US destroying Falluja homes (Al Jazeera)

[gottaB]

US destroying Falluja homes

Ferocious fighting in the Iraqi town of Falluja has grown so intense that US occupation forces have begun destroying buildings and homes.

Aljazeera's correspondent in Falluja, Abd Al-Adhim Muhammad, said exchange of fire in the Golan quarter grew so fierce that troops had to call in helicopter support on Wednesday.

Muhammad said he personally witnessed two US air gunships destroy four homes in al-Mutasim quarter, adding many resistance fighters were now taking cover in the ruined buildings.

Under siege by US marines for more than two weeks, and after 600 Iraqi civilian fatalities, one fighter told Aljazeera some tanks and armoured vehicles had been forced to leave the Golan quarter.

**

[goddess40]

1. won't that build good will

boy they will really love the US after that. I just can't believe how stupid this mess is. It's getting to the point where I won't be able to carry my support the troops, bring them home signs.

[saigon68]

2. "bring em on" WHIMPERED the neo coward

[Jacobin]

3. Ah yes, taking pointers from the Likkudnicks on

"bringing peace" to Iraq.

[bluedog]

4. we blow them up

and we taxpayers are expected to pay to have them rebuilt?? I just don't get it!!

[Judi Lynn]

14. That's quite the racket, isn't it?

It's too bad someone UNLIKE these corrupt bastards didn't see this coming a long time ago, and help draft necessary legislation to prevent this kind of profound murderous self-enrichment.

[Karenina]

43. profound murderous self-enrichment...

IS DA PLAN!!! Been working pretty good so far! Amis ain't caught on yet in sufficient nummers... :eyes: :BLEEEECH: :eyes: :SHRIEEEEEK: :argh:

[makhno]

5. Spread the love!

That'll sure pave the way for sweets and flowers the next time we invade someone. "Look, American liberators are coming! We're gonna be safe and free, just like the Iraqis!"

USA! USA!

[BostonTeaParty04]

6. I don't think the concern is how we will be received 'the next time'

we invade someone.

sounds like you think we should do it right so that our future INVASIONS will go better? Wha????

[makhno]

7. No

I think we should get the fuck out of there and preferably not have a "next time." However, the obvious disconnect between our proclaimed "mission of peace" and the means used on the ground pisses me off tremendously.

Hope that's clear.

[Zhade]

26. I think makhno was being sarcastic.

:)

[Barrett808]

8. "Helicopter downed" in Um al-Idham?

Elsewhere in the restive west, a US helicopter was hit and downed on Wednesday in the village of Um al-Idham, south of Baquba.

Quoting witnesses Aljazeera's correspondent in Baquba said the incident took place at dawn.

"The US forces immediately sealed off the area and removed the wreckage of the helicopter," he said.

Has anybody seen corroborating stories?

[gottaB]

9. yes, in German

Bakuba. AP/BaZ. In der irakischen Stadt Bakuba ist am Mittwoch ein US-Militärhelikopter abgestürzt und in Flammen aufgegangen....

In the Iraqi city of Baquba Wednesday a U.S. attack helicoptor was downed and went up in flames. (roughly)

http://www.baz.ch/news/index.cfm?ObjectID=3FD605A8-C2EC-42EE-B989B6AA10A1BB66

[Barrett808]

11. Good find -- I don't see anything else in the Google news cache n/t

[0007]

13. Thanks for the link

Goes to show 'ya who controls the media, 'eh?

[Shakespeare]

10. Jenin.

Just like fucking Jenin. What are we, the outsourced IDF?

[Zhade]

27. "What are we, the outsourced IDF?"

Well, our troops are being trained in their tactics, so why the fuck not, let's just become the new innocent-targeting, collective-punishment-loving IDF!

It's shit like this that makes it hard to give a fuck about our troops - and I do not like this one bit. My dad was in the military. But with all the shooting up of ambulances and widespread war crimes going on, it's hard not to just give up on them.

I want them home yesterday. Enough with this madness!

[bloom]

12. "US destroying Falluja homes"

I guess one can only presume these are NOT the homes that US troops took over from the fleeing civilians.

[LeftyChristian]

15. Al Jazeera?

I'm a newbie here, but since when has Al Jazeera EVER been known for reporting accurately or without an agenda? Just like propoganda that newsmax, faux or drudge puts out.

Makes my skin crawl to even type those rag's names.

[Dhalgren]

17. You are a newbee. Welcome!

We have found over the last year or so that Al Jazeera has been more accurate and truthful than any of the US media. Sure they have a bias, but it's the same bias any "free" press would have.

[Heyo]

22. Have to disagree with you there...

Al-Jazeera is a propaganda machine worthy of Goebbels.. it just is..

