Convoy of Death-up to 3000 POW's killed by US/Afghan forces

Byrnzie · July 2009

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... -2,00.html
'...two Americans went to meet the prisoners at Qala-i-Jangi. Their mission at the fortress: to identify any members of al-Qaeda among the prisoners. But the Americans didn't conduct the interviews one by one--another mistake. Instead, at 11:15 a.m., the pair--Johnny Micheal Spann, 32, one of the CIA agents who had been active in Afghanistan since the war's beginning, the other identified by colleagues only as "Dave"--were taken to an open area outside the cells and a group of prisoners brought to meet them. According to members of a German television crew who were later trapped in the fort with Dave, Spann asked the prisoners who they were and why they joined the Taliban. They massed around him. "Why are you here?" Spann asked one. "To kill you," came the reply as the man lunged at Spann's neck. Spann drew his pistol and shot the man dead. Dave shot another, then grabbed an AK-47 from an Alliance guard and opened fire. According to eyewitness accounts given to the German team, the Taliban fighters launched themselves at Spann, scrabbling at his flesh with their hands, kicking and beating him. Spann killed two more with his pistol before he disappeared under the crush. An Alabaman with a wife and three children, Spann became the first American to die in combat in Afghanistan...'

The Taliban then overpowered the Alliance guards, killing them with their own weapons. Dave mowed down three more Taliban, then sprinted to the main building along the north wall, where two Red Cross workers had just begun a meeting with the prison governor. "He burst in and told us to get out of there," says Simon Brooks, a Briton and a Red Cross staff member. "He was really shaken up. He said there were 20 dead Northern Alliance guys, and the Taliban were taking control of the fort."

http://www.qern.org/node/68
'...Two CIA agents, Johnny "Mike" Spann and "Dave", had also been instructed to screen the Taliban fighters for possible links with al-Qaida. From a distance Dave looked Afghan. He even spoke Uzbek, the language of Dostam's soldiers, and wore a shalwar kameez beneath a long coat. But his square-cropped haircut gave the game away, and revealed him as an American.

Two television crews - from Reuters and the German station ARD - had also turned up at the fort. They were in the prisoners' compound, together with Dave and Mike, who had begun interviewing suspects.

At 11:25am the Taliban fighters were marched to the central grassy compound of their mini-citadel. The guards tied up the first eight prisoners, Jan said. "The prisoners suspected they were about to be shot. They attacked one of the guards and grabbed his gun," he added. The foreign fighters had also assumed that the television journalists were American soldiers who had come to film their execution.

Another prisoner grabbed Mike and set off a grenade, blowing him up. This conflicts with the CIA account of his death which says that he was shot.

All hell then broke loose: the prisoners shot dead five guards and grabbed their weapons, while the journalists ran for cover...

As Washington attempted to wash its hands of the episode, saying that the alliance was responsible for the prisoners, human rights lawyers warned that the Geneva convention may have been breached on two counts. This is over the degrading treatment of the Taliban, when they were tied up, and the huge firepower directed at them by US warplanes.

On the first count, article 13 of the convention says: "Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated." On the second count, the convention permits the use of force against prisoners. But it says that this must be proportionate.

Christopher Greenwood, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics and joint editor of International Law Reports, said that killing people with hands tied behind their backs was illegal. "If it was heavy-handed overreaction, it was illegal,", he said.

Amid the doubts about the legality of the US and alliance response, there were also questions about the conduct of the two CIA officers. Adam Roberts, professor of international relations at Oxford University and a leading authority on the laws of war, described their conduct as "incredibly stupid and unprofessional".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 18496.html
'...General Dostum striding through the slaughtered yesterday in a long flowing brown shirt and leather jacket, insisted his soldiers had treated the prisoners humanely. As he spoke, a soldier kicked the body of a man who was lying on his side to make sure he was dead. The body rolled over to reveal that the man's arms had been tied together behind his back. Several of the dead men's arms had been tied together above the elbow, some with their own black turbans. General Dostum publicly denied the practice but an Afghan soldier under his command admitted he and his comrades had been tying the prisoner's hands when the fighting started.'

