"NATO, Afghan officials probe report of civilian deaths" says CNN

[kilekaldar]

CNN
© 2007 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/06/30/afghan.attack/index.html

NATO, Afghan officials probe report of civilian deaths

Story Highlights
Allegation from mayor of Gereshk, who investigated attack near Hyderabad

Mayor reports 120 to 130 people killed, including women and children

NATO's ISAF also investigating to determine if any civilian casualties


KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- The U.S.-led coalition and the Afghan government are investigating reports that as many as 130 people, including women and children, were killed Friday in an attack by coalition forces in southern Afghanistan's Helmand province.

The allegation came from Dur Ali Shah, the mayor of Gereshk, who said he was appointed by the province to investigate the attack near the village of Hyderabad.

"The people coming from the area are saying that 120 to 130 people have been killed, including women and children," Shah said. "We don't know how many of those are armed people and how many are civilians."

A U.S.military spokesman assigned to NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said he was aware that a large number of insurgents had been killed but they are investigating to determine if there were any civilian casualties.

A spokesman with the Afghan Interior Ministry also said his government had sent investigators.

This report comes one week after Afghan President Hamid Karzai accused NATO of "the disproportionate use of force" following an incident in which he said dozens of Afghan civilians were killed in the town of Gereshk, which is near Hyderabad.

Shah said the attack came after two coalition vehicles were hit with a mine and an ambush Friday afternoon.

 

[Armymedic]

Well, this yrs new TTP of using civilains as shields does not seem to work for them on the field, but the civilian deaths do seem to help win the IO campaign for the Taliban.

 

[GAP]

I found the original article plastered across most newpapers.....I wonder how many will carry this correction.

Afghanistan strike killed fewer than dozen civilians: NATO
Posted Sun Jul 1, 2007 11:21pm AEST
Article Link

A survey by NATO's force in Afghanistan found that fewer than a dozen civilians were killed in foreign air strikes that village elders said had left 45 civilians dead.

The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) however welcomed an investigation appointed by President Hamid Karzai into the bombing on late Friday in the southern province of Helmand, an ISAF spokesman said.

"At this time we believe after our survey of the situation yesterday (Saturday) when the fighting ceased that there may be less than a dozen civilian dead," Major John Thomas said.

The dead included women and children who were found among the bodies of killed Taliban in trenches, he said.

A "significant number of Taliban" were also killed, Major Thomas said.

"Every single civilian casualty is one too many and we are very saddened by even that number.

ISAF will work with the president's investigation and "we are not closing off the possibility that there may be a different conclusion."

He said that the strike had targeted positions from which the troops were being fired on, which meant that civilians had been among rebels attacking the soldiers.
More on link

 

[Kirkhill]

GAP, I believe I am starting to notice a curious pattern.  AFP - Agence France Presse,  appears to me to be becoming more neutral, if not more friendly to the US cause.

The other day there, there was a report on ABC from AP, Associated Press about 20 people beheaded in Salman Pak.  It was later determined that it was a hoax that AP got from a couple of out of town policemen, one who heard it as a rumour and the other who heard it as a tale from a friend of the family who lived in the area.  AP reporting rumour as fact. 

AFP did not report the original "incident" but it was quick to come out an take digs at AP, Reuters and the rest of the media that did.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/06/media-makes-up-news-another-bogus.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070630/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrestusmedia

It may well be that in this "War" AFP ends up playing the role of the BBC in WW2 and be the medium of record that can declare "victory".  It's credentials as a "neutral" observer are certainly secure because of the early French press's attitudes to the war.

It might be interesting to try and keep track of the AFP reports.  The French may have a different attitude towards the interplay between the State and the Press than the "Anglo-Saxons".
http://www.apfw.org/data/annualconference/2004/english/papers/Europe04PascaleEn.pdf

 

[GAP]

I have been burned by reports that at first glance seem credible, but have been pointed out to me to be propaganda....I try to see if stuff is reported in more than one source, and then pick and post the most complete of the bunch.

Doesn't make me 100%  accurate, but it helps. As to what each press does as far as credibility, I can't keep track, other than the obvious.

 

[Kirkhill]

I have been burned by reports that at first glance seem credible, but have been pointed out to me to be propaganda.

Ici Aussi.