32 votes

WikiLeaks: Airstrike ordered to cover up U.S. shooting of Iraqi children

A U.S. diplomatic cable made public by WikiLeaks suggests that U.S. troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old infant, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence, during a controversial 2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi.

The unclassified cable, which was posted on WikiLeaks’ website last week, contained questions from a United Nations investigator about the incident, which had angered local Iraqi officials, who demanded some kind of action from their government. U.S. officials denied at the time that anything inappropriate had occurred.

But Philip Alston, the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said in a communication to American officials dated 12 days after the March 15, 2006, incident that autopsies performed in the Iraqi city of Tikrit showed that all the dead had been handcuffed and shot in the head. Among the dead were four women and five children. The children were all 5 years old or younger.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1047711--wikileaks...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

has anyone

figured out how to easily search the wikileaks site for documents?
I know these guys are computer geniuses, but for cryin out loud, if they really wanted regular people to see the stuff they release, wouldnt they make it a NORMAL search interface?

Is it me?

Jackson County Georgia

War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.
Thomas Jefferson

If we really knew about the atrocities

that go on in our overseas escapades, we'd puke. All these politicians lining up to with military brass saluting each other over and over are puppets in the game. They're tools used as the hired heat to rob countries in the name of "freedom fighters". If we only knew the real planning, we'd find out that it's not about Homeland Security.

alan laney

If we had freedom of the

If we had freedom of the press (like we used to) we would know what goes on overseas.

It's worse. This is the same

It's worse.

This is the same stuff that they are bringing home to the police here, and why we are rapidly becoming a police state.

If it wasn't worse than was being reported, we wouldn't be building so fast to a police state here. This is a result of the moral premise "government can do anything it wants to people outside the country" simply applied inside the country. Morally, it is no different, and the people are getting what they allowed unfortunately.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Forewarned

free bradley manning

a thousand people saw the same videos and info. how is it that only Bradley objected?

R3ovlUTION charles walker 8322474577

You never know

@linuxhippie:

Of course things have not been proven yet. But claiming that it is impossible? All it takes is a group of some 6 soldiers to kill all people in the house, and calls for air support can also be made with false arguments. The pilot and his chain of command may not have known the truth - how can the pilot see what's inside the house anyway?

So yes there's lots of speculation, and indeed you cannot base a campaign on this story yet. But your "could not have happened" thought is speculation too. If it all turns out to be truth, it would be good to spread the news, agreed?

We wouldn't

be needed to spread the news if it were true. Remember Abu Grab? That is still in the news and nothing even remotely close to the article happened. And maybe you can find 6 that would do something like this all in the same unit....but I highly doubt it. One of them would have come forward or told somebody that would have come forward. By the time this article was written, it took a whole hell of lot more to get an airstrike anywhere over there, let alone in a populated area than "false arguments". It is true about the Pilot, but he doesn't have engagement authority on his own, and by then the US always always always follows up a bomb run that is called for directly from US Ground forces in populated areas. I have done more than one Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) post airstrike, we would have other US ground forces on the scene post blast. Given the set of Rules of Engagement in place at the time of the article, the location, and the level of coordination and exposure this operation would have had, I stand by my position that if not impossible, it is so highly unlikely it deserves more skepticism than credit.

This hurts the Revolution

As much as I am anti-state, anti-war the above article is complete crap. I was there. I'm no shill for anyone. I served 20 years and fought in every ill advised war this nation has been involved in since 1985. Every last one, and during my time I really thought I was doing the right and just thing. I believed what the "thought controllers told me" and devoted my life to our nation. I was wrong, the wars were wrong and not a day goes by I don't regret all that I've done. I'm awake now, and I am doing the only thing that is left to me, supporting Dr Paul so that others don't have to live with what I do, and so innocents everywhere are spared the horrors of war with America.

