US Soldiers Killed Afghan Civilians for Sport and Collected Fingers as Trophies

[Magda Hassan]

US Army 'kill team' in Afghanistan posed with photos of murdered civilians

Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment that could be more damaging than after the Abu Ghraib scandal

• Jon Boone
  
• The Guardian, Monday 21 March 2011 The Afghanistan 'kill team' photos of murdered civilians could be more damaging than those from Abu Ghraib, say NATO commanders. Photograph: AP Commanders in Afghanistan are bracing themselves for possible riots and public fury triggered by the publication of "trophy" photographs of US soldiers posing with the dead bodies of defenceless Afghan civilians they killed.
  Senior officials at Nato's International Security Assistance Force in Kabul have compared the pictures published by the German news weekly Der Spiegel to the images of US soldiers abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq which sparked waves of anti-US protests around the world.
  They fear that the pictures could be even more damaging as they show the aftermath of the deliberate murders of Afghan civilians by a rogue US Stryker tank unit that operated in the southern province of Kandahar last year.
  Some of the activities of the self-styled "kill team" are already public, with 12 men currently on trial in Seattle for their role in the killing of three civilians.
  Five of the soldiers are on trial for pre-meditated murder, after they staged killings to make it look like they were defending themselves from Taliban attacks.
  Other charges include the mutilation of corpses, the possession of images of human casualties and drug abuse.
  All of the soldiers have denied the charges. They face the death penalty or life in prison if convicted.
  The case has already created shock around the world, particularly with the revelations that the men cut "trophies" from the bodies of the people they killed.
  An investigation by Der Spiegel has unearthed approximately 4,000 photos and videos taken by the men.
  The magazine, which is planning to publish only three images, said that in addition to the crimes the men were on trial for there are "also entire collections of pictures of other victims that some of the defendants were keeping".
  The US military has strived to keep the pictures out of the public domain fearing it could inflame feelings at a time when anti-Americanism in Afghanistan is already running high.
  In a statement, the army said it apologised for the distress caused by photographs "depicting actions repugnant to us as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States".
  The lengthy Spiegel article that accompanies the photographs contains new details about the sadistic behaviour of the men.
  In one incident in May last year, the article says, during a patrol, the team apprehended a mullah who was standing by the road and took him into a ditch where they made him kneel down.
  The group's leader, Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs, then allegedly threw a grenade at the man while an order was given for him to be shot.
  Afterwards, Gibbs is described cutting off one of the man's little fingers and removing a tooth.
  The patrol team later claimed to their superiors that the mullah had tried to threaten them with a grenade and that they had no choice but to shoot.
  Last night many organisations employing foreign staff, including the United Nations, ordered their staff into a "lockdown", banning all movements around Kabul and requiring people to remain in their compounds.
  In addition to the threat from the publication of the photographs, security has been heightened amid fears the Taliban may try to attack Persian new year celebrations.
  Tomorrow could also attract attacks because Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, is due to make a speech declaring which areas of the country should be transferred from international to Afghan control in the coming months.
  One security manager for the US company DynCorp sent an email to clients warning that publication of the photos was likely "to incite the local population" as the "severity of the incidents to be revealed are graphic and extreme".
  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar...-civilians
  
  
  
  

[Magda Hassan]

Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment

The previous article has soooo much sympathy for the poor Commanders. Too bad about the dead Afghans. No sympathy for them. Mere bit players in the tragedy of the Commanders having to deal with the backlash of anti-American sentiment.

Meanwhile, from the people who brought us more than 1,000,000 dead Iraqis and the utter destruction of 2 countries and all means to sustain a meaningful life there, we are being told that the 'mad man' Gaddafi was attacking his own people and there fore the civilized west must intervene by killing the people before Gaddafi does.

And since when is Gaddafi killing US and Israeli contras killing Libyan civilians?

[Jan Klimkowski]

Der Spiegel has published three of the images, and they were flashed up very quickly on Channel 4 news this evening. They looked like archetypal trophy photos - akin to the image of the colonial big game hunter posing arrogantly, imperiously, over his slain prey.

I've been unable to find them online, and they're not on Der Spiegel's international site.

Here's a description:

One of the pictures published by Der Spiegel shows a soldier, Specialist Jeremy N. Morlock of Wasilla, Alaska, posing, a grin on his face, next to a dead Afghan who is mostly undressed, his body streaked with blood, as the soldier is lifting the man's head up as if to show him off like a trophy. Specialist Morlock has been charged with murder.

A second, similar photograph shows another soldier, Pfc. Andrew H. Holmes of Boise, Idaho, who has also been charged with murder, kneeling next to the same corpse.

A third photograph shows two Afghan civilians who appear to be dead and whose bodies have been arranged leaning against a post.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/world/...istan.html

[Jan Klimkowski]

More allegations of fingers being sliced off as "trophies", this time by a British soldier.