I don't believe this story one bit...

Heyo

[htuttle]

23. Well, that's one heck of an argument you presented...

"It just is"

Hard to argue with that logic.

:eyes:

[Zhade]

29. Ah yes, unsupported arguments from a war booster.

Why in the world should anybody listen to an alleged progressive who always was, and still is, for the illegal invasion and occupation of a country that was no threat to us?

There's no rule that you have to agree with the sane majority here on DU who abhor this aggressive imperialism, but there's also no rule that we have to respect the opinion of someone who agrees with b*sh about the "war".

"It just is." Why, how very cogent an argument.

:eyes:

[Heyo]

46. This reply goes to this post and the one previous...

I guess saying "It just is" is simply a matter of it being my own opinion...

Even before I was able to find Al-Jazeera in English I used to use those 'cut-n-paste' web language translator things to read (or try to) the arabic language version...

Some of the stuff there is just so outlandish, they are not even making an attempt to seem fair to the western world...

When every other news media outlet in the world (not that I trust all the rest of them much either) reports a story one way, whetaver it may be.... and no matter what the facts may be by the time the story hits al-jazeera it goes something like "The Americans fired wildly into the air, and engaged in an intentional massacre of school children and old ladies."...

Their stories are way over the top and misinformation is the norm.

I doubt I will convince you, and that's okay, I respect that..

But as far as my personal opinion... regardless of how you feel about the war,I don't believe a word al-jazeera says.. I don't trust the sources they use nor their motives. I realize people really latch on to things that make Bush and America look bad, and if it's true.. by all means latch on to it if that is your belief... not sure al-J is the best place for that.

BTW. Since when am I an alleged progressive?

:9

Heyo

[Eureka]

32. I'm sortof with you, Heyo

Sortof, in that I don't think any media is currently reporting without their own bias, but I don't trust Al-jazeera or the "free" press.

It may be though that the article being discussed is a sexed up version of this, www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1092209.htm, which is reporting some killed and battles going on, but no levelling of buildings.

Cheers

Eureka

[gottaB]

33. fixed link, comment

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1092209.htm

What you presented is simply a rehash of a statement from Centcom.

Al Jazeera has reporters in Fallujah, conducts interviews with witnesses, and names sources. That is not "sexing up" in my book, but good reporting.

There are embedded reporters with the Marines there who do a good job of reporting, interviewing witnesses, collecting observations, etc. They too have biases, of course. Even so, they are infinitely more reliable than CENTCOM or the stenographer corps in Baghdad.

There are Reuters, AP and AFP reporters there--I'm not sure of their relations with the military.

Latest fromt the Beeb:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3645573.stm

See the photo essay:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/photo_gallery/3647473.stm


Whatever else you make of this, you ought to consider the wisdom of accepting the Kimmit version of events at face value. Observable facts--observed from a variety of perspectives--don't fully support what the US military is saying.

[Eureka]

37. Thanks for that

my comma got in the way!

As you'll see from my post, I was only suggesting that it "may be" sexed up. You'll also see that I don't accept the Kimmit version at face value either... " I don't think any media is currently reporting without their own bias"

As for observable facts not supporting the US military verison of events, well that I agree with.

Actually, last week on Aus TV there was a report on a recruiting video being used in Fallujah where the locals were disputing the US military death toll, and were digging up the bodies of US servicemen and others to prove their point. They didn't put the video on the web, it was fairly disturbing at any rate, but there is a transcript of it here, if you're interested (and if my punctuation doesn't get in the way, thanks again)

http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/trans.php3?dte=2004-04-14&title=Recruiting+for+the+Iraqi+Resistance

[wabeewoman]

18. Oh I don't know

I find them at least as accurate as the American press especially when they write about how the president articulated such a clear vision of his plan in his press conference.

[VolcanoJen]

20. Spot ON, wabeewoman!!!

It's a sad state of affairs when I'll take al-Jazeera's word over the fawning, drooling, curtseying White House press corps.

[gottaB]

19. Al Jazeera has demonstrated accuracy time and time again

As for bias, I find their biases less offensive and less overwhelming than Fox's. Occasionally Al Jazeera rivals the BBC, which I regard as a paragon of objective reporting.

Newsmax and Drudge I don't consider to be journalism.

Do you want citations? Since you're impugning the source, I think you should do the legwork to prove that the facts are not as Al Jazeera reports them, or to back up your assertion that Al Jazeera is not be to trusted. Tell you what, if you back up your criticism with some clear examples of Al Jazeera reporting untrue things, I'll back up my claim that they are a reliable source of news. Perhaps we can find some common ground.

