PDA

View Full Version : Reporter Asks White House if US Airstrike that killed 11 children is ‘Terrorism’




enhanced_deficit
04-20-2013, 03:19 PM
What I find amazing is why none of the MSM jourbalists had the courage to ask this question? Link below has audio link of question.


Reporter Asks White House if U.S. Airstrikes That Kill Afghan Civilians Qualify as ‘Terrorism’

by Rania Khalek on April 17, 2013

Matthew Keys, the social media editor at Reuters, posted audio (https://soundcloud.com/producermatthew/reporter-asks-white-house) of a reporter asking White House Press Secretary Jay Carney if U.S. bombings that kill innocent civilians in Afghanistan constitute an “act of terror” given the labeling of the Boston Marathon bombing as “terrorism”. She specifically refers to a U.S. airstrike earlier this month that killed 11 children, just the latest in a seemingly (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iF0L65EekYDvpqdBKfQ0n94RvIUA?docId=CNG.5330d f416d3153827498663b84367c46.401) endless (http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/10/world/asia/afghanistan-deaths-probe/) line (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/347740) of Afghan (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/13/us-afghanistan-attack-civilians-idUSBRE91C0E020130213) civilian (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/john-brennan-drones_n_2823583.html) deaths (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/28/headlines/report_4_children_killed_in_night_raid_by_afghan_i nternational_forces#.UW7idKIEx14.twitter) at the hands of the U.S. government.


Carney completely dodged the questions, pointing instead to the 9/11 terrorist attacks to justify U.S. bombings in Afghanistan. After a long-winded answer excusing U.S. conduct, Carney concludes, “ we take great care in the prosecution of this war.”



http://raniakhalek.com/2013/04/17/reporter-asks-white-house-if-u-s-airstrikes-that-kill-afghan-civilians-qualify-as-terrorism/

muh_roads
04-20-2013, 03:23 PM
"we take great care in protecting poppy seeds for this war.”

Fixed.

kcchiefs6465
04-20-2013, 03:26 PM
ter·ror·ism [ térrə rìzzəm ]

1.political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes

Christian Liberty
04-20-2013, 03:28 PM
By this definition, Obama is definitely a terrorist.

enhanced_deficit
04-20-2013, 03:37 PM
If anyone watches CNN/MSNBC/Fox anymore, had you heard about this?

Here is HuffPo report on this with full text of question.

White House press secretary Jay Carney had his evasive maneuvers tested on Wednesday when a reporter at a daily briefing pressed him over whether the administration considered civilian casualties brought about by U.S. airstrikes abroad to be acts of terror.
In an exchange first posted by Matthew Keys of Reuters (https://soundcloud.com/producermatthew/reporter-asks-white-house), McClatchy's Amina Ismail, a reporter who primarily covers Egypt, noted that President Barack Obama had determined Monday's Boston Marathon bombings (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/boston-marathon-bombing) to be an "act of terrorism." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/obama-boston-marathon-bombing_n_3092801.html) She then asked Carney how the White House would consider an action of similar devastation by the U.S. abroad.


"I send my deepest condolence to the victims and families in Boston. But President Obama said that what happened in Boston was an act of terrorism," she said. "I would like to ask, do you consider the U.S. bombing on civilians in Afghanistan earlier this month that left 11 children and a woman killed a form of terrorism? Why or why not?"


(Read more about the recent U.S.-led NATO air strike and its aftermath here) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/07/nato-air-strike-kills-children-nato-afghanistan_n_3033407.html)
Carney appeared eager to avoid a direct answer to the question of how the word "terrorism" would be considered in such a circumstance. Here's his response, as transcribed by Dispatches from the Underclass blog (http://raniakhalek.com/2013/04/17/reporter-asks-white-house-if-u-s-airstrikes-that-kill-afghan-civilians-qualify-as-terrorism/):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/18/amina-ismail-jay-carney_n_3110760.html

Lucille
04-20-2013, 03:41 PM
Awesome.

JK/SEA
04-20-2013, 03:45 PM
Answer: ''because we're Amerika, and we can do whatever we want and get away with it''..

next question.

ItsTime
04-20-2013, 03:46 PM
Bout time. But they will just say it is a war zone... forgetting they have claimed the US is a war zone so we should expect attacks and shouldn't classify it as terrorism.

enhanced_deficit
04-20-2013, 08:52 PM
No one is above war crimes law.

Mani
04-21-2013, 12:07 AM
She asks if those 11 children killed were acts of terrorism...and his long winded reply......They planned 9/11......so those 11 kids planned 9/11????


It's not our fault Afghanistan uses children as shields! We should be able to blow them up fair and square! They are cheating!! (that's what I got from th comments section from the war hawks)...

