US troops kill Iraqi father and two daughters

[maddezmom]

BAGHDAD (AFP) - US forces opened fire on an unarmed Iraqi family's car and killed a father and his two young daughters, the man's wife told AFP on Saturday.

A statement from the US military confirmed that three Iraqis were killed and three more wounded in Friday's shooting in east Baghdad, after the car's driver ignored or missed signals for him to stop.

"They just opened fire randomly on us," said Akhlas Abduljabbar, a Sunni housewife from Zafaraniyah, south of Baghdad, whose family was travelling through the war-torn city.

"They killed my husband and two daughters and my three-year-old boy was wounded in the head. The Americans' translator told me 'Flee, don't stay, they're going to kill you'," she added.

Abduljabbar identified her dead hisband as Rifat Abduljabbar and the daughters as Fatima, 11, and Hafsat, 12.

more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070310/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrestus_070310115748

[Divernan]

1. 'Flee, don't stay, they're going to kill you',"

What a chilling statement. But believable, because she was a witness to a slaughter of civilians.
The article continues to state the U.S. military said they opened fire to "disable it (the vehicle) with small arms fire." Sounds like very poor marksmanship if instead of taking out the tires, they shot at a level which killed 3 passengers, and hit the child in the head, as well as hitting some bystanders. However, when you skimp on or skip training, it could be that the soldiers just were incompetent at aiming their weapons. Or did they panic and blast away aiming to "disable" the passengers, not the vehicle? Just one experience like this can produce a PTSD that can last a life time. Young Americans trying to decide on a career should consider clinical psychology. We're going to need a lot of therapists for veterans and their close family members.

[Ind4now]

3. Please don't blame the troops!

"We're going to need a lot of therapists for veterans and their close family members."

Especially if we run around blaming our soldiers with no real evidence! you need to reconsider your attitude!

We do not know what really happened yet, but we can lay down a few facts about the situation. And mind you, this has nothing to do with your opinion on the war, the situation must be analyzed properly!

fact 1: the soldiers are working in an area that is extremely hostile, where if a vehicle does not stop as instructed there is a good chance it is carrying a payload of explosives that will kill you.

fact 2: this vehicle did not stop

fact 3: the only eye witness account we have is that of a grieving mother/wife, whose opinions must be weighed as one that would not be independent.

To say that she is "...believable, because she was a witness to a slaughter of civilians," is a very ignorant statement. If you only knew how unreliable, not only normal witness', but especially those that are witness to a major tragedy, really are, you would never make that statement!

Don't agree with the war, don't agree with the tactics, but DON'T blame the troops when you don't understand or comprehend the situation! Please, don't turn on the troops!

[Divernan]

6. I'm an attorney & know more about eye witnesses than you do.

If you will go back and read the article, it may sink in that this woman's quote did not refer to what she saw, but to what she heard/was told by the "Americans' interpreter". As to what she saw, no one (including the US Army) contests the fact that her car was fired on, that her husband and two pre-teen daughters were slaughtered, and that her three year old son was wounded in the head, OR that bystanders were also shot. That's why the Army has launched an investigation. It is clear to everyone but you that the soldiers mistakenly fired on a civilian car and killed a father and his two daughters. They ARE to blame for their actions. Why don't you email the Army that they are "ignorant" and they should "reconsider their attitude"? What makes the interpreter's statement to her "believable" is that in the blood lust of war, once shooting starts, it can be re-started quickly, because the people with the weapons are in a heightened emotional state.

As to my comments re the need for therapists, evidently you have not heard about the (predictable) epidemic of post traumatic stress disorder in soldiers returning from war - and most particularly in those who mistakenly killed children. I was a psych major, and then a research fellow for the National Institute of Mental Health for 3 years, during the Vietnam era (before I went to law school). I had both friends and family who served in Nam, and several family members & friends who have served in Iraq/Afghanistan I never met a single vet who was in country in Nam who was not screwed up (to use a non-technical term, encompassing a whole host of mental conditions) to some degree by the experience. That often included problems with re-adjusting to civilian, married and/or family life - lots of spousal abuse and divorces. Hence my comment that their families will also need counseling. Or maybe you are one of those people who don't believe in therapy.

Also try reading the current news regarding Congressional investigations into the VA and huge numbers of vets in need of counseling.

[Judi Lynn]

21. Thank you for your comments. Well reasoned, of course. There is the one outside chance

the soldiers recognized they were looking at a suicide-bombing family, out for a suicidal drive, perhaps...