Soldier 'sliced off fingers of dead Taliban fighters as souvenirs'

A British soldier sliced off the fingers of dead Taliban fighters as "souvenirs", it was has been alleged

By [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/8689120/Soldier-sliced-off-fingers-of-dead-Taliban-fighters-as-souvenirs.html"]
Simon Johnson, Stephen Adams[/URL]6:40PM BST 08 Aug 2011

As the Ministry of Defence launched an investigation into the claims, General Lord Richard Dannatt, the former head of the Army, said he was "absolutely shocked" by the accusations.

He warned they were "incredibly damaging" to the Army's operations in Afghanistan and that they threatened to harm relations between the military and local Afghans whether true or not.

It was alleged that a solider in the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, 5th Battalion, the Royal Regiment of Scotland, hacked off the fingers of enemy corpses.

The Royal Military Police's Special Investigation Branch (SIB) has started an inquiry into allegations that he kept them as "macabre souvenirs" during the regiment's last tour of Helmand Province between September 2010 and April.

They allegations are particularly potent in the "hearts and minds" battle against the Taliban as Muslim tradition dictates that the dead must be buried with all their body parts.

Sir Richard told The Daily Telegraph: "If true, it's quite outrageous and I've never heard of anything like that before. I'm absolutely shocked.

"It's an extremely damaging allegation to have made. The potential damage (to the Afghanistan operation) is huge. The allegation in itself is damaging even if not true because it has been published.

"The Army does not tolerate in any shape or form that kind of activity and will investigate swiftly and thoroughly."

He said one of the "core values" of the Army is that enemy soldiers, dead or alive, are treated with respect.

The MoD refused to comment in detail or to confirm whether any soldier has been suspended.

A spokesman said: "This is a very serious allegation and it would be wrong for us to comment. An investigation is ongoing."

The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, known as 5 Scots and based in Canterbury, Kent, were on their second tour of duty in Afghanistan as part of 16 Air Assault Brigade.

They took over the running of the Helmand Police training centre, where 4,000 recruits are put through intensive eight-week courses.

One company from the battalion was also attached to the 2nd Battalion, the Parachute Regiment, on combat duties. There is no information on which company the soldier came from.

Clive Fairweather, a former SAS commander and honorary colonel of the Argylls' Cadet Force, said he was "baffled and shocked" by the accusations.

"I've never come across anything like this in my 34 years of service. Taking trophies from dead combatants is a sure fire way to provoke anger in the local population," he said.

"This is one of the taboos of the military. There's not that many, but this is one of them."

[Ed Jewett]

I was reminded last night about the experiences of the US soldiers at the "battle" of Wounded Knee (1890), an avenging of the Battle of the Little Big Horn (Greasy Grass) (1876), in fear of the Ghost Dance implications, as well as the Sand Creek Massacre in November 1864.

The use of Cherokees in the Civil War battle of Pea Ridge in Benton,Arkansas had Indians on both sides. "The Unionists organized Colonel John Drew's 1st Cherokee Mounted Rifles, while pro-Confederates organized Colonel Stand Watie's 2nd Cherokee Mounted Rifles. With the 1st Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles, and the 1st Creek Regiment, Pike had a sizable force of Indian troops by early 1862." The article at the link asks questions about the meaning and origin of battlefield mutilation. "The silence surrounding the incident allowed non-Indian commentators to interpret it for their own purposes and within the context of European rather than Native American culture."

"Scalping was practiced by some Native Americans before contact with Europeans. The French recorded its appearance among the Hurons in the sixteenth century. Eastern tribes such as the Creeks and Cherokees were known to have incorporated scalping into their activities, but it appears to have been most common among the Plains Indians. For all Native Americans who practiced scalping, it was important for purposes of symbolism and retribution. Taking the hair of one who had murdered a member of the family or tribe was a symbolic way of replacing the lost. The lock of hair also symbolized victory over an enemy and often was used as a decoration in celebrations. A form of mutilation itself, scalping naturally became part of a wider range of practices by some tribes that ranged from simply cutting the skin of dead enemies to castration.

Among the Cherokees, before their removal to the Indian Territory, scalping was practiced for one of two reasons. First, scalping occurred as a means of exacting revenge for the killing of Cherokees by other Native Americans. It was done with a precise sense of justice. Cherokees took only enough lives and scalps to account for the number of slain Cherokees. In this way, a general war between neighboring tribes was avoided. Second, scalping occurred at the instigation of Europeans. During the French and Indian War, the British offered scalp bounties to the Cherokees, encouraging them to attack tribes allied with the French. Many young Cherokee men were so impressed by the lure of payment that they began to collect the scalps of any tribe that was available, even friendly peoples such as the Chickasaw. This not only threatened a war with the Chickasaw but represented a threat to the social values of the Cherokee Nation. A Cherokee leader named Little Carpenter, unable to punish the scalp-takers, finally asked the British to rescind their offer of scalp bounties.

The episode at Pea Ridge obviously did not fall into the first category, scalping and mutilation as a form of revenge. Pea Ridge was the first major engagement between the Confederate Cherokees and the Union army, and there could have been no question of retaliation for a previous wrong. The episode at Pea Ridge does, however, fall directly into the second category. From the Cherokee perspective, the Civil War was a conflict between outsiders, and many of the Cherokees found themselves drawn into it only reluctantly. In the case of Pea Ridge, the two Cherokee regiments were nearly like mercenary troops coerced by politics and money into leaving the Indian Territory and fighting alongside Confederate troops for the defense of Arkansas. Those few Cherokees who took up the scalping knife were not paid bounties, but their role in Confederate service was analogous to their role as British allies a few generations earlier. John Bull and Johnny Reb both created a political-military situation that encouraged a few individuals to abuse a time-honored ritual of Cherokee culture."