At no time did I ever witness, nor hear of, even in rumor, the wanton murder of innocents in the manner described in the article. Further more, nothing like this would have ever been covered up. Ever. Innocents we most certainly killed by US forces, of that there can be no doubt. But the murders described above, and the alleged cover up, would have taken 100's of people, at all levels of leadership to pull off. It didn't happen, and I resent the implication that the organizations I served in and the people I served with would have been capable of this. That actions described in the article were routinely carried out by AQ on the Arabian Peninsula and the insurgent groups both loyal to the old regime as well as Shia Loyalist supported by Iran.

If we want to be successful (Electing RP is the measure of success) we need to hold our tongues and look skeptically at everything! Especially those thing that get leaked that support our movement. We don't need to look to articles like the above to justify our stance on the wars. We are winning this argument/debate everywhere but in the media. And we will never win there so don't try, but when we cling to tripe like the above we loose credibility and it hurts the movement.

That's what people say

about 9/11 truth too.

But now we know for sure that the gov't lied and covered up the truth about that.
And so some of the truther explanations are now possible, and maybe plausible, and maybe even fact.
They were able to pull alot of strings to lie about what happened in NYC. And they can pull strings to lie about what happened halfway around the globe in a place where Americans don't see.
One thing is for sure. They lie.

If anyone doubts this, look

If anyone doubts this, look at the anthrax attacks. They were heavily used right after the 911 attacks to push for war, including fake notes like Allah is great etc.

They were from a United States government lab. I remember that. They used those anthrax attacks to keep it up the whole time. As soon as we know it came from our own government, no one says anything like it didn't happen.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

And lets not forget the human rights violations

That can happen when the local officials come to "help" with an anthrax scare using forced decontaminations. Anyone know what that's like? If you look beyond the official media reports, it sounds like a processing scene from Schindler's list.

"But Philip Alston, the UN’s

"But Philip Alston, the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said in a communication to American officials dated 12 days after the March 15, 2006, incident that autopsies performed in the Iraqi city of Tikrit showed that all the dead had been handcuffed and shot in the head. Among the dead were four women and five children. The children were all 5 years old or younger."

How is this any different than a multitude of verified stories just like it but not from a leaked cable?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/21/us-army-kill-tea...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1202-28.htm

manning, etc etc

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

The UN is beyond reproach?

It is different in that it is not verified. It is different in that the organization it is coming from is as corrupt if not more so than our own Government. It is different in that most will see it as a smear on the US Military not murder. End the wars now, and the only way we will is if Ron Paul is our President. But if we want Ron Paul to our President, we need more than just all of us sitting in our own echo chamber patting each other on the back about how evil our Government is. I humbly recommend, that in support of the campaign we focus our recommendations for debate issues to those things that have no ambiguity. Just like I don't believe Obama/Bush on anything, I absolutely don't trust the UN. Especially in this incident. If this is not proven and Dr Paul brings it up, it will significantly hurt his credibility. This is our shot. Right now not tomorrow or 4 years from now, it is now. His message is winning, it resonates with more than just us, give the media just one little "flaky" story and that is all we will hear. true or not (I find it unlikely the incident is true given the reasons I stated in a previous post) it will not be a net positive for our movement. The media and GOP will make sure it looks even more unreliable and use to further marginalize our candidate. Think what you will, but if we want to win Dr Paul referencing the above article on a national stage will have a negative impact on his appeal to those still brain washed by the GOP and will not bring justice any closer to those unfortunate souls and all the others that are dying everyday from these wars. We must win, I just think there are enough verifiable, confirmed, and un-equivocal issues that we can champion, that we should avoid using information like the above. Just my thoughts and I hope all who read understand the spirit in which I write them.

I'm not a collectivist

You can't "smear" the US military because someone in the military did something wrong, only that person accused did something wrong.

This type of argument isn't logic, and gets people killed and dictators elected.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Ron Paul should address these issues at the debate...