--And welcome to DU! :hi:

[Merlin]

21. You are absolutely right. Al Jazeera is more accurate than US TV news

True, they are slanted in the direction of Islam. But they provide up close, straight forward, courageous video reports which are obviously true.

That beats our news sources of journalists either attached to US troop units or sequestered in the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad. Most of the video we get on US TV today is either talking head shots of western journalists, or shots of demonstators taken from hotel room windows or shots of real life taken from Al Jazeera TV.

[leftchick]

34. and don't forget....

all of their quotes are from US Military sources not witnesses as al-Jazeera uses.

[LeftyChristian]

35. Incomplete

I just found that the story was incomplete. Why were the homes destroyed? Who was thought to be in them? Story seemed nothing more than a knee jerk response designed to whip up the masses.

I don't doubt that Al Jazeera is a reliable source from the Arab perspective, but on first glance it seems as if the writer was pushing the story instead of following it and not reporting the entire story. IMHO not very good journalism.

The US military could have randomly destroyed these houses, or they could have been legitimate military targets. The way I read it, the former was implied. The press reports the news, they aren't supposed to make the news.

[Zhade]

38. Perhaps they couldn't follow it further, with all the fighting going on?

Considering that the collective-punishment demolition of homes in other parts of Iraq has already been reported by sources you might consider more legitimate than al Jazeera, I find it very likely that these homes were destroyed in similar fashion.

Is that necessarily the case? No, but the precedent is there.

[htuttle]

39. Incomplete because it lacked the US military's 'excuse' for the action?

All they did was simply report the facts: That their correspondent in Fallujah states that they personally witnessed US gunships destroying four houses.

It was an eyewitness report, it was properly attributed, and I don't see any inflammatory language in it's description:

Muhammad said he personally witnessed two US air gunships destroy four homes in al-Mutasim quarter, adding many resistance fighters were now taking cover in the ruined buildings.

I would admit that the label 'resistance fighter' is one of perspective. Iraqi's (and many others) call them 'resistance fighters', the US usually calls them 'rebels' or 'terrorists'. Other than their selection of adjectives and adverbs, the report seems reasonable, factual, and attributed.

You seem upset that it lacked the ubiquitous "US Military spokespersons stated they had no knowledge of the event". You find that 'no comment response' helpful in news stories? Why?

[LeftyChristian]

41. Some of the facts

I'm sorry that you think that I was upset because there was no spin from the US military.

Who, what, where, when, why and how? We've got a who - US gunships, what - destroyed 4 homes, where - Fallujah, when - yesterday, how - probably rockets...no why?

Was it a ghost town after these homes were destroyed? Just this reporter and the rubble of four demolished houses? Hours after this happened there was still no one to ask questions as to who lived there or was in there at the time of the attack?

No military spin, not even Al Jazeera spin?

No two eyewitnesses ever recall an event the same way. Why not bolster the story with more eyewitnesses who may have known more about this attack...positive or negative light for the US military.

[gottaB]

42. Yes, it is fragmentary, but iss Al Jazeera pushing the story?

We don't know why houses were destroyed. Neither do the Fallujans. The feeling that they are being attacked randomly or indiscriminately has been reported by others. The US military disputes their belief, but not the fact that Fallujans have this belief. The dead bodies and demolished buildings would seem to contradict US claims of accuracy and appropriate restraint in the application of force--Not necessarily, but in the context of contradictory claims (the US has talked of using "proportionate" as well as "overwhelming" force in Fallujah), the actualities of the conflict become extremely informative. They are newsworthy in themselves.

As for the homelessness, again, there's a sentiment among Fallujans that they're being driven from their homes. Al Jazeera presents evidence of houses being destroyed, and another report of a family displaced by US forces. Is there an implied connection? Is such a connection warranted?

Other sources are reporting on the issue of displacement, and how the Fallujans feel about it. So it hardly seems as if Al Jazeera is manufacturing this story, or pushing it--not unless you want to posit some sort of conspiracy among a variety of news organizations and independent observers.

What I see as the essence of your complaint is the fact that Mr. Muhammad didn't consult the US military about its destruction of some houses. I agree, that is a weakness. But here's the thing, why that sort of bias doesn't discredit Al Jazeera in my view. This really is a war. On the other side, our side, the best reporting coming from the embeds routinely discounts Iraqi views of events and treats Iraqis, ipso facto, as biased witnesses. Minimally. I don't know what interest it serves to present some snippet of a statement by an Iraqi victim of US violence, and then present a more authoritative voice which calls the Iraqi a liar, or dismisses his testimony as a manifestion of collective delusion, and then say somehow you've managed to present all sides. That's really kind of farcical.