It's a war zone! (according to the US labeling it a war zone? And if tomorrow someone declares a place on US soil a war zone then if our children are accidentally bombed its ok?)

puppetmaster
04-21-2013, 12:58 AM
Wow....just wow and people wonder why I cannot pay taxes without disgust

MRK
04-21-2013, 01:18 AM
The emperor is clearly naked.

MRK
04-21-2013, 01:19 AM
Wow....just wow and people wonder why I cannot pay taxes without disgust

This is one of the many reasons I'm getting out of the empire sometime this year or next.

enhanced_deficit
04-21-2013, 01:12 PM
The emperor is clearly naked.

Not a good look for the emperor.

Anti Federalist
04-21-2013, 01:25 PM
Annnnnd, this goes here:

“If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it.” - Congressman Peter King R-NY

Oh, and for those youngsters that may not know, the Irish Republican Army was a Soviet funded terrorist group that was responsible for numerous bombings and attacks throughout Northern Ireland.

enhanced_deficit
04-21-2013, 01:29 PM
Annnnnd, this goes here:

“If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it.” - Congressman Peter King R-NY

Oh, and for those youngsters that may not know, the Irish Republican Army was a Soviet funded terrorist group that was responsible for numerous bombings and attacks throughout Northern Ireland.


Good reference here.
This makes both GOP King and Dem Obama look not so good.

TheGrinch
04-21-2013, 01:39 PM
Not a good look for the emperor.

http://itmakessenseblog.com/files/2012/07/Emperor-has-no-clothes.jpg

enhanced_deficit
04-21-2013, 07:24 PM
Good one.

enhanced_deficit
07-03-2013, 10:13 AM
ter·ror·ism [ térrə rìzzəm ]

1.political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes

Obama pupms have been called suspected war criminals but not terrists.

enhanced_deficit
10-27-2013, 10:14 AM
Video of that question had been leaked.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPUlpnCasdo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPUlpnCasdo

Carson
10-27-2013, 11:27 AM
Thread music.

Obamikado - I've Got a Little List - Subtitled

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_966692&feature=iv&src_vid=1b_gmO7AJS4&v=5X9tvMadfXU

enhanced_deficit
10-27-2013, 11:50 AM
Thread music.

Obamikado - I've Got a Little List - Subtitled

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_966692&feature=iv&src_vid=1b_gmO7AJS4&v=5X9tvMadfXU

Wow, wonder if it would be played on PBS or CNN anytime soon.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-27-2013, 12:34 PM
Video of that question had been leaked.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPUlpnCasdo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPUlpnCasdo

So basically he is a liar and coward who passed the buck to a department Zero oversees.

CPUd
10-27-2013, 02:44 PM
http://i.imgur.com/yQAHhrp.gif

JohnM
10-05-2016, 08:09 AM
Hey, I know that this thread is ancient history, but it's so good, it needs to be pulled out and dusted off occasionally.

I'll just add one thing. I love the way that Carney said

We have more than 60,000 U.S. troops involved in a war in Afghanistan, a war that began when the United States was attacked, in an attack that was organized on the soil of Afghanistan by al Qaeda, by Osama bin laden and others and more than 3,000 people were killed in that attack.

Now, let me fix that for him.

We have more than 60,000 U.S. troops involved in a war in Afghanistan, a war that began on October 7, 2001, when the United States and the United Kingdom launched an aerial bombing campaign on Afghanistan.

The 9/11 attacks were not an act of war - they were criminal offences.

jllundqu
10-05-2016, 09:04 AM
This is one of the many reasons I'm getting out of the empire sometime this year or next.

Let us know where you go... you might have company in the near future.

dean.engelhardt
10-05-2016, 09:11 AM
ter·ror·ism [ térrə rìzzəm ]

1.political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes

Interesting. A number of years ago, I took a course on terrorism. The first assignment was the definition of terrorism. What a moving target. No two agencies inside the US government use the same definition of terrorism. State Dept., FBI, and Department of Defense do not agree on the definition.

Ender
10-05-2016, 09:19 AM
Hey, I know that this thread is ancient history, but it's so good, it needs to be pulled out and dusted off occasionally.

I'll just add one thing. I love the way that Carney said


Now, let me fix that for him.


The 9/11 attacks were not an act of war - they were criminal offences.

Plus the 911 attacks were supposedly done by Saudis trained in Germany. Isn't that why we're suing them? :rolleyes:

Also, the whole OBL thing was a lie so we could attack Afghanistan. He denied being over the attacks and the Taliban offered to turn him over to the US IF he was held and tried in a neutral country.