Byrnzie · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

I remember hearing that prisoners were suffering abuse before the battle and that the abuse is what led to the revolt. Wiki doesn't mention any of this. I'll have a look for any info it.

you really believe Taliban prisoners needed a reason to revolt? :roll:

Why would you revolt if you'd previously been told that you were going to be set free?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... -1,00.html
'Even by the standards of Afghanistan's warlords, Dostum has an unsavory reputation. In earlier episodes of Afghanistan's wars, he was reputed to have killed those of his soldiers who broke the rules by tying them to the tracks of his tanks. But outside Mazar, his soldiers told their prisoners that Dostum wanted to make a gesture of reconciliation to help unite Afghanistan's warring tribes. Afghan members of the Taliban would be free to return to their homes, while foreigners would be detained before being handed over to the U.N. Dostum didn't search his prisoners; that was a mistake, one he would bitterly regret'.

http://www.qern.org/node/68
'Mullah Fahzel, the Taliban's commander at Kunduz, had instructed the foreign fighters to give up their weapons - but failed to tell them that they would then be taken into custody. "The foreigners thought that after surrendering to the Northern Alliance they would be free," Jan said. "They didn't think they would be put in jail."'

Byrnzie · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

I remember hearing that prisoners were suffering abuse before the battle and that the abuse is what led to the revolt. Wiki doesn't mention any of this. I'll have a look for any info it.

you really believe Taliban prisoners needed a reason to revolt? :roll:

Maybe you're right though...maybe prisoner revolts should be dealt with by calling in air-strikes and using heavy weaponry, and prisoners with their hands tied behind their backs should be shot. I'm sure the Geneva Convention permits such things.

jlew24asu · July 2009

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

I remember hearing that prisoners were suffering abuse before the battle and that the abuse is what led to the revolt. Wiki doesn't mention any of this. I'll have a look for any info it.

you really believe Taliban prisoners needed a reason to revolt? :roll:

Why would you revolt if you'd previously been told that you were going to be set free?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... -1,00.html
'Even by the standards of Afghanistan's warlords, Dostum has an unsavory reputation. In earlier episodes of Afghanistan's wars, he was reputed to have killed those of his soldiers who broke the rules by tying them to the tracks of his tanks. But outside Mazar, his soldiers told their prisoners that Dostum wanted to make a gesture of reconciliation to help unite Afghanistan's warring tribes. Afghan members of the Taliban would be free to return to their homes, while foreigners would be detained before being handed over to the U.N. Dostum didn't search his prisoners; that was a mistake, one he would bitterly regret'.

http://www.qern.org/node/68
'Mullah Fahzel, the Taliban's commander at Kunduz, had instructed the foreign fighters to give up their weapons - but failed to tell them that they would then be taken into custody. "The foreigners thought that after surrendering to the Northern Alliance they would be free," Jan said. "They didn't think they would be put in jail."'

even if they were told they would be set free, that doesnt give them any less reason to fight. they are the Taliban, it was a war. they fight. and it was probably a foreign fighter who set off the revolt.

is this the article you posted? its pretty thorough.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 92,00.html

Commy · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

Commy wrote:

if US forces were present when these atrocities were committed, that's a war crime. whether they pulled the trigger or not. not according to me, but according to international law.

I don't think so. The US special forces have no authority over Afghan forces. what do you expect the US to do in that situation? that said, IF US forces assisted in killing those prisonors, then yes, they should be charged. but they are not guilty for simply being there. and there are probably many details that you dont know simply because you werent there.

When Germany invaded Poland and thousands of POW's were executed, who's fault was that?

try to put it in a context you can think about where your blind nationalism doesn't cloud your judgement.

Commy wrote:

there are pictures of US troops at the prison, at the time the prisoners were being held there. there is eye witness testimony that US troops were present at the massacre, even searching dead bodies for id.

again, so what? I'm interested in knowing what you think the US forces should have done that would exonerate them of crimes in your opinion.

The Taliban prisoners in question were the guys the US forces were there to kill. Do you really think they are going to let local Afghan forces handle their enemy? With NO say in what went down?

Commy wrote:

US special forces were all over this, from beginning to end, this documentary presents evidence of that.

"all over this" ? what does that mean? that they assisted in killing people? thats a bold charge you are making.

US forces were present when the prisoners were being held, when they were being moved, and when they were being buried, and here you're trying to blame the grunts for following orders while ignoring those who gave the orders, abu ghraib all over again.

Commy wrote:

those guys barely take orders from superior officers, you really think the afghanis are going to be operating independently of them?

absolutely. Afgan fighters are notorious for being very independent and answer to no one, expect maybe the warlord of the day. do you really think they took orders for the US?

yes i do, they had no choice.

