The Haditha Massacre
Posted May 27th, 2006 by polizeros
in
The U.S. military is expected to file murder charges against U.S. Marines for killing 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, in cold blood in Haditha, Iraq last November. What is unusual here is that the usual propaganda machines aren't denying this happened.
"Worst war crime" committed by US in Iraq
John Kline, the Republican Congressmen for Minnesota who is a retired marine colonel, was briefed on the findings. "This was not an accident. This was direct fire by marines at civilians," he told the New York Times. "This was not an immediate response to an attack. This would be an atrocity."
The reprecussions from this will be enormous. Even right-wing media and bloggers aren't trying to defend what happened. The evidence is too damning.
Dahr Jamail discusses
Dahr Jamail discusses Haditha in the wider context of the 'actions' of US forces in Iraq.
How Massacres Become the Norm [April 04, 2006]
Crimes happen. One
Crimes happen. One difference between the political Left and the Right is that the Right does not try to defend criminals. Compare for example the fact that Conservatives did not try to defend or excuse Jeffrey Archer when he was found guilty of perjury, with the attitude of the Left both here and in the US towards Clinton caught lying under oath.
Or think about the indulgence shown by Labour to the IRA, on prisoner releases and weapons ownership. Do you think the same tolerance would have been shown to a terrorist organisation with whose aims Labour did not sympathise? It certainly wasn't shown to pistol shooters after Dunblane, even though those were all law-abiding citizens. What kind of political philosophy trusts murderers more than the peaceful?
the Right does not try to
Not sure which planet you are commenting from Alex, but we are pleased to welcome our first intergalactic visitor...
We offer you greetings from
We offer you greetings from Planet Earth.
Therefore, I guess, the thugs running Myanmar and Uzbekistan can not be criminals, as they enjoy at least implict support from the U.S. government and according to Beldar from the Planet Zorg, the Right does not defend criminals.
All that babble about genocide in Myanmar and boiling prisoners in water in Uzbekistan must just be more commie disinformation.
Haditha is not an
Haditha is not an aberration. Iraq is strewn with Hadithas just as Vietnam was with My Lais. Meanwhile Iraqis eagerly await sentence undesrving even of the murder of a dog, not a highly regarded animal in that part of the world.
Don't quite follow Alec's logic but its undeniable that the right are very adept and experienced in criminal coverups of crimes.
ps - is having extramarital
ps - is having extramarital sex/blowjobs that big a crime? What the f*** is Alex on about?
What is unusual here is that
What is unusual here is that the usual propaganda machines aren't denying this happened.
They've been denying the circumstances of the event for months - witness the fact that charges may be pressed for a bogus marine corp investigation - but when, finally, confronted with witness testimony and video evidence of the victims, it's not likely they would continue to flat out deny it.
To answer various
To answer various points:
Personal abuse is not the same as reasoned debate.
Extramarital sex is indeed not illegal in the US. Lying under oath to a Grand Jury is.
Myanmar and Uzbekistan, puh-leeze. The moment the US lifted a finger to sort them out there would be mile-long queues to write to the Guardian screaming about it. The Left has always opposed action to get rid of tyranny (starting off with the Nazis) and this opposition continues with regard to Iraq and Cuba, so no hypocritical holier-than-thou stuff. With minimal help from other countries, bringing democracy to the world is a tall order, and right now there are more urgent fish to fry. But don’t worry – one way or another, their turn will come. Without your help, obviously.
And as for concealing this or other war crimes in Iraq, we on the Right still believe in Innocent Until Proven Guilty. If you have evidence that should have brought prosecutions faster, you should have passed it on. If you have it.
Alex The Left has always
Alex
The Left has always opposed action to get rid of tyranny
Er I don't think so.
Not sure that this is a huge
Not sure that this is a huge political right wing/left wing kind of debate. We can hardly claim one side is cleaner or guiltier than the other when it comes to war.
When you send young, often poorly educated, men into a hostile country incidents like this are going to happen. That a crime has been commited is not in dispute, but some responsibilty for this massacre has to be taken by the authority that placed the soldiers there in the first place.
How many civilian casualties have resulted from stray shells or smart bomb misses?
