Wednesday, July 06, 2005

New English Terminology - Courtesy of US Military

The number of innocent civilians killed by the recent indiscriminate US air strike in Afghanistan has been revealed as 17, including women and children. While President Karzai of Afghanistan, an American stooge, criticised (either sincerely or for domestic politics) the US slaughter of innocent Afghan people, he is an Afghan President that has to genuflect to the USA because his very survival as a political leader depends upon the American military (and foreign policy).

The Sydney Morning Herald reported that the “…civilian deaths are the latest in a string of civilian casualties at the hands of American forces …” (read this link to see how many incidents of US military "collateral damage" had already occurred in Afghanistan). But in the news, I note the new American spin regarding the reckless bombing, as follows:

(1) “In Washington, US Defence Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said the number of people killed in the airstrike is still unclear but that ‘roughly half’ of the estimated 14 to 17 reported deaths may have been civilians. The rest were Taliban or al-Qaeda fighters …”.

It’s like a Dutch auction – when the local Afghan authority said the death toll is 17, the Americans said it’s just half – the other half are "of course" terrorists.

Note also when the US Defence Dept admitted to civilians being killed, it qualified the admission with “… is still unclear …” and “… may have been …”

Hey man, there are 17 bodies including women and children lying very dead in Afghanistan.

(2) “…the ‘early assumption’ is that the bomb struck the intended target, a building that apparently had "non-hostiles" inside, along with Taliban and/or al-Qaeda fighters. It's obviously a very unfortunate situation. It was in the context of counter-terrorist operations"

There you are, the slaughter was within “the context of counter-terrorist operations." This reminds me of that dreadful Americanism in Vietnam of “we had to destroy the village to save it.”

Also note that the civilians with WITH Taliban and/or al-Qaeda fighters - I am just astonish that the US military has been so restrained as they didn’t include any Iranian, North Korean or those ugly deadly alien machines in the War of the Worlds.

Additionally, it was only an “early assumption”, meaning as “new evidence” (the US military are experts at that) are discovered, then all the 17 will become terrorists, including the women and children.

And the disgusting cake of the above statement – the innocent civilians murdered have become “non-hostiles”, yes sireee, not civilians but “non-hostiles”. This new term “non-hostiles” to describe innocent civilians killed by US bombing must surely share a place in the US military’s Hall of Ignominy with “collateral damage” and “suspects”.

(3) "We take great strides to be precise in our military activities. I think we've been very precise. But these things do occur and we obviously regret when they do.”

Bullsh*t and double bullsh*t. The nerve of the assertion of “I think we've been very precise.“ How the f*** could the US military make this outrageous claim when in the same breath it admitted to sh*t happened.

(4) “The US military said in a statement that the attack ‘resulted in the deaths of an unknown number of enemy terrorists and noncombatants,’ which it regretted. It suggested some of the victims were the militants' relatives and said, ‘when enemy forces move their families into the locations where they conduct terrorist operations, they put these innocent civilians at risk."

Now, those civilians, sorry, "noncombatants" were terrorists’ families. It’s the terrorists' fault for putting their innocents with them. Mind you, the US military only SUGGESTED this.

But in the end, we all have to be aware of the reality that all those bullsh*t words are not for our benefit because the US militray knows that we don't believe a single word of their continuous lies, nor could they be bloody bothered. It’s for the folks at home in the good ole USA, who wonder why ‘other’ people hate their good apple-pie eating American service people.

No comments:

Post a Comment