurry up and turn Iraq over to the UN, so they can get on with turning young Iraqi girls into prostitutes.

Refugee sex scandal triggers U.N. reforms (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=06052002-120010-8977r)

Do a little Googling for "UN sex scandal" and see what pops up.

To be fair, the UN is launching an investigation. I hope they conduct it a little faster and better than the investigation into Saddam's activities.

Just as soon as they conclude their fine work in regards to Tibet, I'm sure they'll address this issue with all the alacrity the UN is world-famous for.

Michael

Traces of nuts...
21st May 2004, 11:23 AM
Interesting notes about incident according to Guardian: "Survivors describe wedding massacre as generals refuse to apologise"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1221658,00.html

My first post – Long time lurker

subgenius
21st May 2004, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by Traces of nuts...
Interesting notes about incident according to Guardian: "Survivors describe wedding massacre as generals refuse to apologise"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1221658,00.html

My first post – Long time lurker
Welcome.
A friend of mine toured Finland in a rockabilly band (Robert Gordon's).....said its really big there.

evil sutko
21st May 2004, 11:05 PM
Story here (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040521/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_wedding_attack&cid=540&ncid=1480)

"There were a number of woman, a handful of women, I think the number was four to six, caught up in the engagement. They may have died from some of the fire that came from the aircraft," Kimmitt said.

But an Associated Press reporter in the Ramadi area, at least 275 miles east of Mogr el-Deeb, was able to identify at least 10 of the bodies as those of children.

At the Bou Fahad cemetery outside Ramadi, where the tribe is based, each of the 28 fresh graves contain one to three corpses, mostly of mothers and their young children.

Relatives said they include those of 2-year-old Kholood and 1-year-old Anoud, daughters of Amal Rikad, who was killed; of 2-year-old Raad and 1-year-old Ra'ed — whose headless body was found near his house — sons of Fatima Madhi, who was killed; of Saad, 10, Faisal, 7, Anoud, 6, Fasila, 5, Kholood, 4, and Inad, 3 — children of Mohammed and Morifa Rikad, who were killed.

[snip]
Witnesses, interviewed Thursday by AP in Ramadi, said revelers at the wedding party began worrying when they heard aircraft overhead at about 9 p.m. Tuesday. Then came military vehicles, which stopped about two miles away from the village and switched off their headlights. The planes were still overhead at 11 p.m, so the hosts told the band to stop playing and everyone went to bed.

About four hours later, airstrikes began and continued until dawn when two helicopters landed and about 40 soldiers searched the house where the women had stayed and a second, vacant house. Soon after, the two houses were blown up. Some witnesses said the houses were attacked by helicopters; others said Americans detonated them with explosives.

Kimmitt confirmed that the operation was an air and ground assault. "Those people on the ground identified no children as part of that location that were killed," he said, adding that they reported only adult deaths.

He also referred to the APTN video, shot Thursday in Mogr el-Deeb, as well as separate APTN footage from Wednesday in Ramadi that showed a headless body of a child and other bodies of children.

"What we saw in those APTN videos were substantially inconsistent with the reports we received from the unit that conducted the operation," Kimmitt said. "We're now trying to figure out why there's an inconsistency.

"We're keeping an open mind as to exactly what happened on the ground. That's why we're continuing to try to gather all the facts; that's why we're not ruling out anything based on information coming forward," he added.

Kopji
22nd May 2004, 01:23 AM
They MUST be terrorists.
We had plenty of practice identifying and bombing weddings in Afghanistan. Only incompetent fools could mistake a wedding by now.

a_unique_person
22nd May 2004, 03:47 AM
Originally posted by c0rbin


I don't remember any of them shooting into the air for any reason. Sure, JR got shot, but he "needed killin'"

Now, if you have any other prejudices you'd like to air out, feel free.

in reference to this



Reuters reported the US commander as stating his forces had engaged a "safe house" situation with satelite links, large quantities of money, weapons, and so forth.