I dont think that it is the method of death that matters but the very fact there are deaths at all.
We entred into this conflict inorder to regulate and control oil. Now that the world has seen how bloody and savage we were prepared to be to secure this goal, i hope there are a few pricked consciences in the places that matter to ensure a withdrawal from Iraq. (A vain hope with the current jokers holding power).
How many civilian casualties
How many civilian casualties have resulted from stray shells or smart bomb misses?
Plenty- and there has been plenty of intentional killing of civilians by American forces too.
Take for example this example (video) in which a group of civilians in Fallujah are bombed while walking down the street.
American apologists will doubtless say they should not have been in a war zone, even though they were in their own city, and American forces were not permitting any male over the age of 15 to leave the city.
(Not permitting civilians to leave a battle field is a war crime)
MASSACRES OF CIVILIANS AND
MASSACRES OF CIVILIANS AND FULL-SPECTRUM WAR
The massive broadcasting of the massacres of innocent Iraqi civilians--"worse than Abu Ghraib"--and of the ensuing cover-up, will threaten the will to win the Iraq War like nothing else before, because TV diffusion of violent images has the power to neutralize the legitimacy of the US government and its Army.
The military post-Cold War doctrine, post-MAD, is called 'full-spectrum force'. And Bush's wars are so closely linked to the functioning of the mass-media that TV must be considered part of the 'full-spectrum' of military force. On the far end of the spectrum of force is full-scale warfare, including massive invasion and the tactical use of WMDs.
In the middle of the new power spectrum are policing and peace-keeping operations.
At the opposite end from full-scale invasion is permanent surveillance.
Now my question is: Since TV is part of the full-spectrum force, how will the Military use it to neutralize the disastrous effect of the massacres' images?
Do you remember the way the American people were drawn into an ill-justified war on Iraq only by the effect of the way mass media work in the US?
9/11 was also a televised event; as was the presidential campaigns that brought Bush to power; as was his famous Cathedral speech of Sept 14, where he declared 'war' on terrorism.
After the Cold War, the explicit aim of the US government mentioned in documents on foreign and military policy is 'domination.'
Read more on the http://magmareport.net
Now my question is: Since TV
Now my question is: Since TV is part of the full-spectrum force, how will the Military use it to neutralize the disastrous effect of the massacres' images?
They will produce more self-contained, propoganda news items, masquerading as legit news films made by independent reporters, but really made by the Pentagon* or Haliburton. It is called Video News Releases.
And not for the first time, either on US or Iraqi media.
With Blair copying US tactics, how many of these bogus news items are being pumped through our cathode rays? If the relentless use of astroturf has removed the need to go near the great unwashed, why not, ahem, bury bad news under a blizzard of propoganda news items?
Can BBC** or commercial news stations show them in the UK without explicitly informing the viewer where the information came from?
Is it possible to discover if HMG has been using this tactic using FOIA? Or news stations using VNRs to fill space in thier 24hr news slots? The Leo-Blair-kidnap-lie suggess it is so.
* As well as keeping up with the regular slaughter of journalists brave/psycho enough to dispatch from Iraq. Doesn't half keep the bad news stories to a minimum.
** Anyone who watches 6pm news on BBC knows it's wall-to-wall VNRs.
SWIMBO
SWIMBO
The UK govt DOES have an org , some tens of mios of £, for disseminating VNR,news releases, etc, but me filing system is chaotic, so can't find toute de suite.
Even without that, the penetration of all our media by Right-Thinking Fellow-Travellers , propagandists to us, must be around 70%.
They preponderate in the headline side, BBC "NEWS", Today Programme on radio 4. Beating the drums for War with iran , with no critical interviewing , is their current speciality.
In the past they have SERIOUSLY interviewed, as AUTHORITIES, neo-con scumbags from the scumball Heritage Foundation ! 'DOCTOR' this or that, but scum. Like Condoleezzzzza is a Doctor, but read the reviews of her only book, at Counterpunch.org . Eye-opener.
Worse than Wankers, they are Crooks, the Beeb I mean.
I posted, thread above, on the Haditha massacre. Dahr is a Star, followed him from the beginning.
The real shame on our Press is that even I knew about it SIX MONTHS ago, and now its selling papers.....