Apparently our right-wing couch war supporters imagine there's an endless supply of soldiers as long as the middle class continues to narrow, so it doesn't matter if soldiers sent by deranged, ambitious right-wing Presidents get killed inflicting death and mayhem on others, or are completely unstable for the rest of their lives, as there are always so many more to take their places.

Interesting how supportive the flying keyboard warriors are of the worst atrocitities from soldiers sent to Iraq, but how wrathful they become when it appears one or more of them condemn the war.

[teryang]

28. interesting comments

I am an attorney too. I've reviewed scores of PTSD claims myself. I agree with the spirit of your commentary but would add two caveats.

The first is that eyewitness testimony is extraordinarily unreliable. Many judges wish to eliminate consideration of the death penalty in cases where the only identification evidence is uncorroborated eyewitness testimony. Unfortunately, there are numerous expert studies demonstrating just how extraordinarily unreliable eyewitness testimony is, yet it alone and uncorroborated remains competent sufficient evidence to support a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. My state incredibly enough will not accept expert testimony regarding statistics in peer reviewed studies regarding the unreliability of eyewitness identification testimony. They claim it doesn't pass the Frye test. But it does.

And this is a case where the events are in issue, rather than identification. The misidentification really is on the part of the attackers, who envisoned themselves to be under a possible attack.

My second caveat is that I distinguish homicide of innocent civilians from a qualifying life threatening episode that triggers a bona fide PTSD. Someone who negligently kills innocent people outside of a bona fide combat incident may suffer from nightmares, relive the event, have a startle response, hyper-alertness, etc., but this would not be a true ptsd. This is more in the nature of a guilty conscience that eats away at the soul. All the qualifying symptoms may be present, most characteristically survival guilt, but the qualifying event is lacking. I would expect as you appear to suggest that the US personnel were already suffering from PTSD from prior genuine life threatening episodes which impaired their judgement with resultant hyper-alertness. This tends to make one trigger happy.

Thanks for your thoughtful post.

[Divernan]

29. I agree re unreliability of uncorroborated eye witnesses; but this was EAR witness!

My original reply was as to what she heard, i.e,. "Flee...don't stay, they'll kill you." And your comment on peer-reviewed studies of eye witness reliability made me consider the difference between what we recall HEARING versus what we recall SEEING. I haven't kept up with the recent studies you refer to, but the ones I do recall tended to deal with the misidentification of defendants, i.e, confusing them with the actual perpetrator. Hence all the questions on Law & Order, as well as actual depositions and trials, about one's eyesight, the amount of illumination, clothing masking physical characteristics, the distance, length of time one observed something or someone. Or re hearing, whether one heard a gunshot or a car backfiring.

But I think people are fairly accurate at recalling brief, shouted warnings: "Look out! . . . Duck!. . . Fire!. . . .Avalanche! . . ."Don't move, there's a snake!. . . .or that really old one, "Run for your life!" When I read this account, "Flee. .. don't stay. . . they'll kill you". I think it's entirely likely that the EAR witness accounts of such comments are accurate. And what struck me as most chilling and worthy of comment on the behavior of the US soldiers, was that the soldiers' interpreter, in observing the situation feared that the soldiers would resume firing and kill this woman and her three year old child. Do the peer-reviewed studies you've seen ever examine this difference between what we see and what we hear?

I know when it comes to memorable events in my life (and nothing could be more memorable to this poor woman than seeing her family slaughtered before her eyes), I can recall exact statements 30 or 40 years later. Now I couldn't tell you the dates of these comments, or what people were wearing, or what color their eyes were - but their words are burned into my memory. For an example, in my case, my mother telling me, 50 years ago, "Your father's cancer is back. He has six months to live." I recall the setting sun coming through the window behind her and those words, but couldn't testify in court as to the date, day of the week,month,time, etc.

On Edit: one other thought. I read recently how many witnesses to murder have been killed in New Jersey, such that the DAs are following policies they won't indict for murder unless they have at least 2 eye witnesses, and that very few people in high crime neighborhoods will risk their lives by admitting they saw a murder committed or heard one planned or threatened. Now that the US Army has lowered its standards re recruiting people with criminal records, the Army ends up with soldiers who realize that if they commit a crime, they better get rid of any witnesses. Like that recent case where the US soldiers plotted to rape a young woman, and ended up killing her and her entire family - although that had not been part of the original plan. What hell hath Bush/Cheney wrought!

