Soldiers fired before pilots bombed

HALIFAX -- Newly obtained evidence shows that Canadian soldiers involved in the friendly-fire incident in Afghanistan were firing their weapons into the air at the time of the tragedy.

Transcripts of testimony by two Canadian soldiers who survived the bombing last April indicate they aimed their weapons skyward as part of their night-training exercises near the Kandahar air base.

That fire was seen by the two American pilots who were flying overhead and misinterpreted the blasts as an enemy attack. Four died and eight were seriously injured in the bombing.

In testimony to a board of inquiry, Sgt. Lorne Ford of the Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry said there were definitely shots fired into the air from one position as he and his colleagues conducted live-fire exercises.

"There would have been rounds, like a short burst going into the air to begin with," Ford, who sustained wounds to his leg and eye, said in a statement to a joint Canadian-American board of inquiry.

A transcript of the statement, as well as that of Cpl. Rene Paquette, was obtained by The Canadian Press.

Paquette also testified to the board, which produced a final report into the incident, that he fired rounds into the air as part of the late-night mission.

Paquette said he and another soldier were instructed to fire, but that only he had authorization to do so.

"So it was up to me and I fired two or three short bursts at the target. It was almost directly up," Paquette told the Canadian and American board members.

The testimony is not referred to in reports released publicly by American and Canadian officials investigating the tragedy.

The two soldiers said there was a near-steady stream of fire during the moonless night, as they moved from one position atop a hill to another.

The fire produced bright flashes either through ricochets or tracers from the weapons. Ford testified that the rounds could produce red and white sparks.

Overhead, American pilot Maj. Harry Schmidt was telling his lead pilot Maj. William Umbach that he was seeing flashes on the ground. Schmidt then requested permission to attack the target, but was reminded by Umbach that they should ensure they weren't friendly forces.

Schmidt was ordered to hold fire, but four minutes after seeing the ground fire he invoked self-defence and dropped a 225-kilogram laser-guided bomb on the soldiers.

In his testimony, Ford described hearing the "screaming of what I was pretty much sure was a bomb being launched."

He was thrown to his right, while Paquette said he saw a brilliant flash and was then "jack-knifed in the air."

The newly available testimony has led defence lawyers for the two American pilots to raise doubts about the culpability of their clients - and about the conduct of two boards of inquiry.

The two reports placed almost all the blame on the pilots, finding they breached protocol and acted rashly in dropping the bomb without first retreating to assess the situation.

"When you just go out to fix the blame like this board did, you don't get all the facts," Dave Beck, Umbach's lawyer, said from his office in Knoxville, Tenn. "This information was not in the reports."

Beck and Schmidt's lawyer, Charles Gittins, had asked that a new board be struck to examine the evidence after claiming that the first American board was biased and prejudicial to their clients. Their request was denied.

Gittins says much of the information that is trickling out, but which is not in the reports, will be presented when the pilots appear before a so-called Article 32 hearing in January.

The procedure, much like a grand jury hearing, will determine whether there is enough evidence to proceed to a court martial.

The pilots could each face 64 years in prison if convicted of the involuntary manslaughter, dereliction of duty and assault charges that have been recommended.

The reports also did not include the fact that a sentry had issued an order to the Canadians to stop firing while a plane either landed or took off from the nearby Kandahar Airport.

Gittins argues that had the Canadians responded, the accident might have been prevented.

"The Canadian and American reports both ignore this testimony from a witness who was far away from the bomb impact and who actually was giving the order," Gittins said. "Amazing, but unconscionable to omit this reference."

Retired general Lewis MacKenzie agrees, saying the material should have been included in the reports if only to eliminate any perceptions that information was being concealed.

MacKenzie, who has been involved in several boards of inquiry, dismissed the threat the Canadians could have posed to the pilots from their location and armed with the type of weapons they were using to practise.

"When you're at 10,000 feet you don't really have to worry about a weapons system that has a capability of going out a few thousand metres getting anywhere close to you," MacKenzie said in an interview from Toronto.

"I don't think it's terribly significant. But if it was known and it was not included then I think that's an oversight. That's a mistake."

Why has our military been screwing over our own pilots to make nice with Soviet Canukistan?

So9

Why has our military been screwing over our own pilots to make nice with Soviet Canukistan?

The soldiers were ordered not to bomb the training exercise. They disobeyed a direct order.

My understanding of the military is that if you disobey a direct order and, by doing so, save lives, you probably won't be punished too harshly, but you probably still won't get away with it. Otherwise, you're in deep doo doo. And if someone gets killed because of your insubordination, you're in "man the lifeboats" deep doo doo (but with no lifeboat).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.