I think I can safely guarantee there are in Texas :-

a) Houses

with

b) Satellite Links
c) Large quantities of money
d) weapons

and so forth.

yersinia29
22nd May 2004, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by a_unique_person
I think I can safely guarantee there are in Texas :-

a) Houses

with

b) Satellite Links
c) Large quantities of money
d) weapons

and so forth.

Uhhh...those 3 things are EXCEEDINGLY RARE in a ******** country like Iraq, especially out in the middle of the *********** desert.

You cant compare that to Texas, whose economy is the 11th largest in the WORLD and dwarfs the whole nation of Iraq by nearly 50%. Texas, a state with a standard of living thats several fold higher than Iraq.

yersinia29
22nd May 2004, 03:16 PM
The video footage of kids being killed was filmed 300 miles away in another town that the US did not strike.

Something fishy is going on here.

Kevin_Lowe
22nd May 2004, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by yersinia29
Uhhh...those 3 things are EXCEEDINGLY RARE in a s**thole country like Iraq, especially out in the middle of the f**king desert.


Actually, Iraq was very modern until about ten years ago when the USAF bombed the heck out of it. It wasn't Venice, or even Texas, but it didn't do badly. Compared to the rest of the Middle East standards of health and literacy were excellent, I believe.

Of course people got kidnapped and tortured for looking at someone the wrong way all the time, because the government were brutal thugs. [/straight line]

A satellite phone is eminently affordable and useful to people who don't have mobile phone coverage or a landline. It's also the last thing I'd use if I was a terrorist - gee, do you think it's possible that the US could be monitoring satellite phone traffic in Iraq?

Having Syrian and Iraqi cash, and passports, is perfectly logical for people who live near the Iraq/Syria border. It's no more strange than a citizen of the US who lives near the Canadian border having a passport and Canadian money in their possession.

Firearms are again quite normally possessed by Iraqi civilians. Wouldn't you want to be armed if your country was a poorly-policed war zone?

Now it could indeed have been a safehouse that was attacked. I wasn't there. The reasons for skepticism are that the US armed forces have lied in the past to cover up atrocities like this (claimed) one, and that the material that hss been presented as evidence that the atack was righteous is obviously insufficient.

It walks and quacks like a sop thrown to the Fox News viewers, frankly. "Um, we haven't recovered the bodies of any known terrorists. Nor have we found plans, bombs, weapons of mass destruction, rocket launchers, surface to air missiles, orders, photos of Osama or anything else indicative of actual insurgent activity. Nor have we any intercepted data or anything we can show you to make you believe we had probable cause to blow the place apart. But we found guns, money and passports amongst the corpses! Mission Accomplished!".

Heck, I've got money, a passport and a mobile phone at my place. Obviously that's sufficient proof that I'm a terrorist to retroactively justify killing me. I've even got a modem - what more proof do you need that I could have been in touch with terrorists?

RandFan
22nd May 2004, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by Kevin_Lowe
Heck, I've got money, a passport and a mobile phone at my place. Obviously that's sufficient proof that I'm a terrorist to retroactively justify killing me. I've even got a modem - what more proof do you need that I could have been in touch with terrorists? Are you making a confession?

Mr Manifesto
23rd May 2004, 02:31 AM
Originally posted by yersinia29


Uhhh...those 3 things are EXCEEDINGLY RARE in a s**thole country like Iraq, especially out in the middle of the f**king desert.

You cant compare that to Texas, whose economy is the 11th largest in the WORLD and dwarfs the whole nation of Iraq by nearly 50%. Texas, a state with a standard of living thats several fold higher than Iraq.

An expert on what's available and what isn't in Iraq now! :wow:

WildCat
23rd May 2004, 07:36 AM
Sounds like a fun wedding! (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/23/iraq.main/index.html)
At Saturday's briefing for reporters in Baghdad, Kimmitt showed photos of what he said were binoculars designed for adjusting artillery fire, battery packs suitable for makeshift bombs, several terrorist training manuals, medical gear, fake ID cards and ID card-making machines, passports and telephone numbers to other countries, including Afghanistan and Sudan.

None of the men killed in the raid carried ID cards or wallets, he said.

