Skip to content or view screen version

US winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan

Hermes | 20.10.2005 19:58

The US forces commit atrocities in Afghanistan. If they do this in front of the TV cameras, just think what they do when noone is watching.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4359128.stm

The SBS television footage begins with a warning of disturbing scenes, particularly for Muslim viewers.

It opens with what the programme describes as shots of an American PsyOps unit using loud pop music to try to flush out the Taleban - who banned music when they ruled the country.

Some footage shows what the programme describes as the corpses of two Taleban fighters laid out facing Mecca and then being burned in what the reporter, John Martinkus, describes as a "deliberate desecration of Muslim beliefs".

Islamic tradition states that bodies should be washed, prayed for, wrapped in white cloth and buried within 24 hours.

The soldiers initially said they were burning the bodies for hygiene reasons, the programme reports.

Later footage shows two US soldiers reading from a notebook messages which they said had already been broadcast to villagers.

"Attention Taleban you are cowardly dogs," the message reads. "You allowed your fighters to be laid down facing West and burnt.

"You are too scared to retrieve their bodies. This just proves you are the lady boys we always believed you to be."


Here is a link to SBS who filmed it, and at some point there should be an update to be able to watch the footage.

www.sbs.com.au/dateline/

Hermes

Comments

Hide the following 8 comments

Just out of interest

22.10.2005 11:24

Just out of interest, is there any particular reason why your by-line omitted the opening line of the BBC piece you link to? It begins:

"The US military has launched a criminal investigation into alleged misconduct by its troops in Afghanistan, including the burning of Taleban corpses. "

What's wrong, the prospect that they're going to investigate and jail folk for it not fit in with your conspiracisit viewpoint?

Amused


Funny Is It?

22.10.2005 13:00

Just like the criminal investigation it launched during the abu Gharib icident which by the way led to the people fouind guilty not even serving 1 day in jail even though they tortured killed and disgraced prisoners.

Not Amused


..

22.10.2005 14:09

Actualy, I didn't include the majority of the article, just the details of what happened. I assumed anyone wanting to find out more could click on the link.
Well done, you're obviously intelligent enough to follow a link, have a cookie.

Hermes


Get your facts straight

22.10.2005 16:37

Not amused,

You claim that no-one was jailed for the Abu Ghraib torture? Get your facts straight. 9 people were found guilt and nearly all given prison sentences:

Lynndie England: found guilt and given 3 years in jail, dishounourable discharge
Megan Ambuhl: guilty plea - lost rank, "other than honourable" discharge
Armin Cruz: guilty plea - 8 months in jail, bad conduct discharge
Ivan L Frederick II: guilty plea - 8 years in jail, dishonourable discharge
Charles A Graner Jr: found guilty and given 10 years in jail, dishonourable discharge
Jeremy Sivits: guilty plea - 1 year in jail, bad conduct discharge
Javal S Davis: guilty plea - 6 months in jail, bad conduct discharge
Roman Krol: guilty plea - 10 months in jail, bad conduct discharge
Sabrina Harman: found guilty and given six months in jail, bad conduct discharge

Want a link? Try  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4287266.stm

Amused


You Get your facts straight

22.10.2005 19:24

THey all got parol with that sentence u know what that means? Thats right it means they all get sent home.

Also another thing. Do you think Some1 that is responsible for killing and torturing people in prison should get 3 yrs max? Do u give other murderers 4 yrs max with parol?? SO dint fucking talk about US justice coz we see it everyday from the murderers it funds all over the world, to the wars it starts to the sentences it hands out to criminals.

Still not amused


Really?

25.10.2005 10:46

Right then, I've had a look on the web and I can't find anything about them all being paroled without serving any jail time. Can you provide substantiation?

Amused


...

25.10.2005 13:52

I'd just like to add, Charles Graner received 10 years in prison, and Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick got 8 years, I'm surprised you missed the most obvious cases.

Lynddie England will be eligible for parole after 1 year.

Considering the abuse they inflicted, it doesn't seem a great deal. But secondly, it seems to me their only crime was being caught. This situation in Afghanistan is only being investigated because it was filmed by and Australian film crew. The Abu Ghraib abuse was found out because they took photographs in exchange for pornography. How much more happens which doesn't get into the media, and doesn't get investigated.

The green light for torture comes straight from the top. In Nuremburg, the people who were hanged for human rights abuses were those who gave the orders, and it should be Donald Rumsfield serving life in prison.

Hermes


Like Minds

25.10.2005 22:37

Hermes, agree entirely - sentences do seem to be ridiculously light, but not sure how parole works in the US military system. Are they out in half the sentence, like the UK, or is it longer?

Anyway, the point I was making was merely that the original post saying no-one went to gaol was crap. A typical example of some of the hyperbole we see from certain posters.

Amused