[teryang]

38. Excited utterances exception to hearsay rule, yes...

...people do remember these. I find juries cavalierly disregard them, when they shouldn't. I recently learned of a scientific survey of actual florida juries that showed that most jurors don't give the presumption of innocence and have no idea what proof beyond a reasonable doubt means. American courtroom justice is based mostly on wishful thinking and mythology.

Actually, misidentification is more affected by race than anything else. The other factors you mention are typical weight of the evidence factors traditionally allowed in direct and cross. As I recall and I could be wrong, it's been two years since I studied the mistaken id literature, the traditional factors, such as limited opportunity to observe, were not variables in the identification studies. People just plain can't remember what other people unknown to them look like most of the time. So much for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. When I say corraboration, I'm talking about circumstantial evidence of identity or physical proof. Another witness doesn't add that much weight to the id. They could both be wrong.

[Divernan]

39. I appreciate your comments. Now that I'm retired, I don't chat with very many lawyers.

I taught trial advocacy for a couple of years and ran the ITAP program, which always ended with the 2-person student teams (2 for the plaintiffs or prosecution & 2 for the defense) trying mock cases in front of real judges with real juries. I lined up 26 judges (got a lot of great Air Force JAGS & state court judges), and each trial had a 6 person jury made up of community volunteers balanced as to age, sex, race & religion. I spiced it up some more by getting a Brownie troop to provide child witnesses (in a mock traffic accident case), had one blind juror with a seeing eye dog in one jury panel - quite a challenge to the students to make sure the witnesses adequately described what they saw; and in another panel I had a deaf juror with his signing interpreter. The students got to listen to the jury deliberations - probably the most valuable and instructive part of the whole experience, and the judges also appreciated very much the rare opportunity to hear a jury deliberate.

[bluerum]

8. WTF!

Fact 1. Civilians trying to live in occupied country - THEIR country.
Fact 2. Occupiers cannot communicate effectively with population. Have no idea of intentions or motivations.
Fact 3. Civilian grieving over the death of her family at the hands of the occupiers.
Fact 4. People with power MUST behave responsibly with that power and they MUST be held accountable for their actions.
Fact 5. There was at least one additional witness - the one that told the mother to flee for her life.

I am not blaming the troops. But I do want them to be accountable for their actions. Just because we (the US) train you, arm you, and put you in the middle of a civil war does not give you the right to kill indiscriminately.

[pinniped]

9. Facts 4 & 5: they were UNARMED and a family was wiped out.

.

[acmavm]

14. Right, let us all join hands and support the contining slaughter of innocent

people just because the troops are 'ours'.

Get real. Go read the stories about My Lai and Tiger Force. They're just repeating history. And people like you with your 'don't turn on the troops' enable this behavior. The people that were murdered did not ask this country to invade, to start dropping bombs, to ruin their infrastructure, to deny them electricity and water and the other 'luxuries' of civilized 21st century life. They didn't ask for foreign troops to come over there and give themselves the right to bust their doors down whenever they feel like it. They didn't ask for any of this.

I'll give you an alternative suggestion. Support the innocent.

[saigon68]

17. I agree, if a rustic a gun

And this is the result. I have seen it. Most of these idiots are ill trained and their NCOs areprotypes of the Graner Syndrome

[maddezmom]

15. there were other witnesses...Iraqi Police

The allegations were made by the man’s wife, who was in the car, and members of the Iraqi police, who were at the scene. The American military command said in a statement on Friday that it was investigating an episode in Sadr City involving “an escalation of force,” but it could not confirm any details of the account given by the man’s wife.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/world/middleeast/10cnd-iraq.html

[saigon68]

24. Ask Rusty Calley

[w4rma]

31. I blame the people that put our countrymen into a situation that produces these kinds of events.(nt)

[IndianaGreen]

32. We have a 4-year history of US lies when it comes to Iraq

Why do you still give the benefit of the doubt to a military that has yet to tell the truth about anything?

Why do you think Iraqis hate us so much?

US troops should be held accountable for their actions under international law, and if charges are brought, they should be tried by an independent court at The Hague.

Here is another case: It is a fact that US troops always open fire in every direction after an IED attack. This has always resulted in innocent civilian casualties. Why do the troops do this? Is it racism? Revenge? Jesus? While those may be factors, the fact that the shootings always take place leads me to believe that the troops are under orders, and that their rules of engagement demand that they fire in every direction after an IED attack, civilians be damned. If this is the case, then we should be going after the ones that issued those orders.