So yeah, for lacking a pro forma nod to fairness on this one point, Al Jazeera seems rough. Under the circumstances that's acceptable to me because I want to understand events from a variety of points of view, and Al Jazeera has worked to present the Iraqi point of view. Furthermore, because Al Jazeera has standards of accuracy and truthfulness, I believe the testimony of their reporter, that what he says he saw really happened.

[Jacobin]

24. On that subject, I had an interesting conversation with

a U.S. soldier on leave from Iraq a few months back. He watched CNN and shook his head. He said they aren't reporting 1/10 of what is going on over there and that the situation is absolutely horrible, the Iraqis all want us gone, that we have no business there, and that moral is very bad among the soldiers.

He said one of the things that depresses them most is that U.S. news doesn't say how bad things are and they worry that people in the U.S. will get the wrong impression that things are going pretty well.

Now go to Al Jazeera and look at the news they report. It ain't pretty, but its likely to be more realistic than the propaganda that we see here that is controlled by the WH.

BTW, welcome to DU

[leftchick]

36. reminds me of Jane Araff... cnn correspondent in Baghdad...

she goes on and on DAILY about how MOST Iraqis want the US there and Many places are actually calm and peaceful! Shameless HO!

[LeftyChristian]

40. One person's experience

Thanks for the welcome. I repsect that one soldier's assessment of the progress or lack there of. I live in San Antonio, home to three AFB and one military post. I have soldiers that are neighbors and have come back from Iraq with different accounts. Maybe it has to do with where each individual is deployed. I spoke at length with a neighbor who was nothing but positive about the efforts to give the Iraqis the infrastructure that they never had. Working with their engineers and laborers to build roads, drinking water pipelines, electricity, etc.

Call me an optimist, but for all the bad that this war has caused, there are also many good things that are going on as well. I just hope that our men and women come home safely and soon.

[Nihil]

44. Beep!

> ... a neighbor who was nothing but positive about the efforts to give
> the Iraqis the infrastructure that they never had. Working with their
> engineers and laborers to build roads, drinking water pipelines,
> electricity, etc.

Wrong.

Contrary to WASP propaganda, Iraq *did* have an infrastructure before
the Kuwait war. They had an education system, a health system, water,
sanitation and power that was far better than the Saudis (for example)
and better than some of the US states for that matter.

Ten years of "sanctions" started to bring that down.

Seven years of illegal bombing raids helped it on its way.

Two months of intensive destruction last year finished it.

Power stations, water purifaction plants, roads, pipelines.
Destroyed during the "war" and very slowly, very expensively, very
shoddily being rebuilt by Halliburton & friends.
I don't deny that some of the soldiers (and non-soldiers) over there
are doing good, humanitarian work. I resent the easily-swallowed
propaganda that "it's the first time Iraq has had this stuff".

(I had a neighbour who had been working in Iraq on & off for the best
part of fifteen years and who was disgusted at the deliberate, fully
intentional degradation that was being practiced by "the Allies".
He was involved with the setting up and maintenance of some of the
water systems. Enough 2000lb bombs will f*ck any "infrastructure".)

Nihil

[Aidoneus]

31. around 90% of the time

"...since when has Al Jazeera EVER been known for reporting accurately..."

:shrug:

I would not say that they are unbiased, though I cannot think of anything that is, this contrary to almost universal protestations to the contrary. It is my experience that anything claiming to be completely unbiased actually has their eyes towards deceiving the viewer without their knowledge. I prefer it to be expressed openly enough so as to be easy to pick up on and consider. All things considered, al-Jazeera is an excellent source that is not afraid to print the unpleasant truth (this has won it many enemies, ranging from Saddam Husayn in a past life, the Pentagon, Zionist politicians and their compradors in occupied-Palestine, many of the Arab governments, etc).

[Dhalgren]

16. Stalingrad.

The freedom fighters know history. Determined fighters are harder to dislodge from rubble than they are from houses - Stalingrad, 1942.

[nolabels]

45. "Enemy at the Gates" was quite a good movie but.........................

I am sure what ever was written about it could not have done it justice.

I matters not whatever of the people, you are invading their home to kill them and steal their effects, they won't need anything after such things are laid out for them to see.

[damnraddem]

25. This must be why Dubya gave Sharon everything the latter wanted --

Sharon had explained how to win the minds and hearts of an occupied people.

[ze_dscherman]

28. Welcome to Grozny

Look back just some years, see what happened in Chechnya, and you'll see what atrocities still may come in Iraq and other places of geostrategic interest.

Spelling edited. Should go to bed.

[bemildred]

30. Welcome to Chechnya on steroids. nt