US Troops Kill Baby Son of Army Officer

ALI DAYA, Afghanistan, April 9 (Reuters) - The Afghan Army officer father of a seven-day-old boy said on Thursday his infant son died in an overnight raid by Afghan and U.S. forces, with the U.S. saying it was investigating the claim.

A female school teacher was also killed and the child's mother wounded, the father said, during the raid in Ali Daya village in Khost province, where Taliban fighters are active.

The U.S. military said in a statement it was aware of allegations the raid had caused "non-combatant casualties" and was investigating.

"We take the safety of Afghan citizens very seriously and we will immediately investigate to get to the bottom of this," Colonel Greg Julian, spokesman for U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said in a statement.

AW says : If they take their safety so seriously how come they continue to kill them almost daily?

Janat Gul, the boy's father, told Reuters he was not at home when the raid happened and was not sure how his newborn child died. His son did not have any bullet wounds but he had died during the raid, Gul said. The boy's mother was in hospital and could not be reached for comment. Photographs showed the boy's body with trickles of blood from his nostrils and white dust on his forehead.

Earlier, U.S. forces released a statement saying they had killed four militants, including two women. Gul said four adults died, but none were militants, and one of the women was a schoolteacher. Violence in Afghanistan has reached its highest level since the U.S.-led invasion despite a growing number of foreign troops and has spread from the south and east to the outskirts of the capital, Kabul.

Colin Powell - Torture Denier

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

NATO Must Go

NATO is 60 today and is widely regarded as useless. It should be disbanded for the following reasons:

* NATO States collectively spend 70% of the estimated $1.473 global annual military budget in contravention of years of international commitments to reallocate military expenses.

* NATO has condoned the possession of nuclear weapons by "friendly states', but has been willing to entertain strikes on the nuclear facilities of "NATO designed rogue states" and risk the release of radiation.

* NATO, through its engaging in numerous military interventions and occupations such as Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, has contributed to and condoned, rather than prevented the scourge of war in defiance of the principal objective of the Charter of the United Nations

* NATO has not abandoned the option of a "first use of nuclear weapons policy" has failed to act on its undertaking under the General Assembly resolution entitled the Condemnation of Nuclear War A/RES/38/75, 1983 "to condemn the formulation, propounding, dissemination and propaganda of political and military doctrines and concepts intended to provide 'legitimacy' for the first use of nuclear weapons and in general to justify the 'admissibility' of unleashing nuclear war (2 Condemnation of Nuclear War General Assembly Resolution A/RES/38/75, 1983

* NATO has been using depleted uranium [the effect of which in part is similar to that of a nuclear weapon] has failed to act on its undertaking to deem "that the use of nuclear weapons would be a violation of the Charter of the United Nations and a crime against humanity, ( resolutions 1653 (XVI) of 24 November 1961, 33/71 B of 14 December 1978, 34/83 G of 11 December 1979, 35/152 D of 12 December 1980 and 36/92 I of 9 December 1981,

* NATO through using Depleted Uranium, which could be deemed to have the effect of a nuclear weapon, has disregarded the decision of the International Court of Justice that the use or the threat to use nuclear weapons is contrary to International humanitarian law (World Court Project, 1996)

* NATO has violated the Geneva protocols on prohibited weapons

* NATO has undermined the United Nations through contributing to the failure (i) to discharge obligations under International Conventions, Treaties, and Covenants, (ii) to act through Commitments made under conference action plans and (iii) to fulfill expectations created through General Assembly Resolutions

* NATO has condoned the misinterpretation of Article 51- self defence- in the Charter of the United Nations in its support for the invasion of a sovereign state, and has used the pretext of "human security" and "humanitarian intervention" and "preemptive/preventive" aggression to justify the invasion and occupation of other states;

* NATO has continually ignored Chapter VI- Peaceful Resolution of Disputes, of the Charter of the United Nations, and the provision in Chapter VI to take disputes to the International Court of Justice;

Craig Murray - 'Most Important Post I Have Ever Made'

Tucked away at Page 15 of its annual Human Rights report, the FCO has finally made a public admission of its use of intelligence from torture. Despite the Orwellian doublespeak about "unreserved condemnation of torture", this is the clearest statement the government has ever made that it, as a policy, employs intelligence from torture.