"We feel that that was an indicator that this was a high risk meeting of high-level anti-coalition forces," Kimmitt said.

"There was a tremendous number of incriminating pocket litter, a lot of telephone numbers to foreign countries, Afghanistan, Sudan and a number of others."

I, for one, wouldn't think of attending a wedding w/o my artillery spotting binoculars or terrorist training manuals. And I don't even live in Texas!

nightwind
23rd May 2004, 09:43 AM
Well, it could have been a safe house, it also very well could have been a wedding party.

The US has messed up on its intelligence before, so it would not be surprising if a wedding party was bombed.

WildCat
23rd May 2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by nightwind
Well, it could have been a safe house, it also very well could have been a wedding party.

The US has messed up on its intelligence before, so it would not be surprising if a wedding party was bombed.
Unlikely in this case. Troops were nearby when the bombing took place, and moved in immediately afterwards. Nothing wedding-related was found. The children graves allegedly killed in the attack were shown to reporters 275 miles away from the scene!

The "wedding party" claim is just propaganda, IMHO. It just doesn't pass the smell test.

demon
23rd May 2004, 04:44 PM
AP: Video Shows Iraq Wedding Celebration
By SCHEHEREZADE FARAMARZI
Associated Press Writer
May 23, 2004

Email this story.

The bride arrives in a white pickup truck and is quickly ushered into a house by a group of women. Outside, men recline on brightly colored silk pillows, relaxing on the carpeted floor of a large goat-hair tent as boys dance to tribal songs.

The videotape obtained Sunday by Associated Press Television News captures a wedding party that survivors say was later attacked by U.S. planes early Wednesday, killing up to 45 people. The dead included the cameraman, Yasser Shawkat Abdullah, hired to record the festivities, which ended Tuesday night before the planes struck.

The U.S. military says it is investigating the attack, which took place in the village of Mogr el-Deeb about five miles from the Syrian border, but that all evidence so far indicates the target was a safehouse for foreign fighters.

"There was no evidence of a wedding: no decorations, no musical instruments found, no large quantities of food or leftover servings one would expect from a wedding celebration," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said Saturday. "There may have been some kind of celebration. Bad people have celebrations, too."

But video that APTN shot a day after the attack shows fragments of musical instruments, pots and pans and brightly colored beddings used for celebrations, scattered around the bombed out tent.

The wedding videotape shows a dozen white pickup trucks speeding through the desert escorting the bridal car - decorated with colorful ribbons. The bride wears a Western-style white bridal dress and veil. The camera captures her stepping out of the car but does not show a close-up.

An AP reporter and photographer, who interviewed more than a dozen survivors a day after the bombing, were able to identify many of them on the wedding party video - which runs for several hours.

APTN also traveled to Mogr el-Deeb, 250 miles west of Ramadi, the day after the attack to film what the survivors said was the wedding site. A devastated building and remnants of the tent, pots and pans could be seen, along with bits of what appeared to be the remnants of ordnance, one of which bore the marking "ATU-35," similar to those on U.S. bombs.

A water tanker truck can be seen in both the video shot by APTN and the wedding tape obtained from a cousin of the groom.

The singing and dancing seems to go on forever at the all-male tent set up in the garden of the host, Rikad Nayef, for the wedding of his son, Azhad, and the bride Rutbah Sabah. The men later move to the porch when darkness falls, apparently taking advantage of the cool night weather. Children, mainly boys, sit on their fathers' laps; men smoke an Arab water pipe, finger worry beads and chat with one another. It looks like a typical, gender-segregated tribal desert wedding.

As expected, women are out of sight - but according to survivors, they danced to the music of Hussein al-Ali, a popular Baghdad wedding singer hired for the festivities. Al-Ali was buried in Baghdad on Thursday.

Prominently displayed on the videotape was a stocky man with close-cropped hair playing an electric organ. Another tape, filmed a day later in Ramadi and obtained by APTN, showed the musician lying dead in a burial shroud - his face clearly visible and wearing the same tan shirt as he wore when he performed.

