Slaughter of the Innocents: Something is Rotten in Iraq and the Pentagon

By DAVE LINDORFF

Isn't it odd that in the air attack that the US military claims killed 19 high-ranking leaders of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and 15 civilians, all the slain Al Qaeda members were men and all the men were Al Qaeda, while all the civilians were women (6) and children (9)?

Think about this a minute.

This means that no women were Al Qaeda--and yet we know that women also fight, and also blow themselves up as suicide bombers. Yet these women were all civilians. The children, of course, were children.

And we're to believe that there were no men who were innocent bystanders? All those adult males who were killed were "bad guys."

Yet there were innocent bystanders: the women and the children. Somehow, any innocent bystanding men managed to duck out of the way, or the bullets and bomb fragments (and I'm sure they were fragmentation bombs that were used, as well as a withering spray of machine-gun fire) that hit all those poor women and kids, just somehow (magically?) missed the men.

Pretty amazing huh?

Keep Reading...


punditman says: Just remember: When people are cut to pieces by shrapnel, it's never the fault of the Pentagon or the US or the Bush administration or the neo-cons and their illegal, immoral war of aggression.

Now drink your kool-aid like good little consumers.

Tribal Chief Says NATO Airstrike Killed 108 Afghan Civilians

punditman says:

Here we go again. The mainstream media is mostly focused on whether or not the Afghan War is worth the cost--in Western lives. But the reality is that foreign forces have been killing thousands of innocent Afghanis--men, women and children--for almost six years.
It is worth noting that as citizens, we have no say whatsoever over the military strategy that is being pursued in our names. This means that if you support the war, then you support the way it is being waged because you can't have your war and eat it too. There is to be no tinkering around the edges by Joe Sixpack, no tweaking of tactics. You don't get to say, "I support the mission, I just wish we didn't kill civilians."
Supporters of this campaign need to ask themselves why they think aerial bombardment and counter-insurgency win hearts and minds when the history of warfare teaches us that these techniques merely turn civilians against the occupier, adds to the number of foe and heightens their resolve to strike back in any way they can.

Winning Hearts and Minds?

Airstrike reportedly kills 21 Afghan civilians
Governor says Taliban hid in villagers’ homes; coalition soldier also killed

punditman says:
The same old story, and it goes something like this: "Of course we didn't mean to, and we promise we will pay for the funerals, but we had to kill your family members because the enemy was hiding in your homes."

This is becoming so common place in both Afghanistan and Iraq, that I believe people in the West have become desensitized to the carnage. And a numb populace is incapable of acting as a responsible citizenry. One begins to think that this is precisely the idea of an endless war against an illusive enemy.