[oblivious]

35. Why not blame the troops? Among others.

Why I fled George Bush's war
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=190x20141

[anotherdrew]

41. look, who else to blame but the people who pulled the triggers?

they were there, they did what they did, deal with it. Their 'good' intentions don't enter into it. That is EXACTLY why they shouldn't even be there, because they are forced to commit acts beyond reason. They shouldn't be blocking a road anyway, they should get the hell out of the way.

[pokercat999]

42. The troops are volunteers in an unlawful "war".

Some have chosen to refuse to continue the murder and are facing the consequences, others continue to ravage a foreign land....what else needs be said to make you understand.... it IS the troops at this point!

[rodeodance]

12. Troops are on edge-never know who they are dealing with. Terrible

position for them to be in-----and they should NOT be in this position.

[rebel with a cause]

19. You know I saw a news story a few months ago about

a national guard unit that had just returned from Iraq. They interviewed quite a few of these young people and I was appalled at the attitude I saw. They couldn't wait to go back, they wanted to continue fighting, and they couldn't understand why THOSE people wanted to hurt them. I don't know if they actually said they wanted to go on killing Iraqis but they did say they were angry at them for wanting to hurt them and they wanted revenge.

I've stopped supporting the troops. I support the young people who are over there trying to do the right thing, hating they are over there, and wanting to come home. I want these young people saved and brought home as soon as possible. Those over there that call the native people "sand ni**ers" and torment the innocent, I could care less about. I'm sorry, but being "American" does not make them any more special to me than if they were any other nationality. I am a human being first and fore most, and I care about my fellow human beings. I am a USA citizen, but it is a country not a god.

[Divernan]

30. Vietnam affected one of my cousins like that. He bragged

about how many "gooks" he'd killed, and was one of the most offensive racists you could imagine. I must say, he was a spoiled bully growing up, so it wasn't a total surprise that he grew into such a nasty adult.

[rebel with a cause]

34. You know, I expected to see one guy like this

but everyone they interviewed was like that. It was really disturbing. I think the unit was from Iowa, not from here.

In 2004 I met two youngsters from here that had just came back for Iraq and they were upset over it. They had no equipment and no guidance in their time over there. They were really disturbed by it all, and they had been warned by their commander that they had better keep their mouth closed because they couldn't say anything that might reflect badly on bush.

[IndianaGreen]

33. One combat tour is enough to fuck up one's brain

We now have troops starting their third head fucking combat tour, while Congress sits around debating legislative process, and impeachment off the table!

[Vinca]

2. No wonder the world hates us. nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

16. You mean the warm reception Bush got in SA?

Those weren't tear gas bombs, but celebratory firecrackers. Those weren't rocks, they were candies meant for Bush and his entourage

[rebel with a cause]

22. Don't you know that all the people just want georgie's autograph.

saw it on faux noise this morning. Had the station on just a few minutes just to see what they were saying about the rainbow tour, and had to take a pain pill afterwards. euuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

[ChairmanAgnostic]

25. didja see Libby was not guilty?

what a stupid fucked up organization. No, that's not right. They know exactly what they are doing.

I also heard a report that the only news channel they play in Iraqnam is Faux Gnus. those poor bastards. not only are their lives in danger, so are their minds.

[rebel with a cause]

26. Once you have them programed,

you have to keep them programed. What better way to do this than with faux gnus. And they say we don't do brain washing. We do it to our own troops. :grr:

[pinniped]

4. Where are all the stories about Iraqi soldiers opening fire on Iraqi civilians?

Do they not have patrols, fire on civilian cars, or what?

As usual, don't expect any fucking accountability here.

"The incident is under investigation," it concluded.

[maddezmom]

5. not sure, but US troops are accused of shooting 3 Iraqi Army troops on Friday

In Diyala, American forces on Friday shot and killed three Iraqi Army soldiers in a military pickup truck after they failed to obey an American order to stop, Iraqi military officials said.

The spokesman for the Defense Ministry, Muhammad al-Askary, said the military was investigating the episode, which took place north of Baquba, though it appeared to be “a mistake.” He said the soldiers were wearing uniforms and were in a vehicle with military markings.

According to Colonel Garver, the American military was also investigating the matter. “We understand there were three Iraqi Army soldiers killed in this engagement, and it is too early to tell the details surrounding the event,” he said.