As the musicians played, young men milled about, most dressed in traditional white robes. Young men swayed in tribal dances to the monotonous tones of traditional Arabic music. Two children - a boy and a girl - held hands, dancing and smiling. Women are rarely filmed at such occasions, and they appear only in distant glimpses.

Kimmitt said U.S. troops who swept through the area found rifles, machine guns, foreign passports, bedding, syringes and other items that suggested the site was used by foreigners infiltrating from Syria.

The videotape showed no weapons, although they are common among rural Iraqis.

Kimmitt has denied finding evidence that any children died in the raid although a "handful of women" - perhaps four to six - were "caught up in the engagement."

"They may have died from some of the fire that came from the aircraft," he told reporters Friday.

However, an AP reporter obtained names of at least 10 children who relatives said had died. Bodies of five of them were filmed by APTN when the survivors took them to Ramadi for burial Wednesday. Iraqi officials said at least 13 children were killed.

Four days after the attack, the memories of the survivors remain painful - as are their injuries.

Haleema Shihab, 32, one of the three wives of Rikad Nayef, said that as the first bombs fell, she grabbed her seven-month old son, Yousef, and clutching the hands of her five-year-old son, Hamza, started running. Her 15-year-old son, Ali, sprinted alongside her. They managed to run for several yards when she fell - her leg fractured.

"Hamza was yelling, 'mommy,'" Shihab, recalled. "Ali said he was hurt and that he was bleeding. That's the last time I heard him." Then another shell fell and injured Shihab's left arm.

"Hamza fell from my hand and was gone. Only Yousef stayed in my arms. Ali had been hit and was killed. I couldn't go back," she said from her hospital bed in Ramadi. Her arm was in a cast.

She and her stepdaughter, Iqbal - who had caught up with her - hid in a bomb crater. "We were bleeding from 3 a.m. until sunrise," Shihab said.

Soon American soldiers came. One of them kicked her to see if she was alive, she said.

"I pretended I was dead so he wouldn't kill me," said Shihab. She said the soldier was laughing. When Yousef cried, the soldier said: "'No, stop," said Shihab.

Fourteen-year-old Moza, Shihab's stepdaughter, lies on another bed of the hospital room. She was hurt in the leg and cries. Her relatives haven't told her yet that her mother, Sumaya, is dead.

"I fear she's dead," Moza said of her mother. "I'm worried about her."

Moza was sleeping on one side of the porch next to her sisters Siham, Subha and Zohra while her mother slept on the other end. There were many others on the porch, her cousins, stepmothers and other female relatives.

When the first shell fell, Moza and her sisters, Subha, Fatima and Siham ran off together. Moza was holding Subha's hand.

"I don't know where Fatima and my mom were. Siham got hit. She died. I saw Zohra's head gone. I lost consciousness," said Moza, covering her mouth with the end of her headscarf.

Her sister Iqbal, lay in pain on the bed next to her. Her other sister, Subha, was on the upper floor of the hospital, in the same room with two-year-Khoolood. Her small body was bandaged and a tube inserted in her side drained her liver.

Her ankle was bandaged. A red ribbon was tied to her curly hair. Only she and her older brother, Faisal, survived from their immediate family. Her parents and four sisters and brothers were all killed.

In all, 27 members of Rikad Nayef's extended family died - most of them children and women, the family said.

Link: http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040523/API/405230755

WildCat
23rd May 2004, 06:12 PM
Interesting report, demon. I just read the same one on the Chicago Tribune's online edition. But I'll reserve judgement until I see more on this.

demon
23rd May 2004, 06:34 PM
Wildcat, have you see any of the video footage from the scene?
They showed some here in the UK (BBC I think, or it could have been Channel 4), I can`t remember now if it was footage shot by Iraqis or reporters on the ground there.
There certainly were a lot of mangled kids around, that`s for sure although of course, that doesn`t prove anything one way or the other.
As you say, it may be best to reserve judgement on exactly what went down here and I feel pretty confident that the truth will come out...I think we are begining to see a bit more of that as this Iraq saga unfolds.

