Pentagon Admits It Intentionally Bombed Doctors Without Borders

[Nat Algren]

Pentagon Knew Targeted Afghan Site Was a Hospital
US Troops Were Surveilling Hospital in Lead-Up to Attack
by Jason Ditz, October 15, 2015

With the official US narrative on their attack on the Doctors Without Borders hospital having changed several times, and the White House openly opposing calls for an independent investigation into the strike, the Associated Press in now reporting that the ground troops in the area, the ones who apparently called in the strike, knew it was a hospital.

Not only that, but the Pentagon had actually ordered the troops on the ground to conduct surveillance against the hospital, on suspicion that a Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence spy was inside. Officials were even privately saying the attack on the protected hospital full of civilians was “justified” because of this, and that they believe one of the 22 slain civilians may well have been the Pakistani in question.

This dramatically undercuts US claims that the attack, likely a war crime, was “a mistake,” and President Obama’s “apology” to Doctors Without Borders, who say the new reports underscore the likelihood that the US deliberately targeted a hospital.

It also supports Doctors Without Borders’ assessment that there was no fighting anywhere near the hospital the night of the strike, suggesting the claim of a battle was a pretext for an American attack on a hospital, which was the goal in the first place.

Doctors Without Borders did, however, spurned the reports that a Pakistani ISI spy was present, saying none of the staff at the facility were Pakistani, and that they had no information that any of the patients were either.

http://news.antiwar.com/2015/10/15/pentagon-knew-bombed-afghan-site-was-a-hospital/

 

[HawktimusPrime]

More Obama derangement syndrome, obviously.

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

Link from another source besides "antiwar.com"?

Not that I am claiming they have an agenda.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Link from another source besides "antiwar.com"?

Not that I am claiming they have an agenda.

I don't know Matty,......do you think I might be able to find one?

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

Nope. Not making the dubious inferences this makes

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Nope. Not making the dubious inferences this makes

Okay MW, but you shouldn't jump onto the playground unless you are willing to deal with the consequences.

Go kick around a can and think this over.....

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

Okay MW, but you shouldn't jump onto the playground unless you are willing to deal with the consequences.

Go kick around a can and think this over.....

Still waiting for that credible link...

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Still waiting for that credible link...

Why Matt? Will you and your pathetic self actually give it any quarter the second I lay it out? Or will go and cry, and get someone banned because you don't like what is given to you? The last time you called me out on something like this, I answered in full, but you didn't respond. So the question comes,...why waste my time Matt?

 

[lucas80]

This is being reported in other outlets. It is a far cry to say Obama ordered a hit, or even the Pentagon did. It was a horrible PR disaster. It seems more likely that people on the ground stepped outside of their boundaries.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

This is being reported in other outlets. It is a far cry to say Obama ordered a hit, or even the Pentagon did. It was a horrible PR disaster. It seems more likely that people on the ground stepped outside of their boundaries.

A good leader knows everything that happens in his/her house.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Nope. Not making the dubious inferences this makes

Hey Matthew,....are you going to provide that link anytime soon?

 

[joelbc1]

More Obama derangement syndrome, obviously.

No...actually it is more scab picking than anything else.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

No...actually it is more scab picking than anything else.

Agreed.

 

[shank hawk]

Link from another source besides "antiwar.com"?

Not that I am claiming they have an agenda.

Yeah, we demand credible sources - small, family businesses like FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, et al. Unbiased, old-school journalism free from corporate influences that would use their money and power to promote perpetual war.

This multi-billion dollar steamroller known as "anti-war.com" must be stopped in it's brazen attempt to spread peace throughout the world. Sick bastards.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Who you gonna believe: Doctors Without Borders or the US military-industrial complex?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Yeah, we demand credible sources - small, family businesses like FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, et al. Unbiased, old-school journalism free from corporate influences that would use their money and power to promote perpetual war.

This multi-billion dollar steamroller known as "anti-war.com" must be stopped in it's brazen attempt to spread peace throughout the world. Sick bastards.

The problem with infowars is that they too often blend fact, speculation and outright fantasy. Which is to say that they often get things partly right.

I've seen Alex Jones take the wingnut position, the lefty position, the official US version, the paid liars' version - all without any apparent effort to discern fact from fiction. Basically, he's never seen a conspiracy theory he didn't like. By being so indiscriminate, he is invariably right some of the time.

He probably thinks of himself as a muckraker. But if you want real muckrakers, you might want to check The Intercept. They currently have multiple serious articles on our drone wars.

 

[shank hawk]

The problem with infowars is that they too often blend fact, speculation and outright fantasy. Which is to say that they often get things partly right.

I've seen Alex Jones take the wingnut position, the lefty position, the official US version, the paid liars' version - all without any apparent effort to discern fact from fiction. Basically, he's never seen a conspiracy theory he didn't like. By being so indiscriminate, he is invariably right some of the time.

He probably thinks of himself as a muckraker. But if you want real muckrakers, you might want to check The Intercept. They currently have multiple serious articles on our drone wars.

I think you're confusing antiwar with infowars, though you are spot on as far as Alex Jones goes.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I think you're confusing antiwar with infowars, though you are spot on as far as Alex Jones goes.

You're right. My bad. Tell me about antiwar.

Per Wikipedia:

Antiwar.com is a libertarian website which describes itself as devoted to "non-interventionism" and as opposing imperialism and war. It is a project of the Randolph Bourne Institute. The website states that it is "dedicated to building an awareness of the globalist and interventionist forces that would enslave us all in a New World Order on which the sun never sets."