Commy wrote:

it was a US supervised mass murder of unarmed prisoners of war, and an investigation has been opened. i doubt anything will come of it, but you never know.l someone should pay for this.

again, absolutely bullshit made up by you. its a disgrace that you can simply convict US soldiers for mass murder by simply watching some random video on the net. the video shows nothing of the sort. you make me fucking sick how you will take any opportunity to piss on America military service members.

I'd glad an investigation is opened. no doubt it will show the Afgan forces killing the prisoners independent of anything. Afgans are hardened warriors who have been doing this for decades.

[/quote]

In one sentence i'm condemned for convicting them (i've done my research) and the next they are acquitted, and I have a feeling this is the first you've heard about this.

btw, i first heard about this on democracy now!, not a random internet site. even so, 2 of the documentary's witnesses have ended up dead, its shouldn't be taken lightly. i suggest watching it, that's why i posted it.

jlew24asu · July 2009

Commy wrote:

When Germany invaded Poland and thousands of POW's were executed, who's fault was that?

try to put it in a context you can think about where your blind nationalism doesn't cloud your judgement.

well there you have it folks, make a Nazi reference to prove your case. well done. and to answer your question, it was the Nazi's fault. for the story at hand, its the Afgans who did the actually killing who are at fault. so yea, not sure why you felt it was necessary to compare the Nazi;s to anything.

Commy wrote:

The Taliban prisoners in question were the guys the US forces were there to kill. Do you really think they are going to let local Afghan forces handle their enemy?

for the most part, yes. you really don't understand Afgan's do you? I'm no expert but from my research, Afgans do what they want. I'll try to dig up something for you but I mostly learned this from watching documentaries.

Commy wrote:

With NO say in what went down?

sure, US always has a say on what goes down but that doesn't mean Afgan's listen. if Afgan's decided to just start lighting up the truck, the US would be powerless to stop it short of firing back at them.

Commy wrote:

yes i do, they had no choice.

says who? you? they absolutely had a choice. I'll hve to find those documentaries about Afgan fighters. they are not puppets who do whatever we say. we are talking about hardened warriors who have fought in wars their entire lives. think about it.

Commy wrote:

In one sentence i'm condemned for convicting them (i've done my research) and the next they are acquitted, and I have a feeling this is the first you've heard about this.

Innocent until proven guilty. ever heard of that?

jlew24asu · July 2009

Byrnzie wrote:

Maybe you're right though...maybe prisoner revolts should be dealt with by calling in air-strikes and using heavy weaponry,

its called war. would you feel better if only hand guns were used in war? but please, you tell me the best way to deal with a prisoner revolt General Byzine. :roll:

Byrnzie wrote:

and prisoners with their hands tied behind their backs should be shot. I'm sure the Geneva Convention permits such things.

can you prove American soldiers shot prisoners who had their hands tied behind their back?

Pepe Silvia · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

sure, US always has a say on what goes down but that doesn't mean Afgan's listen. if Afgan's decided to just start lighting up the truck, the US would be powerless to stop it short of firing back at them.

i'm pretty sure if my job sent me to another state and i saw someone murder a bunch of people and then bury their bodies in mass graves and never did anything to try and stop it and THEN helped keep it a secret i wouldn't be found innocent in a court of law. at the very least helping keep it a secret would make me an accomplice

jlew24asu · July 2009

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

sure, US always has a say on what goes down but that doesn't mean Afgan's listen. if Afgan's decided to just start lighting up the truck, the US would be powerless to stop it short of firing back at them.

i'm pretty sure if my job sent me to another state and i saw someone murder a bunch of people and then bury their bodies in mass graves and never did anything to try and stop it

I'm glad you used yourself :roll: in this example. what would you have done to stop it?

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

and THEN helped keep it a secret i wouldn't be found innocent in a court of law. at the very least helping keep it a secret would make me an accomplice

there is no evidence of the US covering this up or keeping this secret

Byrnzie · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

you really don't understand Afgan's do you? I'm no expert but from my research, Afgans do what they want. I'll try to dig up something for you but I mostly learned this from watching documentaries.

....