Renfield
23rd May 2004, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by WildCat
Interesting report, demon. I just read the same one on the Chicago Tribune's online edition. But I'll reserve judgement until I see more on this.

Well, someone's lying out their ass.

Mr Manifesto
23rd May 2004, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by WildCat
Interesting report, demon. I just read the same one on the Chicago Tribune's online edition. But I'll reserve judgement until I see more on this.

Funny how you didn't reserve judgement when the 'evidence' supported your POV.

shemp
24th May 2004, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by yersinia29
The video footage of kids being killed was filmed 300 miles away in another town that the US did not strike.

Something fishy is going on here.

And where, pray tell, do you get this? Source please? Or is that fishy smell coming from your decayed brain?

shemp
24th May 2004, 04:54 AM
A similar version of the story demon posted above:

AP: Video Shows Iraq Wedding Celebration (http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040524_138.html)

For those who don't bother to read the whole story, I'd just like to throw in a little emphasis (bold mine):

Haleema Shihab, 32, one of the three wives of Rikad Nayef, said that as the first bombs fell, she grabbed her seven-month old son, Yousef, and clutching the hands of her five-year-old son, Hamza, started running. Her 15-year-old son, Ali, sprinted alongside her. They managed to run for several yards when she fell her leg fractured.

"Hamza was yelling, 'mommy,'" Shihab, recalled. "Ali said he was hurt and that he was bleeding. That's the last time I heard him." Then another shell fell and injured Shihab's left arm.

"Hamza fell from my hand and was gone. Only Yousef stayed in my arms. Ali had been hit and was killed. I couldn't go back," she said from her hospital bed in Ramadi. Her arm was in a cast.

She and her stepdaughter, Iqbal who had caught up with her hid in a bomb crater. "We were bleeding from 3 a.m. until sunrise," Shihab said.

Soon American soldiers came. One of them kicked her to see if she was alive, she said.

"I pretended I was dead so he wouldn't kill me," said Shihab. She said the soldier was laughing. When Yousef cried, the soldier said: "'No, stop," said Shihab.

Well, I'm glad somebody got a good laugh at the reception.

smalltlalk_2k
24th May 2004, 06:47 AM
Its just another military "oops". Its a shame that those things happen but it does happen. As technology and battle communication advances these type of things happen less and less frequently. However, it is still a sad thing.

shemp
24th May 2004, 07:29 AM
It isn't just that it happened. If it did happen the way the media is portraying it, then why does the U.S. military continue to lie about it?

Kodiak
24th May 2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by shemp
It isn't just that it happened. If it did happen the way the media is portraying it, then why does the U.S. military continue to lie about it?

Where's your vaunted skepticism? Other reports say that there was no food, no band or other music, and no decorations. How do you know that its the military that is lying?

Keep in mind the source, but those gathered were criminals says military (http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=868354&tw=wn_wire_story) .

curious
24th May 2004, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by Kodiak
Where's your vaunted skepticism? Other reports say that there was no food, no band or other music, and no decorations. How do you know that its the military that is lying?

"But video that APTN shot a day after the attack shows fragments of musical instruments, pots and pans and brightly colored beddings used for celebrations, scattered around the bombed out tent."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=7&u=/ap/20040524/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_attack
^Link to video footage from wedding on that page.

http://channels.netscape.com/fotosrch/3/20040524LON111.jpg
http://channels.netscape.com/fotosrch/3/20040524LON110.jpg
TV Image shows the body of an unidentified man in a vehicle in the remote desert area near Mogr el-Deeb, Iraq, 5 miles (8 km) away from the Syrian border, Wednesday, May 19, 2004. An attack on a wedding party that survivors say was by US planes early Wednesday, killed up to 45 people, most of them women and children. The man was seen to be playing the keyboard in Tuesday's wedding festivities footage and was reportedly killed in the attack . (AP Photo / APTN)
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/bigpic.jsp?photoid=20040524LON110.jpg&this=3&searchpage=photosearch.jsp&cap=iraq+wedding&w=ap+or+reuters&max=8&first=&fs=