The emphasis I added is perhaps food for thought relative to the current environment of war.

[Jan Klimkowski]

For all Native Americans who practiced scalping, it was important for purposes of symbolism and retribution. Taking the hair of one who had murdered a member of the family or tribe was a symbolic way of replacing the lost. The lock of hair also symbolized victory over an enemy and often was used as a decoration in celebrations. A form of mutilation itself, scalping naturally became part of a wider range of practices by some tribes that ranged from simply cutting the skin of dead enemies to castration.

Among the Cherokees, before their removal to the Indian Territory, scalping was practiced for one of two reasons. First, scalping occurred as a means of exacting revenge for the killing of Cherokees by other Native Americans. It was done with a precise sense of justice. Cherokees took only enough lives and scalps to account for the number of slain Cherokees. In this way, a general war between neighboring tribes was avoided. Second, scalping occurred at the instigation of Europeans. During the French and Indian War, the British offered scalp bounties to the Cherokees, encouraging them to attack tribes allied with the French. Many young Cherokee men were so impressed by the lure of payment that they began to collect the scalps of any tribe that was available, even friendly peoples such as the Chickasaw. This not only threatened a war with the Chickasaw but represented a threat to the social values of the Cherokee Nation. A Cherokee leader named Little Carpenter, unable to punish the scalp-takers, finally asked the British to rescind their offer of scalp bounties.

So what is the psychological motivation for the slicing off and collection of fingers and other body parts of Afghans and other supposed Al Qaeda or Taliban fighters by American and European troops?

My sense is that it is not for money and it is not to count the revenge exacted.

I suspect that the motivation is closer to the trophy gathering of a big game hunter: hunter's boot planted on the corpse of the hunted as the camera snaps, the deer's horn cut and taken home to be mounted on the wall as evidence of the hunter's victory over the "beast".

I welcome other views.

[Keith Millea]

I suspect that the motivation is closer to the trophy gathering of a big game hunter: hunter's boot planted on the corpse of the hunted as the camera snaps, the deer's horn cut and taken home to be mounted on the wall as evidence of the hunter's victory over the "beast".

I welcome other views.

My view,is that hunting here in the Northwest is generational(passed down).This is still wild country,and hunting and fishing play a big part in family life.And,for sure no thoughts of "beasts",but more likely the word "Majestic",when bringing home a big Mule deer buck,or mature bull elk.Hell yes,hang that rack on the wall.Real hunting is an art form.

Scalping:

I watched the movie "Little Big Man" several days ago.Towards the end of the movie,Little Big Man(Dustin Hoffman),who is adopted by the Cheyenne chief,is talking with his "grandfather".The chief pulls out a scalp and says,"Now this guy has to live forever as a bald man." (paraphrasing)

:curtain:

[Ed Jewett]

I am re-reading the Pulitzer Prize winning book by the cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker entitled "The Denial of Death" (Free Press, 1973). I am not going to try to summarize an entire book I read for the first time three and a half years ago, but here's the gist: man is an exceptional being in the way that we think we are different, special and immortal, but we aren't. Follow along in your hymnal here: http://www.ernestbecker.org/ and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Denial_of_Death and here: http://www.amazon.com/Denial-Death-Ernes...0684832402

The taking of something from an "other" as a trophy probably helps accentuate the idea that the trophy-taker is unique, supreme (at least at that moment of encounter), and yet perhaps envious of something the "other" had that he didn't, doesn't or doesn't understand, and hopes he can somehow accrue through the talisman or trophy.

Indeed, why do conquering peoples acquire the trappings of the civilization they just helped destroy?

[Jan Klimkowski]

Scalping:

I watched the movie "Little Big Man" several days ago.Towards the end of the movie,Little Big Man(Dustin Hoffman),who is adopted by the Cheyenne chief,is talking with his "grandfather".The chief pulls out a scalp and says,"Now this guy has to live forever as a bald man." (paraphrasing)

:curtain:

Quality. :rasta:

[Keith Millea]

Ok,I found the real quote.So much better than my recollection.

Jack Crabb is Dustin Hoffman (Little Big Man).

Jack Crabb: Do you hate them? Do you hate the White man now?

Old Lodge Skins: Do you see this fine thing? Do you admire the humanity of it? Because the human beings, my son, they believe everything is alive. Not only man and animals. But also water, earth, stone. And also the things from them... like that hair. The man from whom this hair came, he's bald on the other side, because I now own his scalp! That is the way things are. But the white man, they believe EVERYTHING is dead. Stone, earth, animals. And people! Even their own people! If things keep trying to live, white man will rub them out. That is the difference.

The word the chief uses to name the Cheyenne,is human beings.The name I'm familiar with is "The people".