Pepe Silvia · July 2009

do you happen to have a torrent link? the ones i found hasn't seemed to have anyone on for the past few days

jlew24asu · July 2009

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

do you happen to have a torrent link? the ones i found hasn't seemed to have anyone on for the past few days

are you talking to me? I'll look, they were documentaries on the history and discovery channel. I did watch an interesting interview the other night of the man in charge of killing Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora back in 01. he talks about his experience working so called Afgan allies. you know, the ones who are nothing more then trained robots who follow our EVERY order.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/ ... ontentBody

"Paint the picture for me of these Afghan Mujahideen troops," Pelley asks.

"They range anywhere from maybe 14 up to maybe 80. Various dress. Basically, we would probably consider it rags, which is the standard dress for a Mujahideen warrior," Fury explains.

There is a video of the top secret mission, which has never been seen by the public before. It was recorded by the Delta commandos themselves. Dressed like Afghans, the Americans maneuvered up the mountains, calling in air strikes on al Qaeda. By day they would advance, but at night they soon discovered their Afghan allies went home.

"Well, I have to assume that if you started up the hills of Tora Bora, and you and the Mujahideen took territory, they didn't abandon that at night?" Pelley asks.

"Oh yes they did," Fury says.

He says they gave it up to the enemy. "The Mujahideen would go up, get into a skirmish, firefight, lose a guy or two, maybe kill an al Qaeda guy or two, and then they leave. It was almost like it was an agreement, an understanding between the two forces fighting each other. Almost put on a good show and then leave."

---

..."In the morning, bin Laden was on the radio. The CIA, Delta, and their Afghan allies were listening.

How did the Afghans react when they heard from bin Laden on the radio?

"Osama Bin Laden is [to] many a Muslim’s hero," Fury says. "These guys in my opinion were more in awe of Osama Bin Laden than they were willing to kill him. When they heard him talking on the radio they would gather around the individual that held that hand held transistor. He would hold it up in the air, almost as if he didn't want the connection to break, almost like they could see the ridge line Osama bin laden happened to be talking from, like if they could almost see him and feel his presence and they just stood there with wide eyes and somewhat in awe that here is the leader of the jihad, the leader of al Qaeda and they’re actually hearing his voice over the radio."

"And these were the men who were supposed to help you capture or kill him? Some allies," Pelley remarks.

"Some were better than others," Fury says.

Pepe Silvia · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

do you happen to have a torrent link? the ones i found hasn't seemed to have anyone on for the past few days

are you talking to me? I'll look, they were documentaries on the history and discovery channel. I did watch an interesting interview the other night of the man in charge of killing Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora back in 01. he talks about his experience working so called Afgan allies. you know, the ones who are nothing more then trained robots who follow our EVERY order.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/ ... ontentBody

"Paint the picture for me of these Afghan Mujahideen troops," Pelley asks.

"They range anywhere from maybe 14 up to maybe 80. Various dress. Basically, we would probably consider it rags, which is the standard dress for a Mujahideen warrior," Fury explains.

There is a video of the top secret mission, which has never been seen by the public before. It was recorded by the Delta commandos themselves. Dressed like Afghans, the Americans maneuvered up the mountains, calling in air strikes on al Qaeda. By day they would advance, but at night they soon discovered their Afghan allies went home.

"Well, I have to assume that if you started up the hills of Tora Bora, and you and the Mujahideen took territory, they didn't abandon that at night?" Pelley asks.

"Oh yes they did," Fury says.

He says they gave it up to the enemy. "The Mujahideen would go up, get into a skirmish, firefight, lose a guy or two, maybe kill an al Qaeda guy or two, and then they leave. It was almost like it was an agreement, an understanding between the two forces fighting each other. Almost put on a good show and then leave."

---

..."In the morning, bin Laden was on the radio. The CIA, Delta, and their Afghan allies were listening.

How did the Afghans react when they heard from bin Laden on the radio?

"Osama Bin Laden is [to] many a Muslim’s hero," Fury says. "These guys in my opinion were more in awe of Osama Bin Laden than they were willing to kill him. When they heard him talking on the radio they would gather around the individual that held that hand held transistor. He would hold it up in the air, almost as if he didn't want the connection to break, almost like they could see the ridge line Osama bin laden happened to be talking from, like if they could almost see him and feel his presence and they just stood there with wide eyes and somewhat in awe that here is the leader of the jihad, the leader of al Qaeda and they’re actually hearing his voice over the radio."