Mr Manifesto
24th May 2004, 01:14 PM
I'm waiting for people to seize upon the fact that the brand-name of the speakers used at the weddings was 'Shams'.

karl
24th May 2004, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by demon
AP: Video Shows Iraq Wedding Celebration
By SCHEHEREZADE FARAMARZI
Associated Press Writer
May 23, 2004

[...]
"There was no evidence of a wedding: no decorations, no musical instruments found, no large quantities of food or leftover servings one would expect from a wedding celebration," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said Saturday. "There may have been some kind of celebration. Bad people have celebrations, too."


In light of recent reports, I'm just waiting for someone to say "bad people have weddings, too."

demon
24th May 2004, 02:01 PM
"Bad people have celebrations, too."

Arrogance or what?!

And among these Bad People are Bad Babies?

No, let's not be sarcastic here. What Kimmitt's saying is this: If you find there are babies - good, bad or indifferent babies - at a Bad People's Party, you can blow them up with a clear conscience. Cos how else you gonna get those Bad People? Plus: If they weren't Bad People, they wouldn't hold parties where their babies might get collaterally damaged. (How callous and inhuman those Bad People are. And cowardly, too.)

Remember also the "Bush doctrine" (let us draw a discreet veil over the probability that Bush thinks "doctrine" is the present participle of "doctor"), viz. if one is Murcan, one can pre-empt thangs which might be a turrst threat at some point in the future. Who knows what them tykes might have turned out into had they not been so freedomifically fragged?

This is a well-known trick of Bin Laden's - midget jihadists. Syria and Iran have had a hand in their training. Also, the CIA knows Saddam had an elite force of Ba'athist babies trained for resistance activities.
Not to mention the projectile vomiting, which often exceed the allowed range stipulated by the UN. Also toxic sludge is produced regularly out of the rear end smelling of noxious ammonia which is known to be harmful to the lungs.

B*ll*cks - bloody murdering hypocritical faux-pious Mr Kimmitt Moral High Ground **** ****...

Mr Manifesto
24th May 2004, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by demon
"Bad people have celebrations, too."

Arrogance or what?!

And among these Bad People are Bad Babies?

No, let's not be sarcastic here. What Kimmitt's saying is this: If you find there are babies - good, bad or indifferent babies - at a Bad People's Party, you can blow them up with a clear conscience. Cos how else you gonna get those Bad People? Plus: If they weren't Bad People, they wouldn't hold parties where their babies might get collaterally damaged. (How callous and inhuman those Bad People are. And cowardly, too.)

Remember also the "Bush doctrine" (let us draw a discreet veil over the probability that Bush thinks "doctrine" is the present participle of "doctor"), viz. if one is Murcan, one can pre-empt thangs which might be a turrst threat at some point in the future. Who knows what them tykes might have turned out into had they not been so freedomifically fragged?

This is a well-known trick of Bin Laden's - midget jihadists. Syria and Iran have had a hand in their training. Also, the CIA knows Saddam had an elite force of Ba'athist babies trained for resistance activities.
Not to mention the projectile vomiting, which often exceed the allowed range stipulated by the UN. Also toxic sludge is produced regularly out of the rear end smelling of noxious ammonia which is known to be harmful to the lungs.

B*ll*cks - bloody murdering hypocritical faux-pious Mr Kimmitt Moral High Ground **** ****...

But no kids were killed in the attack! The general told me! So, those kids being buried must have died from... Completely non-occupation causes... They choked on felafel or something...

When the famous photo of Kim Phuc was published, apparently General Westmoreland said that she was burnt on a hibachi (as per Washington Post 19/01/1986- no link available).

WildCat
24th May 2004, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by shemp


And where, pray tell, do you get this? Source please? Or is that fishy smell coming from your decayed brain?
From your own link (http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040524_138.html)!!
However, an AP reporter obtained names of at least 10 children who relatives said had died. Bodies of five of them were filmed by APTN when the survivors took them to Ramadi for burial Wednesday. Iraqi officials said at least 13 children were killed. Mourners say the bride and groom were killed.

