UK troops 'shot harmless Iraqis'



spank_the_monkey said:
In a report, the human rights organisation claimed in "many" cases the deaths of civilians by the British military had not been investigated.
And what have Amnesty International said about the murder of the Italian that was Kidnapped ?

<edited to add> Nothing as far as i can tell from thier site.

I wonder if Amnesty have received a reply from Sadr detailing the investigative process doublessly in place in down-town Najaf into the violent assaults on coalition forces and the murder of busloads of kindergarden children in Basra.

Has the ICRC sent an `interim' report to al Queda asking for Bin Laden to investigate the `shocking' and `humiliating' treatment dished out to Daniel Pearl or the Italian civilian shot through the head recently.

Perhaps Zawahri could hold a press conference and explain how his `independent' investigaive authority was probing accusations that the multiple suicide bombings in Kabalah had violated the human rights and personal dignity of the 130 pilgrims torn to pieces and splattered all of the outside of a mosque.

Amnesty and the ICRC are long past their use by date and are repeating the same accusations day after day in order to embarass the US & British governments.

An Amnesty spokeswoman said yesterday "well we're not in Iraq on a day to day basis so we can't investigate everything ourselves, we have to rely on locals providing us with information."

Yeah and that'll be the truth, the whole truth so help me Allah!!! Be fcuked!

They base their claims of UK forces shooting `civilians' on local eye witnesses and completely dismiss any statements by UK forces.

Lets face it, the anti war, anti Bush & Blair crowd are still smarting and will stop at nothing to discredit coalition governments and now coalition service personnel backed by liars like Piers Morgan.
armourer said:
And what have Amnesty International said about the murder of the Italian that was Kidnapped ?
I didnt think it was the British that did that!!

Old digger said:
I wonder if Amnesty have received a reply from Sadr detailing the investigative process doublessly in place in down-town Najaf into the violent assaults on coalition forces and the murder of busloads of kindergarden children in Basra.
The Iraqi resistance arent an official organisation that have signed up to any conventions or agreements. Which is probably why they havent mentioned it in a report about British troops. :roll:
AI ask for an independent report into the shootings, I say fine let them ask! But it will be as usual, they will believe the locals rather than us as we are the armed aggressors.

A fine tactic of insurgents/terrorists is to hide behind local civ pop and then let rip, hide and let the civ pop take the casualties. This will then lead the finger to be pointed at the soldier(s) as the guilty party for shooting at innocent civilians (memories of NI here!).

After all, surely AI don't have a hidden agenda to discredit us surely?
A few years ago I had some respect for AI, who supported political prisoners by the rather gentle tactic of writing letters to support them, and by sensibly and quietly lobbying governments for their release.

However, they now seem to have been taken over by extreme lefty hand-wringers.

Their website includes listings of stuff they're involved in. It includes the UK government's 'shameful' failure to establish an immediate public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane, who was apparently a 'human rights' lawyer. First time I've heard PIRA called a human rights organisation.

They call the measures taken by the UK to combat terrorism an 'aberration of justice'.

They think there was 'institutional acquiesence' on the part of the Army in the alleged rape of Kenyan women.

In all cases, they rely upon hearing only one side of the story to reach their conclusion. Oddly, most of the victims of the alleged abuse of rights are acsking for compensation, so we can be sure they have no interest in talking up their stories.

Why should the government or the military be accountable to a charity, just because it bleats loudly?
Now this, people, is utter naivety on the part of AI. Is it just me, or is firing your gun in the air during a wedding (as in the case of the 22 year old allegedy killed by our guys) in an area patrolled by the military a little stupid? The case of this poor 8 year old girl is definately an accident - how can they accuse anybody of deliberately shooting a child?
STAB_in_the_dark said:
how can they accuse anybody of deliberately shooting a child?
They could start with the Serbs, the Croatians, or in Uganda, Rwanda, Cambodia, Liberia etc. etc.

Then there's Israel, a 'civilised' country whose military regularly kills children.

A 7 year old child was shot dead in London recently, in some sort of Jamaican drug war, after social workers had failed to look after her adequately. Presumably AI didn't think being abandoned to drug dealers by the local council infringed her human rights, because they have been completely silent on the issue.
I agree with your point, Viro. Is it just me or do 'charities' such as AI go for the jugular on countries like the UK a lot more than they do with groups like the Serbs (although they do condemn third world types as well) because we are an easier target due to a sceptical media.
We are an easy target for groups like AI, for several reasons. We have a sceptical media, as STABITD says. We have a government who try to please everyone and will start hugely expensive public inquiries at the drop of a hat to improve their own ratings with minority groups. Lastly, we do not respond to criticism by sending round the Albanian/Serb/Croat/Russian/Chechen mafia, the Yardies or the Mujahideen.
Just scanned the AI report. It relies heavily on the testimony of the locals, and generally appears biased in their favour - where the military account of a situation disagrees with that of the locals, AI seem always to believe the locals. Interestingly, whilst AI's interest is in the principle of the protection of human rights, the interest of the locals is in securing compensation, but AI do not acknowledge that this could result in 'embroidery' of statements.