With so many idiots calling themselves libertarians these days, that doesn't help very much.

 

[shank hawk]

You're right. My bad. Tell me about antiwar.

Per Wikipedia:

Antiwar.com is a libertarian website which describes itself as devoted to "non-interventionism" and as opposing imperialism and war. It is a project of the Randolph Bourne Institute. The website states that it is "dedicated to building an awareness of the globalist and interventionist forces that would enslave us all in a New World Order on which the sun never sets."

With so many idiots calling themselves libertarians these days, that doesn't help very much.

Justin Raimondo seems to be pretty true to the cause, and he also plays for the other team so if Natural ever decides to give up his devotion to the state, antiwar.com would be a good place for him to seek out.

Raimondo tried to get on the Rand Paul bandwagon, but even he walked after Paul's repeated attempts to appease the neocon warmongers. I've read the site for years and he will tear into both the R's and the D's equally: he has been consistent in his criticism of the MIC.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Justin Raimondo seems to be pretty true to the cause, and he also plays for the other team so if Natural ever decides to give up his devotion to the state, antiwar.com would be a good place for him to seek out.

Raimondo tried to get on the Rand Paul bandwagon, but even he walked after Paul's repeated attempts to appease the neocon warmongers. I've read the site for years and he will tear into both the R's and the D's equally: he has been consistent in his criticism of the MIC.

Thanks. I'll pay more attention.

 

[joelbc1]

Justin Raimondo seems to be pretty true to the cause, and he also plays for the other team so if Natural ever decides to give up his devotion to the state, antiwar.com would be a good place for him to seek out.

Raimondo tried to get on the Rand Paul bandwagon, but even he walked after Paul's repeated attempts to appease the neocon warmongers. I've read the site for years and he will tear into both the R's and the D's equally: he has been consistent in his criticism of the MIC.

With all due respect shank......both parties are guilty of "war mongering" to some extent. More oft than not, it comes down to corporate/business interests that puts us on this path. The "party in power" regardless of symbol, is beholding to these interests.
Defunding political campaigns scares the shit out of these folks and that is why it will never happen.

 

[shank hawk]

With all due respect shank......both parties are guilty of "war mongering" to some extent. More oft than not, it comes down to corporate/business interests that puts us on this path. The "party in power" regardless of symbol, is beholding to these interests.
Defunding political campaigns scares the shit out of these folks and that is why it will never happen.

Couldn't agree more joel. I'm a former republican for a reason: they're all whores to their corporate overlords with few exceptions.

 

[strummingram]

Yeah, we demand credible sources - small, family businesses like FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, et al. Unbiased, old-school journalism free from corporate influences that would use their money and power to promote perpetual war.

This multi-billion dollar steamroller known as "anti-war.com" must be stopped in it's brazen attempt to spread peace throughout the world. Sick bastards.

You're good, man!

Most of these people are indoctrinated so far that they will only accept something as being factual if it comes from the official indoctrination source.

 

[strummingram]

Still waiting for that credible link...

Do you actually think (or need) a credible source is only found in the "media" sources that are owned by a handful of people? Surely you're not that far gone... please come back to us!

 

[Nat Algren]

This is being reported in other outlets. It is a far cry to say Obama ordered a hit, or even the Pentagon did. It was a horrible PR disaster. It seems more likely that people on the ground stepped outside of their boundaries.

I'm sure it was just an accident that this sanctioned hit came on the day of the Trans-Pacific Partnership announcement. DWB had ads out ripping the TPP. Knowing you're a D apologist, I'm sure you'll tally this under accident # 34,856 and call me a tin-foil hat wearing loon.

 

[Nat Algren]

Still waiting for that credible link...

Click on the hyper-link provided in the original article. And since when is the MSM considered 'credible'? These presstitutes are owned.

 

[Nat Algren]

Two Propaganda Techniques: Clouding and Narrowing
Michael S. Rozeff

If facts are clear that make you look bad, fuzz or cloud the facts up. Do this by planting alternative facts in the press or by planting alternative explanations (interpretations) even if they do not add a thing to the original facts. Cloud the original facts. Make the planted “facts” specific so as to cause conflicting perceptions among readers.

The American attack on a hospital in Afghanistan is a clear fact and a clear war crime. To cloud this is now the objective of those who did wrong and those who want to protect the wrongdoers and not be held responsible for the crime. Shifting the blame is one way to cloud the fact. Rationalizing the attack is another. Both clouding methods are at work in this news report out of AP. (Thank you, David Krall.) The article, an obvious plant, tries to justify the attack on the ground that the American special forces made an honest mistake: “…they believed it was being used by a Pakistani operative to coordinate Taliban activity…” Is it okay to bomb a known neutral site because of a suspicion that it harbors a shadowy enemy or suspected enemy who is suspected of something vague like “coordinating” the vague “activity” of a suspected enemy (Taliban) who may not even be near the place? The whole idea of this being a justification is absurd on every count. Nevertheless, this is effective propaganda, even if the story is never verified. It buys time. It delays an accounting. Perhaps the story will die when another story supplants it and grabs headlines.

(more…)

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/two-propaganda-techniques-clouding-and-narrowing/


12:14 pm on October 16, 2015

 

[ottumwan in tx]

so, most Obama-ites think the pentagon and Obama are two different animals, and that Obama is the usa and the pentagon is some Nazi-like fascist organization