Pen­ta­gon har fore­tatt sin egen gransk­ning av feil­bom­bin­gen i Afgha­ni­stan sist fre­dag og fast­hol­der at bare fem sivile ble drept, i mot­set­ning til afghanske myn­dig­he­ter og FN som hev­der 90 sivile, hvorav 50 barn og 19 kvin­ner, ble drept.

After reviewing a dis­puted air­strike on a vil­lage in Afgha­ni­stan, U.S. offi­ci­als have con­clu­ded that the civi­lian death toll was far lower than clai­med by the Afghan govern­ment and the U.N., two U.S. defense offi­ci­als said Thurs­day.

The offi­ci­als, who spoke on con­dition of ano­ny­mity because the results of the review have not been announ­ced pub­licly, said Afghan offi­ci­als have been pre­sented the fin­dings, which say 25 mili­tants were kil­led, plus five civi­li­ans. Afghan offi­ci­als have said that between 76 and 90 civi­li­ans were kil­led.


Also, the U.S. govern­ment is pres­sing for a joint U.S.-Afghan probe in hopes of reaching a com­mon con­clu­sion about an inci­dent that stir­red out­rage in Afgha­ni­stan and frust­ra­tion among U.S. offi­ci­als.

It was not clear Thurs­day whether the Afghan govern­ment accep­ted the fin­dings of the U.S. review or whether a joint probe would go for­ward. Details of how the U.S. review was con­ducted were not imme­dia­tely avai­lable.

Sources: US says civi­lian deaths were over­stated

Liker du det du leser? Vipps noen kroner til Document på 13629


    Meget beti­me­lig kom­men­tar dette.
    Jeg tror neppe dette vil nå frem til media – f.eks. NRK Dags­revyen f.eks. – som helt siden 2001 synes å ha hatt en mål­set­ting om å bringe neg­a­tive tall fra og neg­a­tive syns­punk­ter på Afgha­ni­stan-enga­sje­men­tet.


    Vi ser ytterst skjel­dent at Tali­ba­nere bru­ker uni­form. Da går det lett med sivile i kam­per.

    At sivile kri­gere gjem­mer seg blandt kvin­ner og barn blir aldri kri­ti­sert eller påpekt i/av NRK.


    I all denne kri­tik­ken av USA som pres­sen bom­bar­de­rer oss med og har gjort siden 911, pos­ter jeg disse his­to­riene som en mot­vekt:

    When in Eng­land at a fai­rly large con­fe­rence, Colin Powell was asked by the
    Arch­b­is­hop of Can­ter­bury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of
    ’empire buil­ding’ by George Bush.

    He answe­red by say­ing, “Over the years, the Uni­ted Sta­tes has sent many of
    its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for free­dom beyond
    our bor­ders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough
    to bury those that did not return.”

    It became very quiet in the room.

    Then there was a con­fe­rence in France where a num­ber of inter­na­tio­nal
    engi­neers were taking part, inclu­ding French and Ame­ri­can. During a break
    one of the French engi­neers came back into the room say­ing “Have you heard
    the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an air­craft car­rier to
    Indo­ne­sia to help the tsu­nami vic­tims. What does he intend to do, bomb

    A Boeing engi­neer stood up and replied quietly: “Our car­riers have three
    hos­pi­tals on board that can treat seve­ral hundred people; they are nuclear
    powe­red and can sup­ply emer­gency elect­ri­cal power to shore faci­lities; they
    have three cafe­te­rias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a
    day, they can pro­duce seve­ral thou­sand gal­lons of fresh water from sea water
    each day, and they carry half a dozen heli­cop­ters for use in trans­por­ting
    vic­tims and inju­red to and from their flight deck.. We have ele­ven such
    ships; how many does France have?”

    Once again, dead silence.