We all know Ron Paul is going to be asked about foreign policy again, and we all know that the rest of the GOP will just mock him or say he's crazy. He should be prepared with all these articles, evidence, reports of corruption, misuse of power, war crimes and etc so after the debate he can have a press conference,post all the info on his website and address the American people directly and say, "As the people who pay for these wars YOU are responsible for their actions. Do YOU condone these things? Do YOU blame them for hating us?" If he starts talking to the American people directly it will become blatantly obvious that he stands for Freedoms and is very different from the establishment. If someone in government starts telling us what we already know just don't admit, it will be a short time before he is the only one that people trust anymore. The next time the MSM asks him a question about FEMA, his credibility on the corruption of our government will be enough for people to ignore the ploy to make him look stupid. They will chalk it up to the MSM protecting its interests.

Cheney and Rumsfeld need to be tried for War Crimes!

The disgusting things that our elected and appointed leaders do makes the U.S. hated around the World.

It just so happens that

It just so happens that yesterday the following article came out:

Aide: Dick Cheney fears arrest for war crimes

...

reckless military spending

This would be the other end of the consequences.

No worse than many of our

No worse than many of our political leaders calling for the assassination of the Wikileaks founder, and that was in public. No doubt at all that it happened. Killing him would also have been part of a coverup.

FYI - calling for murder of someone is a serious crime btw. Most of you would be investigated or arrested for doing the same thing. Nothing was done, no one blinked an eye.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Everyone calm down...

...these are allegations. Not facts. I'm glad we've heard about them so that they can be looked into, but I seem to remember a number of other incidents that turned out to have been misrepresented, i.e. Haditha. If I recall correctly, a huge deal was made by our media and then the soldiers in question were acquitted.

Quoted from the

Quoted from the article:

Philip Alston, the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said in a communication to American officials dated 12 days after the March 15, 2006, incident that autopsies performed in the Iraqi city of Tikrit showed that all the dead had been handcuffed and shot in the head. Among the dead were four women and five children. The children were all 5 years old or younger.

Are you disputing the above which was reported in the article as being non-factual?

I think the trouble we run into is who are we to trust when it comes to the reporting of "facts." Even our own government has a long-term clearly established and proven track record of giving us "facts" which are eventually proven to be lies.

...

"...these are allegations.

"...these are allegations. Not facts. I'm glad we've heard about them so that they can be looked into"

Yea but our government would not be looking into anything if it weren't for wikileaks; the same wikileaks that they are trying to destroy. So even if these allegations aren't true what remains true is that our government is out to destroy a truly free press.

I don't disagree with this...

...but in regard to the incident in question lets not use it as an excuse to malign the military or soldier's before the facts are in. If afterward, there is a reason to do so, then so be it.

Yea I would agree and add

Yea I would agree and add that we shouldn't malign anyone in the military except those who commit war crimes and then only if they are proven guilty. The same courtesy we should extend to anyone in fact.

You're saying there is nothing reprehensible

about joining the U.S. military in a time of war, when the wars haven't been declared, we are constantly lied to about the objectives, and the soldiers will be called upon to kill innocent people?

If that is what you are implying, I strongly disagree. It's a disgrace to join the military under these conditions. The only ones who do so have been duped, and there is nothing honorable about playing the fool, especially when you risk becoming a murderer.

Yea actually thinking about

Yea actually thinking about it I agree with you except that the people who join the military are naive kids who don't know that the constiitution (that they take an oath to uphold) forbids us to go to war without a declaration of war by the congress. I have a hard time blaming them although undoubtedly you're correct, morally they are responsible for joining in an immoral crusade. The fact is that people's attitudes haven't caught up yet to the reality that the US military is NOT defending us or our freedoms but working to expand an empire.

Agreed.

Agreed.

William have you seen this

Maybe the Miller High Life

Maybe the Miller High Life guy will go hang out and watch a game with these "heroes" of "America's front line."

And friends wonder why I roll my eyes and retch at every display of militarism masquerading as patriotism.

In the words of Simone Weil (via Joe Sobran, RIP), violent force is “that which turns a person into a thing — either corpse or slave.”

Down with the empire!