The graves shown to the AP reporters were at least 250 miles away, in Ramadi.

WildCat
24th May 2004, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


But no kids were killed in the attack! The general told me! So, those kids being buried must have died from... Completely non-occupation causes... They choked on felafel or something...
Except that somehow, the dead kids ended up 250 miles away. Must have been a hell of an explosion!

Mr Manifesto
24th May 2004, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by WildCat

Except that somehow, the dead kids ended up 250 miles away. Must have been a hell of an explosion!

You will recall that sanctions have lead to hospital equipment which could be turned into 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' (such as X-ray machines and parts for same) being banned in Iraq. Don't forget, as well, the number of hospitals that were looted after the fall of Saddam. With this in mind, where was the nearest hospital with the facilities for dealing with the injured at the wedding?

Oh! You're a forensics expert now! :jaw:

WildCat
24th May 2004, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


You will recall that sanctions have lead to hospital equipment which could be turned into 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' (such as X-ray machines and parts for same) being banned in Iraq. Don't forget, as well, the number of hospitals that were looted after the fall of Saddam. With this in mind, where was the nearest hospital with the facilities for dealing with the injured at the wedding?

Oh! You're a forensics expert now! :jaw:
But there were medical personnel on the scene - US soldiers! It is standard operating procedure to treat the wounded, even the enemy. They don't just leave them there.

And forensics are for the dead. They go to the morgue, not the hospital. And I don't have to be an expert to know that.

Mr Manifesto
24th May 2004, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by WildCat

But there were medical personnel on the scene - US soldiers! It is standard operating procedure to treat the wounded, even the enemy. They don't just leave them there.

Just like it's SOP for US soldiers to treat prisoners with dignity and respect, right? ;)


And forensics are for the dead. They go to the morgue, not the hospital. And I don't have to be an expert to know that.

But you must be a forensics expert! You know where these people died- at the site where they were killed. From what you have written, it's simply not possible that they were wounded, then transported to a hospital.

curious
24th May 2004, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by WildCat

Except that somehow, the dead kids ended up 250 miles away. Must have been a hell of an explosion! Not nearly as big as the explosions that keed sending our guys nearly 10,000 miles away.

It's an odd detail but the notion that the tribe likes to bury their dead in a preselected area doesn't seem unreasonable to me since we show similar predispositions to the placement of our dead.

"From the mosques of Ramadi volunteers had been called to dig at the graveyard of the tribe, on the southern outskirts of the city."
http://zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=5572&sectionID=15

This next story provides a little more detail on the tribe:

But an Associated Press reporter in the Ramadi area, at least 275 miles east of Mogr el-Deeb, was able to identify at least 10 of the bodies as those of children.

At the Bou Fahad cemetery outside Ramadi, where the tribe is based, each of the 28 fresh graves contain one to three corpses, mostly of mothers and their young children.

Relatives said they include those of 2-year-old Kholood and 1-year-old Anoud, daughters of Amal Rikad, who was killed; of 2-year-old Raad and 1-year-old Ra'ed — whose headless body was found near his house — sons of Fatima Madhi, who was killed; of Saad, 10, Faisal, 7, Anoud, 6, Fasila, 5, Kholood, 4, and Inad, 3 — children of Mohammed and Morifa Rikad, who were killed.

There also are photo images of dead children, but it was not possible to determine if those victims were already accounted for by relatives.

Bou Fahad tribesmen denied there were foreign fighters among their community. They consider the desolate border area part of their territory and follow their goats, sheep and cattle there to graze. In the springtime they leave spacious homes in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, and roam the desert.