    A U.S. Navy Admi­ral was atten­ding a naval con­fe­rence that inclu­ded Admi­rals
    from the U.S., Eng­lish, Cana­dian, Aust­ra­lian and French Navies. At a
    cock­tail recep­tion, he found him­self stan­ding with a large group of Offi­cers
    that inclu­ded per­son­nel from most of those countries. Eve­ryone was chat­ting
    away in Eng­lish as they sip­ped their drinks but a French admi­ral sud­denly
    com­plai­ned that, ‘whe­reas Euro­pe­ans learn many lan­gua­ges, Ame­ri­cans learn
    only Eng­lish.’ He then asked, ‘Why is it that we always have to speak
    Eng­lish in these con­fe­ren­ces rat­her than speak­ing French?’

    Wit­hout hesi­ta­ting, the Ame­ri­can Admi­ral replied ‘Maybe it’s because the
    Brits, Cana­dians, Aus­sies and Ame­ri­cans arran­ged it so you wouldn’t have to
    speak Ger­man.’

    You could have heard a pin drop!


    FJORDKJYLLINGER og Anti-War dot com.

    Legg mer­ket til hvor mange gan­ger late venstre­so­sia­lis­tiske jour­na­lis­ter site­rer og selek­te­rer det samme stof­fet som neo-Sta­li­nis­tene
    Jus­tin Rai­mondo og Alex­an­der Cock­burn.

    Når det gjel­der mulig bor­ger­krig i Eng­land, bruk hodet fjord­kjyl­lin­ger, hvem støt­tet IRA ?

    Rus­sian TV Sounds Like Soviet TV (Star­ring “top U.S. aut­hor” Jus­tin Rai­mondo)

    Den­un­cia­tions of U.S. ‘impe­ria­lism,” which were a regu­lar staple of Soviet TV, are back on the Rus­sian ver­sion.

    …recent guests on Rus­sia Today have inclu­ded Alex­an­der Cock­burn, “an Ame­ri­can poli­ti­cal jour­na­list,” and Jus­tin Rai­mondo, said to be “a top U.S. aut­hor.” Cock­burn denoun­ced John McCain as a war­mon­ger, while Rai­mondo warned the Rus­si­ans to investi­gate what’s on those huma­ni­ta­rian flights to Geor­gia. “I would check that out, if I were you,” he was quoted by Rus­sia Today as say­ing.

    3 alter­na­ti­ver


    Legg merke til FSBs dess­in­for­ma­sjons­av­de­ling hvem er deres nyt­tige idio­ter ?
    Hvem er brønn­pis­serne som frem­mer kon­spi­ra­sjons­teorier og for­gif­ter demo­kra­tiske pro­ses­ser ?

    De første kon­spi­ra­sjons­teorier med lange såkalte logiske for­kla­rings­mo­del­ler duk­ket først opp på Rus­siske nett­si­der.

    In rea­lity, Cock­burn is a left­ist who wri­tes for The Nation and other pub­li­ca­tions. Rai­mondo was descri­bed by Rus­sia Today as “a top U.S. aut­hor,” in order to give him a measure of cre­di­bi­lity, but his main claim to fame is run­ning a web­site,, that descri­bes itself as oppo­sed to impe­ria­lism.

    This appa­rently doesn’t mean oppo­sition to Rus­sian impe­ria­lism.

    The Rus­sian inva­sion of Geor­gia has made it clear beyond doubt that the old Soviet KGB disin­for­ma­tion ope­ra­tions have been revi­ved, using Ame­ri­cans as pup­pets to make Rus­sian points. But the pro­pa­ganda is being dis­tri­buted on a world­wide basis, even on U.S. cable networks. …

    A May 8 New York Times article on Rus­sia Today and its increas­ing avai­la­bi­lity in U.S. media mar­kets noted that “The sta­tion is part of the state-owned news con­glo­me­rate RIA Novosti, and news orga­niza­tions rou­tinely refer to it as ‘state-run,’ inclu­ding The New York Times, which has said it was created to pro­mote ‘pro-Krem­lin views.’”

    3 alter­na­ti­ver