"One example is the question of the use of intelligence provided to the UK by other countries. The provenance of such intelligence is often unclear – partners rarely share details of their sources. All intelligence received, whatever its source, is carefully evaluated, particularly where it is clear that it has been obtained from individuals in detention. The use of intelligence possibly derived through torture presents a very real dilemma, given our unreserved condemnation of torture and our efforts to eradicate it. Where there is intelligence that bears on threats to life, we cannot reject it out of hand. What is quite clear, however, is that information obtained as a result of torture would not be admissible as evidence in any criminal or civil proceedings in the UK. It does not matter whether the evidence was obtained here or abroad."
Link to full document here:

Farmers The Latest Civilian Victims

The latest sad story of crass and brutal incompetence is here

In Afghanistan Why Not Kill Your Allies?

From Afghan National TV on 19th March.

On 19th March ,Khaiber Momand, the district chief of Bati Kot where a US raid the previous night happened, said those targeted were civilians, and those detained included the director of the district's development department, Haji Khair, and two of his sons.

Momand alleged that during the raid, troops also beat the mayor of Bati Kot, Mohammad Hassan, and his son, Enayat.

Col. Greg Julian, spokesman for U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said there were "solid, multiple sources of intelligence which led us to this location and to these individuals."

Detainees were being questioned and were suspected of association with insurgent activity, Julian said.

It was impossible to independently verify either claim because of the remoteness of the area.

'Victims Not Militants' - Police

Another bungled operation - more innocent victims.

A Very Cosmopolitan Pogrom

Australians Investigated Over Civilian Killings:

One thing about the NATO routine killing of civilians is that everyone is in on the act.

NATO In Afghanistan - Master Narrative

Key NATO Document leaked by Wikileaks. Link

14 More NATO Victims

For once they have admitted their guilt in this latest massacre

Record Civilian Death Levels

KABUL 10 Feb. - The number of Afghan civilians killed in armed conflict rose 40 per cent last year to a record 2118 people, the United Nations said in a report.

The United States, Nato and Afghan forces killed 829 civilians, or 39 per cent. About 130 deaths couldn't be accounted for because of issues such as crossfire.
Civilian deaths have been a huge source of friction between the US and President Hamid Karzai, who has increased demands that US and Nato troops avoid killing civilians during operations.
The UN's annual report on the protection of civilians noted that despite new battlefield rules meant to reduce civilian casualties, US, Nato and Afghan troops killed 31 per cent more civilians in 2008 than in 2007, when the UN said those forces killed 629 civilians.

A US-based group that advocates for civilians in conflict said that "the lack of a clear, co-ordinated strategy to address civilian losses has been a leading source of anger and resentment toward military forces". The international coalition in Afghanistan is losing public support," the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict said.

Aussies Join in The Carnage

Australian special forces soldiers have killed five children in an attack on a 'compound' in Afghanistan. The incident has triggered yet another strong warning from the Afghan Government that civilian deaths are playing into the hands of the Taliban.
Afghan ambassador Amanullah Jayhoon said his Government was very concerned that the Australians had not co-ordinated the operation with Afghan security forces.
The ambassador said 1000 civilians were killed by Coalition forces last year and such killings were eroding support for the Afghan Government.

The Australian Defence Force chief of joint operations, Lieutenant-General Mark Evans, said the soldiers were involved in an operation in Oruzgan province, southern Afghanistan, in darkness early on Thursday. He said 'tragically some civilians were killed'. Couldn't have foreseen that 'tragedy', eh, General. It's not the first you will preside over or the last.