AI do not comment on whether any of their reporting staff have ever served in the military, or have ever had to take snap decisions. Nor do they comment on the wisdom of trying to apply Western standards to what is effectively a medieval Arabic culture.

Though I looked very hard, I was unable to find any reference to the killing of Coalition personnel by Iraqis. Odd, that.


It would be a shame to get overly defensive because of the faked mirror pictures that coincide with the spam jail abuse and a couple of incidents under investigation over here.

If there are any events that AI or anyone else for that matter consider worthy of investigation let them probe. Maybe even some lessons can be learned all round.

Transparency is not the enemy.
You are right, OG, but we must also maintain a healthy index of suspicion regarding groups who seem to have a vested interest in anti-military stories, and a history of reporting incidents which subsequently prove to be groundless.
I read the report with an initially very negative attitude fuelled by media reporting of the `shocking', `gov on the run', ‘new horrifying abuses’ comments and was relieved to see the language was generally neutral.

As I read further though, the word `compensation’ started to appear at the end of every paragraph – it seems AI are more concerned by the alleged non payment of `compensation’ than any potential illegal shootings.

Following the very short list of 11 or so alleged British failings during the past year was an incomprehensible list of 18 or so Iraqi civilian and ex Baath Party killings with the following call:

“Amnesty International also believes that the UK armed forces and the Iraqi Police Service have failed many of the families of people who have been killed by individuals and armed groups. (not the poor bastards shot dead on the street but their families) They have failed by not exercising due diligence in preventing such abuses or in investigating, prosecuting and punishing those who carried out the killings.”

AI are really away with the tweeties – what the fcuk do they think UK forces have been trying to do for the past year – built a bloody `conflict in the middle east’ theme park!

Still mustn’t complain too much they follow up with a reasonable and very serious statement:

“Amnesty International calls on all armed groups operating in Iraq to:
Respect minimum standards of international humanitarian law, justice and humanity, including the prohibition on deliberate attacks on civilians, indiscriminate attacks and hostage taking. “

Good on AI – Sadr’s people and the `terrorist fighters’ in Fallujah will really take notice now and a wave of peace and tranquillity will sweep away the centuries old hatreds and vendettas that currently are being expressed so politically incorrectly.

Forgive me for my cynicism, but every time the west tries to be a little robust in its dealings with unpleasant people around the world, AI fifth columnists and their cardigan wrapped, slitty black rimmed glasses wearing, latte sipping, democrat voting soft c*ck appeasers try to undermine the effort.

They want `peace’ at all costs without being prepared to pay the price – a price coalition forces are now having to pay daily with their blood as a result of decades of inaction.

Can’t have it both ways – peace has a BIG price tag! :(
lets face it, we make an easy, supine target. If they start to slag off the Iraqi bad guys or Al Qaeda, they will get slotted.
With this incumbent (incompetent!) government, we are a very easy target for all and sundry.

They will start inquiries into our conduct and as said, have very much found us guilty before any inquest into our conduct. They are willing to appease any and everybody at our expense. Yet we are the force TBliar(praise be upon his name etc.etc) uses to further his cause for the EU Presidency! :evil:
It's the same old story - the press/TV get hold of these statements - edit them to get out the headliners - but don't put in the background information (i.e. guns are fired as a normal part of wedding celebrations, so what goes up must come down!! etc, etc) As has previously been stated, only one side of the story has been told by AI which are therefore all that are being published by the press and on TV.

How would AI react to incidents in Cyprus, where if you were involved in a traffic accident you didn't dare leave your car because it would be quite possible to find it facing the other way and the next day all of the Cypriot driver's family and the rest of the relations would turn up as witnesses against you!! You stayed with your car, took photographs, and waited until SBA police arrived just to make sure you weren't misrepresented. I'm sure it's a very similar tale in Iraq.

In the same vein maybe we should make sure ALL reports, EVERYDAY go straight to Mr Bair etc.- they'd be so snowed under, there wouldn't be any forests left, but we couldn't be accused of covering anything up. :twisted:
The fact of the matter is, if amnesty international feel that they can make these allegations (no matter how misguided they may be) they are simply supporting our right to be in Iraq. Only in a democratic and free state are the military open and accountable to the people, they are simply illustrating the difference between us and the former regime in Iraq, although it might have been interesting to see what the former Iraqi information minister would have made of Amnesty international.
I object to any calls for indepedant inquiries because they take the investigations out of the hands of rational people who understand the situation and the methods involved, and place the responsability with moral crusaders who have their sights set on naive ideals rather than practical reality.

Similar threads

New Posts