Bush just said "Bombs away!"

Zippyjuan
10-05-2016, 01:47 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37559145


The bombing of Aleppo's children

5 October 2016 Last updated at 00:18 BST
The consequences of Syria and Russia's bombing campaign against rebel-held eastern Aleppo have been the death of nearly 100 children over the past week. This is the story of some of those maimed and trapped within the siege.

You can watch more of Fergal Keane's reporting on children in Aleppo here.

Video at link. May include disturbing images.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/5242014-3x2-940x627.jpg

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:32 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37559145


Aleppo is in Syria. Now you know.

Afghanistan is not in the United States. Check the map, it's true.

Zippyjuan
10-05-2016, 04:35 PM
I didn't say Aleppo was in Afghanistan but thanks for the geography.

If killing children in Afghanistan is terror is killing children in Syria also terror or war crimes?

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:37 PM
I didn't say Aleppo was in Afghanistan but thanks for the geography.

I know, I told you where it was, Syria.


If killing children in Afghanistan is terror is killing children in Syria also terror or war crimes?

Aleppo is in Syria.

Afghanistan is not in the United States.

Figure it out.

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:45 PM
And there is a difference between the rule of law in war, and the true laws of war.

In war, laws don't mean anything. The only laws are those which you can get away with, and those which can bring about your defeat. If you want to execute POW's, do it, but realize it means all your POWs will also be killed.

There is no such thing as "war crimes" or "terrorism", they are all horrible acts of death and destruction.

There are only just wars, and unjust wars, if you wish to define actions from a moral standpoint, and not a legal one.

Unseating foreign-funded fighters from your own city is a just war.

Bombing people in Afghanistan because some guy with help from the ISI attacked your country, is not just.

So I don't even by into your stupid question, or its premise. The whole idea of "war crimes" is absurd in reality, and merely yet another facet of victor's justice (which is the only real justice in the real world, losers will never see "justice", there must be victory of the just for there to be justice, and victory in war can mean some horrific things to accomplish it).

Zippyjuan
10-05-2016, 04:47 PM
In war, laws don't mean anything.

So war crimes don't exist. US can do whatever it wants in Afghanistan and Iraq and Russia can do whatever it wants in Syria.

Charges and claims against Obama and Clinton are pointless then as would be this thread.

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:48 PM
So war crimes don't exist.

If they did, Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be some of the biggest war crimes.

read the above post.

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:53 PM
So war crimes don't exist. US can do whatever it wants in Afghanistan and Iraq and Russia can do whatever it wants in Syria.'

They got the bigger missiles and guns.

So from a realistic point, war crimes do not exist.

From a legal point, they do, but only in courts who recognize those laws. And laws are often what wars are fought over, who makes them, and what they will be. So in reality, they don't.

From a moral standpoint, every death in an unjust war is a war crime, and every death of those responsible for starting the injustice is one step closer to justice.


Charges and claims against Obama and Clinton are pointless then.

Of course they are, they are from the bloc that decides which is and which is not a war crime. And surprise surprise, 99.9% of the time, their actions are not war crimes, in the western legal sense.

UWDude
10-05-2016, 04:59 PM
And for another does of reality. All war matches the definition of terrorism perfectly. Indeed, the term "terrorism" itself was first coined by Robespierre during the French revolution... ...and he was advocating it, to be sure the aristocracy remained terrorized of the public at large, instead of visa-versa.

There are a lot of idealist who like to believe that the words and print on paper make the rules. Not true. It is the people with the guns who enforce those rules, that make the rules. The reality is power flows from violence, not dialogue. Most of the populace in every country has been trained from birth to agree with their government because behind every program and word and school lesson, is the threat of violence. By age 5, most people have no idea what they are or who they believe. They have already been trained to worship their state, no matter where they are. It is easy to make people bend to your will... point a gun at their head, and see how quickly they start to agree with you, and try to befriend you.

If I was wrong, there would not be nationalism, and yet, people continue to slaughter each other over nationalism.

UWDude
10-05-2016, 05:05 PM
Or, this:

Shooting someone robbing you is heroic.
Shooting someone you are robbing is villianous.

The shooting itself, is neutral.

Danke
10-05-2016, 05:38 PM
And for another does of reality. All war matches the definition of terrorism perfectly. Indeed, the term "terrorism" itself was first coined by Robespierre during the French revolution... ...and he was advocating it, to be sure the aristocracy remained terrorized of the public at large, instead of visa-versa.