"And these were the men who were supposed to help you capture or kill him? Some allies," Pelley remarks.

"Some were better than others," Fury says.

actually i was talking to Byrnzie or Commy but your link was interesting. is that what became of nick fury??

the same thing happened early on in Iraq, they would just leave or not really fight

Byrnzie · July 2009

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

do you happen to have a torrent link? the ones i found hasn't seemed to have anyone on for the past few days

I found this but there are currently no seeders:

http://www.mininova.org/tor/586742

Commy · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

there is no evidence of the US covering this up or keeping this secret

well, the Bush admin blocked investigations into the massacre, according to mainstream media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YAMAFfK ... r_embedded

jlew24asu · July 2009

Commy wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

there is no evidence of the US covering this up or keeping this secret

well, the Bush admin blocked investigations into the massacre, according to mainstream media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YAMAFfK ... r_embedded

and Obama opened an investigation. move on

Commy · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

Commy wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

there is no evidence of the US covering this up or keeping this secret

well, the Bush admin blocked investigations into the massacre, according to mainstream media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YAMAFfK ... r_embedded

and Obama opened an investigation. move on

a government investigation into itself, that'll be productive. :roll:

the warlord responsible was on the CIA payroll, you really think the CIA is going down for this?

Pepe Silvia · July 2009

great video and article. why did Bush avert 3 separate investigations into this, i wonder?

and they made the warlord responsible deputy defense minister and on the CIA payroll, how nice

also interesting that after NewsWeek published a story about it the US said they would open an investiagion right away, then Bush shut down the State Dept investigation? also says PHR had to file a Freedom of Information request on the documents but they refused to turn anything over....they sued and government records state they thought 2,000 people were killed while all along they had stated maybe a few dozen died but from battle wounds or disease

http://blog.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/ ... nce-class/

War Crimes in Afghanistan. Or: What You Don’t Learn in Science Class
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) demonstrated in a more than impressive way this week how science and technology can advance the cause of human rights. Using forensic analysis and satellite imagery, they did an excellent job in documenting a war crime—and the subsequent US supported cover-up—in Afghanistan, where in the wake of the US led invasion in 2001 hundreds of prisoners of war were killed by a US backed warlord and dumped in a mass grave in Dasht-e-Leili. Check out this must see video:

The New York Times has covered the story in an extensive piece last weekend. PHR has set up its own website, where you can also urge Attorney General Eric Holder to halt the cover-up. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)—who supported the project and with whom AIUSA’s own Science for Human Rights project has a longstanding partnership—also provided a detailed analysis of the gravesite and its cover-up. Here’s a quick summary of the story:

In 2002, PHR investigators discovered the presence of a mass grave site in Dasht-e-Leili, outside of the city of Sheberghan in northern Afghanistan. The grave site is reported to contain anywhere from hundreds to thousands of Taliban prisoners of war. Forensic analysis suggests that most of the prisoners died from suffocation. They reportedly died while inside closed metal shipping containers.

Upon returning to the site in 2008, Stefan Schmitt, Director of PHR’s International Forensic Program, noticed that the mass grave might have been tampered with. To gather additional evidence, PHR requested satellite imagery from the area, which showed two sizeable pits, compromising the original area. The satellite imagery obtained by the AAAS indicated that there was earth-moving equipment present on August 5, 2006 along with one of two new pits. Later imagery on October 24, 2007, revealed the second pit in the same location as the earth-moving equipment from August 5.

The Bush Administration discouraged any attempts to investigate the episode, as the warlord suspected of committing the crimes, Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, was on the C.I.A.’s payroll, while his militia worked alongside the United States Special Forces in 2001. The Department of State has urged the Obama administration to oppose Gen. Dostum’s reappointment in the Afghani government; however the president has yet to take action on this issue.

As we still wait for the President to ensure accountability for past human rights violations of the Bush administration, this is another test of Obama’s commitment to human rights. It will be interesting to see if the administration fully investigates the 2001 killings in Afghanistan, at a time when Obama is sending an additional 21,000 more troops to battle the increasing Taliban insurgency. A first response by Obama to PHR’s work seems at least promising.

Pepe Silvia · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

there is no evidence of the US covering this up or keeping this secret

actually there is, if you watch the video in the article i just posted.

it also says covering up a war crime is in itself a war crime

Convoy of Death-up to 3000 POW's killed by US/Afghan forces

Comments

Categories