New 'Iraq massacre' tape emerges

BBC ^ | BBC

[Axlrose]

The BBC has uncovered new video evidence that US forces may have been responsible for the deliberate killing of 11 innocent Iraqi civilians.

The video appears to challenge the US military's account of events that took place in the town of Ishaqi in March.

The US said at the time four people died during a military operation, but Iraqi police claimed that US troops had deliberately shot the 11 people.

A spokesman for US forces in Iraq told the BBC an inquiry was under way.

The new evidence comes in the wake of the alleged massacre in Haditha, where US marines are suspected of massacring up to 24 Iraqi civilians in November 2005.

'Massacre'

The video pictures obtained by the BBC appear to contradict the US account of the events in Ishaqi, about 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, on 15 March 2006.

Map

The US authorities said they were involved in a firefight after a tip-off that an al-Qaeda supporter was visiting the house.

According to the Americans, the building collapsed under heavy fire killing four people - a suspect, two women and a child.

But a report filed by Iraqi police accused US troops of rounding up and deliberately shooting 11 people in the house, including five children and four women, before blowing up the building.

The video tape obtained by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds.

The pictures came from a hardline Sunni group opposed to coalition forces.

It has been cross-checked with other images taken at the time of events and is believed to be genuine, the BBC's Ian Pannell in Baghdad says.

[atomicpossum]

What caliber/cartridge was used to inflict the woulds? Were they inflicted before or after death?

These are the things I want to know both here and in Haditha. Are we able to do the basic ballistic/forensic work that would be standard here stateside, or are we going on rumor and chatter from the 'street?' Frankly, I would like to see hard evidence, not testimony or conjecture.

[DCPatriot]

Look....Israel has fought back like this for decades.

You kill a few of ours and we kill a dozen of you.

Does anybody doubt Israel would cease to exist by now if they didn't take that approach?

I AM P*SSED!

President Bush should announce the new policy that any civilians actively assisting the insurgency will be targets.

We're trying to bring you a peace and you want to kill us?

I betcha the next time somebody trys to plant an IED in front of a house the owner may have something to say about it.

[SeanOGuano]

"President Bush needs to put an end to all these witch hunts and grant pardons to all American forces in Iraq."

A pardon implies guilt. I'm reserving judgement until the results of the investigation are released.

[Axlrose]

"President Bush should announce the new policy that any civilians actively assisting the insurgency will be targets."

He lacks the balls, and thats the truth.

[roverman2K6]

Agreed, an extension of the B17 bombing campaigns, they all need to suffer if they support the enemy, they are the enemy. Having said that I still do not beleive they rounded them up and killed them.

[Unicorn]

At least there's no bias there/s

[Steve_Seattle]

Why does a free media seem to always "hang to the left ?"

That's an interesting question. I think part of it is arrogance. People in the media have come to think of themselves as "enlighteners," as being a class of people who educate the rest of us, so there's a kind of elitism involved. Leftism is always elitism, despite all the talk of "the people" and "democracy." Plus, Watergate was a huge event in the mind of American journalists; things won't return to normal until the Watergate generation is dead. Ever since Watergate, journalists have all wanted to be "players," to topple an administration, to expose a scandal. Isn't it moronic the way every scandal has the word "-gate" affixed to it?

[Txsleuth]

Well...gosh, we won't have to worry about any more incidents will we...now that we are sending "sensitivity training units" over there to teach our troops...

how to NOT kill and break things...after all the money we have spent to TRAIN them to kill and break things.

[Dead Dog]

They have a symbiotic relationship with Al Quida.

[Kakaze]

" The other incident is far more troubling because it appears that our own military has reached a preliminary opinion that the Marines shot innocents. "

What really bothers me about Hafitha, is that it seems to me the militarys' opinion is more politically expediant than the truth.

Sensitivity training and hanging our boys out to dry wont make anyone love us or even like us.

But it will encourage the enemy. Worst of all it will induce doubt in our troops. Doubt in the command structure supporting them ( CIC included ) and doubt at pulling the trigger based on some "group hug" they had to sit through about diversity . Thats going to get some killed.

Our boys deserve better.

[somniferum]

Most students of journalism are liberals, and most journalism departments are to the left of Karl Marx.

[leadpenny]

The live BBC feed (US edition) comes on one of
the DC area public tv networks in about 10 minutes.
I'll check it out.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

I take it as a "given" that in a war of this magnitude there will be a few incidents where our troops violate the rules of war. I also take it as a given that they will be punished if the incidents come to light.

So do I--usually. But the word I've heard from some folks at Camp Pendleton is that this came to light when someone at Division HQ noticed that the after-action report and some logistics reports gave conflicting information, they asked for more information to explain the discrepancies, and things went to hell.

That's why this is worrying. If they end up giving a few enlisted grunts jail or worse and let officers who should have known better off with a slap on the wrist like the Army did with Gen. Karpinski, it will send the wrong message.

[Dead Dog]

Hell, I think you can extend this to Kent State. In fact, I think the two are very similar.

National Guard troops under attack by deadly force (a thrown brick), open fire on mixed group of combatants and others of unknown intent.

Marines under attack open fire on mixed group of combatants and others of unknown intent.

Lie with dogs, you get fleas. Natural Law lends to freedom of association, and if your associates force people to defend themselves with rifles, you suffer the consequence.

[AngryJawa]

Let me preface this by saying I know just as much about the merits of this case as the MSM and Murtha...which is to say I know NOTHING. We'll know when the investigation is complete.

It wouldn't be a great stretch to imagine that the local jihadis have captured M-4's or M-16's with which to fire 5.56mm ammo.

I wonder if a postmortem was even performed on the shootees due to the muslim insistance on planting the body in the ground asap.

This whole damn thing is smelling fishy -even moreso now that it's come up that the muz reporter that "broke" the story has a history of being detained by the US military.

[Dead Dog]

I doubt the Marines are too concerned about preserving the careers of a few captains and Lts. In fact they have already ruined a couple remotely involved in this.

I'd be more surprised of an NCO gets nailed.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

I doubt the Marines are too concerned about preserving the careers of a few captains and Lts.

I wasn't just thinking of captains and lieutenants.

[txrangerette]

Ever heard of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? The Military Rules of Engagement? The Commanders on the ground in Iraq, whose information and advice the President seeks virtually daily? The Joint Chiefs of Staff? Donald Rumsfeld? The Senate and House Armed Services Committees? Guess not.

[LADY J]

So it shows that there were gunshot wounds. I haven't seen anything yet that shows anybody DOING the shooting!

WHO shot these people? Someone besides a Marine could have shot them and then video taped the bodies.

[AngryJawa]

Most journo students get into it to "make a difference". That tends to morph "journalism" into "advocacy". After a while, they can't even tell the difference anymore.

Given the demographics and the inbred nature of their business, it's unlikely that the 20 year old liberal do-gooder that started in J-school will ever be exposed to the things that tend to make 30 and 40 year old conservatives.