There are a lot of idealist who like to believe that the words and print on paper make the rules. Not true. It is the people with the guns who enforce those rules, that make the rules. The reality is power flows from violence, not dialogue. Most of the populace in every country has been trained from birth to agree with their government because behind every program and word and school lesson, is the threat of violence. By age 5, most people have no idea what they are or who they believe. They have already been trained to worship their state, no matter where they are. It is easy to make people bend to your will... point a gun at their head, and see how quickly they start to agree with you, and try to befriend you.

If I was wrong, there would not be nationalism, and yet, people continue to slaughter each other over nationalism.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A

TheTexan
10-05-2016, 05:47 PM
children ? More like fun-sized terrorists

UWDude
10-05-2016, 05:58 PM
children ? More like fun-sized terrorists

i love you, man.

AZJoe
10-05-2016, 08:17 PM
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/terrorist-puppet-400x306.jpg

Weston White
10-07-2016, 06:49 AM
So war crimes don't exist. US can do whatever it wants in Afghanistan and Iraq and Russia can do whatever it wants in Syria.

Charges and claims against Obama and Clinton are pointless then as would be this thread.

If the Third Reich had succeeded would there have been the Nuremberg trials? If there were true justice would Congress have turned a blind eye to Operation Paperclip? ...Would not IBM and Ford and German loyalists have been exposed as to the parts they willfully played in the Holocaust?

...Japan's military "surprise" attacks a U.S. military base in 1941, so we surprise drop two nukes onto their civilians residing within two of their nation's highly populated cities--meanwhile holding their Americanized citizens here at home hostage inside of Japanese internment camps--how are these nothing less than countless criminal acts of war and civil rights violations?

"History is written by the victors." -- Paraphrasing of Machiavelli's The Prince, Ch. XVIII.

enhanced_deficit
11-04-2021, 03:59 AM
Controversies surrounding the well-funded 'mentor-prodigy' duo continue:

US strike that killed 10 Afghan civilians was legal, says Pentagon

US investigation finds civilian deaths did not violate law of war as strike attempted to target Islamic State

Residents and family members of victims gather after a US drone airstrike in Kabul killed 10 civilians in Afghanistan. Photograph: Wakil Kohsar/AFP/Getty Images

Agence France-Presse
Wed 3 Nov 2021 21.15 EDT

A US drone strike in Kabul in August that killed 10 Afghan civilians was a tragic mistake but did not violate any laws, a Pentagon inspector general said after an investigation.
Three adults, including a man who worked for a US aid group, and seven children were killed in the 29 August operation, with the target believed to have been a home and a vehicle occupied by Islamic State militants.

“The investigation found no violation of law, including the law of war. Execution errors combined with confirmation bias and communication breakdowns led to regrettable civilian casualties,” Lieutenant General Sami Said, the inspector general for the US Air Force, said in a report.
“It was an honest mistake,” Said told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday. “But it’s not criminal conduct, random conduct, negligence,” he said.
Said said the people directly involved in the strike, which took place during the US-led evacuation of tens of thousands of Afghans after the Taliban seized control of the country, genuinely believed “that they were targeting an imminent strike.”
“The intended target of the strike, the vehicle, its contents and occupant, were genuinely assessed at the time as an imminent threat to US forces and mission at Hamid Karzai International Airport,” the report said.
However, it said, the interpretation of intelligence and the observations of a targeted car and its occupants over eight hours was “regrettably inaccurate,” it said.
“What likely broke down was not the intelligence but the correlation of that intelligence to a specific house,” Said explained.
After a preliminary investigation, the Pentagon admitted on 17 September that it had been a “tragic mistake” and pledged to provide compensation to the surviving family members.
Said explained that there was not one point of failure or a person to be blamed for the error. He also said it was not in his responsibilities to decide whether someone should be punished for the error.

theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/us-afghanistan-strike-killed-civilians-legal-pentagon


Related

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/icons/icon4.png Indian expert wants Afghanistan "boiling"; 100 dead in terror attack. "ISIS Delta variant"? (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?556266-Indian-expert-wants-Afghanistan-quot-boiling-quot-100-dead-in-terror-attack-quot-ISIS-Indian-variant-quot&)


Streamed live on Oct 3, 2021

"the best part is strengthen Tajikistan, fund Tajikistan, and create an environment of anarchy inside Afghanistan... because it cannot be stabilized, not by America, not by China. Keep it boiling, keep it boiling so nobody can settle down including China and keep your influence there by giving money to selected people... keep Afghanistan unsettled, give large amounts of money.."

"So many people educated in India were there in Afghanistan.... even Karzai was educated (in India).. We will not be starting from scratch, less than 8 minutes to fly into Kabul and bomb it.. and if we get F-35s from Americans, I think we can do it very easily"

Occam's Banana
11-04-2021, 07:33 AM
https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1456067077039697921
1456067077039697921