Smuggling livestock into Syria is also part of a herdsman's life, although no one in the tribe acknowledged that.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-05-21-wedding-iraq_x.htm

If the tribe is engaging some big propoganda scam and doesn't normally bury it's dead in Ramadi regardless of where they are killed it should be easy for the CPA to debunk the story. So far all I've read about is Kimmit showing pictures of guns, ammo, batteries, a pass port and some white powder, none of which prooves jack to me (though I'd like to see the pictures if anyones seen them).

demon
28th May 2004, 01:49 PM
quote:
Turnaround
Senor Shows Human Side, Is Whisked Away by Security Contractors
By RON JACOBS

(Baghdad Green Zone, May 20, 2004)

In a surprising turnaround, Coalition spokesman Dan "the man" Senor admitted to media gathered inside the Green Zone Thursday that American helicopters had knowingly attacked a wedding party 15 miles from the Syrian border and southwest of the town of Qusaiba. Earlier, the Coalition had denied the charges, claiming that the attack was against "enemy fighters."

"There were no enemy fighters in the area," said Senor. "Our soldiers knew that the only people in the village were Iraqi civilians. They went ahead and attacked anyhow. It's a form of terror we use often."

This acknowledgement by Senor confirmed what local Iraqis had been telling Arab and European media since they were notified of the attack. Television outlets broadcast film taken at the scene, showing a truck heaped with bloody bodies, many of them wrapped in blankets. Several of the bodies shown were those of children. Until Senor's statement, US officials were insisting that the dead were all "foreign fighters." To prove their point, these officials produced weapons and passports they claimed they recovered from the scene.

"We bombed a safe house," said General Abizaid "There were nothing but foreign fighters in the area. They deserved what they got." He went on to describe the village as one known to be friendly to the resistance against the US occupation.

This version of events was challenged by doctors and nurses at nearby Ramadi hospital, who told media that forty-five people had been killed, including ten women and fifteen children. Doctors said most of the children were between 2 and 5 years old. Independent media reporters were able to obtain photocopies of the passports the Coalition claims they found in the rubble of the houses destroyed in the attack. None of the descriptions or photos matched any of the dead or wounded. When confronted with this, Senor admitted that there were no foreign fighters in the village.

"There were no foreign fighters in the village," said Senor. "In fact, there are no foreign fighters in Iraq except for those fighting with the Coalition. Just like the WMD, the whole foreign fighters helping out the insurgency thing is a lie."

This admission was followed by a quarter-hour of rapid-fire questioning by the assembled media. Most of these questions centered on the acknowledgement by Senor that the administration invaded Iraq knowing that Iraq possessed no WMD. Senor fielded the questions, occasionally wiping away a tear.

"You know," he said. "I was willing to go along with this whole invasion and occupation because I truly believed that Saddam Hussein was a bad guy who really was a threat to the United States. I told my bosses that I would tell you guys in the media anything that they wanted me to tell them. WMD, Al-Queda, anthrax, no prison abuse or only isolated prisoner abuse, whatever. But when I saw those dead kids killed for no reason in their sleepI don't know, something just cracked inside of me. I couldn't justify it. I mean, there's no way those kids were foreign fighters and, if they were, then we really shouldn't be here if babies are picking up weapons to fight us."

Reporters wrote Senor's remarks down, incredulous at what they were hearing. Never in the collective memory of all the media gathered had any government spokesman been so candid. Senor continued, switching to the topic of Israel.

"As for Israel," he began. "They have no intention of stopping their assault on the Palestinians. They want to dominate the Middle East with the United States. It's all part of a big plan to" At this point, two unidentified security contractors dressed entirely in black jumpsuits similar to those worn by SWAT teams in the US grabbed Senor. He was led away at gunpoint. Chaos ensued among the press corps as they raced to file the story. While attempting to send their reports via the internet, all connections were mysteriously shut down. This reporter was able to relay his report via a separate wireless connection maintained by independent supporters.

Senor's current whereabouts are unknown, although unnamed sources at Abu Gharaib prison in Baghdad have told this reporter and other media that he is being held there and will be shipped to Camp X-Ray at Gauntanamo Bay soon.

The White House and Pentagon have denied Senor's statements in separate press releases. The White House went further, suggesting that Senor had either lost his mind or forgotten who was signing his paychecks.
http://www.counterpunch.com/jacobs05222004.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, he sounds as untrustworthy as the bloody foreigners;)