American and Iraqi forces are fighting a growing Sunni insurgent threat in Diyala, which has become one of the bloodiest sectarian battlegrounds in Iraq. On Friday, the American commander for northern Iraq, Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, said he had asked for more troops in the province.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/world/middleeast/10cnd-iraq.html

[pinniped]

7. Maybe this is why the Iraqis aren't allowed to give orders to stop like the Merkans.

The roles would be reversed.

[maddezmom]

11. Iraqi Police and National Police assist after escalation of force incident

Iraqi Police and National Police assist after escalation of force incident
Saturday, 10 March 2007
Multi-National Corps – Iraq
Public Affairs Office, Camp Victory
APO AE 09342

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
RELEASE No. 20070310-08
March 10, 2007

Iraqi Police and National Police assist after escalation of
force incident

Multi-National Division – Baghdad PAO
2nd BCT, 82nd Abn. Div. Public Affairs

BAGHDAD – Paratroopers from the 2nd Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment
fired upon a vehicle failing to respond to visual warning signals March 9 in a northern
neighborhood of the Iraqi capital.

The vehicle failed to respond to paratrooper’s warning signals as it approached
their patrol in the Adhamiyah security district. The paratroopers followed established
protocol for escalation of force but the vehicle continued to advance toward them forcing
them to disable it with small arms fire.

Three Iraqis were wounded and three were killed in this incident. The wounded
were provided immediate medical assistance. Iraqi police and national police secured
the area and Iraqi police evacuated the wounded.
The incident is under investigation.


http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10484&Itemid=21

[rebel with a cause]

27. I guess all sand "N" look alike.

:sarcasm: :grr: sorry for the use of this term, but we need to start telling it like it is, and this is the type of language being used. And this is the mindset of some of the troops being sent there. Golly Moses, I may be becoming a separationist, because I don't know if I don't think our armies should not be allowed in other countries unless under certain circumstances. (Like disasters, to stop genocides, and wars that are necessary: ex WWII) Oh well, what do I know?

[Amonester]

10. And the murdurous clusterfu*k goes on, and on, and on...

While X-on-MOB-ill makes another billion
Of Record Profits Each day

Watta-world, watta-world aWoLiar created...

[rodeodance]

13. We have read about tragic incidents like this for the last 4 years and will

continue to do so until we get out!

[saigon68]

18. Or as we say "Freedom is on the March"

In Mar 2003 some of us predicted this "Cluster Fuck" and it goes on and on and on.

[lse7581011]

20. Proud to Support The Troops-NOT!

I think this whole thing is shameful! We keep hearing more and more reports like this! Are we supposed to think each one is an aberration?

[rebel with a cause]

23. See my post # 19.

It is not an aberration, it is a frame of mind. It is us against them, and they are seen as less than us. The training tells them this, and even it no racism exists before, there is a good chance there will be afterwards. And the lack of empathy is telling. There should be cultural and language training instead of some of these hate lectures (just my opinion from what I have heard) they are given.

[saigon68]

44. They will Kill with little or no remorse

When they are 45 years old, Little creatures will claw at their flesh and they'll have PTSD night sweats

Then the VA will dump them on the street and they will commit suicide.

[frogcycle]

36. what i see here is

a whole lot of people presuming to be able to conduct an investigation and try a case based on a bit of hearsay.

Clearly this is an awful incident. It could be several crimes were committed. But there is absolutely no point in our ripping each others throats out at this time based on this accounting. What is abundantly clear is that we have trained people to kill, equipped them to kill, and then thrown them for extended periods into a highly stressful situation. Whether these individuals "snapped" or have some rationalization or are just thugs who managed to get into the army (remember the waivers? felons can get in now) will presumably be established in due course.

Bottom line is we have overextended ourselves and it is only going to continue to get worse if we don't get out.

[Supersedeas]

37. same ole same

[IndianaGreen]

40. Yes, all we gain by staying in Iraq is to add to the dead and wounded

Each day the Congress fails to turn off this war, is another set of names that will be added to a future Iraq War Memorial.

[frogcycle]

43. and roughly 15 times that many devasting injuries

and even more psychologically damaged, with families damaged or destroyed

how about extending the oh-so-sacrosanct "rights of the unborn" and of the Terri Schiavos to those children already living whose daddies are dying, being maimed, or becoming strangers, no longer the loving hero who was sent to that hellhole? These hypocritical "family values" bastards will insist on an unwanted crack baby being allowed to be born into poverty and public assistance, but cavalierly ignore the destruction of existing families, the devastation they wreak DAILY