US Marine claims unit killed 30 Iraqi civilians

myopicmouse · #1 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 01:16 AM

Quote:

A former US Marine said his unit killed more than 30 innocent Iraqi civilians in just two days, in graphic testimony to a Canadian tribunal probing an asylum claim by a US Army deserter.

Former Marine Sergeant Jimmy Massey appeared as a witness to bolster claims by fugitive paratrooper Jeremy Hinzman that he walked out on the 82nd Airborne Division to avoid being ordered to commit war crimes in Iraq.

Mr Hinzman, 26, claims he would face persecution if sent home to the United States, in a politically charged case which could set a precedent for at least two other US deserters seeking asylum in Canada.

Mr Massey told Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) that men under his command in the 3rd battalion, 7th Marines, killed "30 plus" civilians within 48 hours while on checkpoint duty in Baghdad.

"I do know that we killed innocent civilians," Mr Massey told the tribunal, relating the chaotic days after the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Mr Massey said that in some incidents, Iraqi civilians were killed by between 200 and 500 rounds pumped into four separate cars which each failed to respond to a single warning shot and respond to hand signals at a Baghdad checkpoint.

At the time, US soldiers feared suicide bombers would try to ram checkpoints, he said.

Searches found no weapons in the vehicles or evidence that those killed were anything but innocent civilians, he said.

He also said Marines killed four unarmed demonstrators, and more Iraqis the next day during another spell of checkpoint duty in the occupied Iraqi capital.

"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Mr Massey.

"When you don't know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?" asked the former Marine, later honourably discharged from the service with severe depression and post traumatic stress disorder.

Mr Hinzman earlier argued in the tribunal, which started on Monday and was due to end Wednesday, that he gradually realised after joining the Army in 2001 that he could not bring himself to kill another person.

"I was faced with being deployed to Iraq to do what the infantry does, kill people, and I had no justification for doing so," said Mr Hinzman.

Mr Hinzman and his wife and two-year-old son arrived in Canada early this year, after deserting from his unit, an action which carries a maximum five-year term in jail.

The South Dakota-born soldier is claiming refugee status based on his contention that he was right to refuse to fight in a war which he says was illegal and violated human rights and the Geneva Conventions.

He also claims he would face persecution if returned home to face desertion charges.

Mr Hinzman first requested conscientious objector status in 2002 before learning he was to be posted to Afghanistan, where he eventually made 18 combat parachute jumps.

The following year, the request was rejected, and late in 2003 he learned he was to be deployed to Iraq, prompting his flight to Canada.

Odds against him winning the case are slim, as no such verdict has ever been handed to a US soldier here or to a combatant in a non-conscription army.

The IRB was set up to consider the merits of refugee claims at arms length from the Canadian Government.

Presiding member Brian Goodman signalled on Tuesday he would ask for written submissions from Mr Hinzman's counsel, a government lawyer and a refugee officer, thereby ruling out a judgement on the case on Wednesday.

Mr Goodman will decide whether Hinzman would face persecution if sent back to the United States by dint of political or religious beliefs or his status as an objector to US military action.

The judgement will also question whether Mr Hinzman will face "cruel and unusual" punishment, during what would likely be a long prison term.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1260377.htm

The12thMan · #2 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myopicmouse";p=&quot

Mr Massey told Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) that men under his command in the 3rd battalion, 7th Marines, killed "30 plus" civilians within 48 hours while on checkpoint duty in Baghdad.
"I do know that we killed innocent civilians," Mr Massey told the tribunal, relating the chaotic days after the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

He certainly belongs in jail.

Quote:

"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Mr Massey.

A moron.

Quote:

"When you don't know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?" asked the former Marine, later honourably discharged from the service with severe depression and post traumatic stress disorder.

complicated by severe stupidity.

Quote:

Mr Hinzman earlier argued in the tribunal, which started on Monday and was due to end Wednesday, that he gradually realised after joining the Army in 2001 that he could not bring himself to kill another person.

"I was faced with being deployed to Iraq to do what the infantry does, kill people, and I had no justification for doing so," said Mr Hinzman.

Another moron. Didn't he think about it before he joined up?

Quote:

He also claims he would face persecution if returned home to face desertion charges.

I certainly hope so.

Quote:

Mr Hinzman first requested conscientious objector status in 2002 before learning he was to be posted to Afghanistan, where he eventually made 18 combat parachute jumps.

Good luck with that in an all volunteer service.

Quote:

The following year, the request was rejected, and late in 2003 he learned he was to be deployed to Iraq, prompting his flight to Canada.

I'm shocked... just shocked.

Quote:

Odds against him winning the case are slim, as no such verdict has ever been handed to a US soldier here or to a combatant in a non-conscription army.

DUH.

f100supersabr · #3 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 05:31 PM

Mycrobicmouse wrote

Quote:

Former Marine Sergeant Jimmy Massey appeared as a witness to bolster claims by fugitive paratrooper Jeremy Hinzman that he walked out on the 82nd Airborne Division to avoid being ordered to commit war crimes in Iraq.

There is no way that any commander in any US military unit would order anyone "to commit war crimes in Iraq." There is just too much media attention with any unit that even if there was a crazy commander out there he would not dare an try to give such a stupid order.

To disseminate such utter garbage is unconscionable.

Nathan · #4 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 07:41 PM

greatly blurred. In fact, i'd say they overlap quite a bit. To deny this is to deny the realities of war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The12thMan";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by myopicmouse";p=&quot

Mr Massey told Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) that men under his command in the 3rd battalion, 7th Marines, killed "30 plus" civilians within 48 hours while on checkpoint duty in Baghdad.
"I do know that we killed innocent civilians," Mr Massey told the tribunal, relating the chaotic days after the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

He certainly belongs in jail.

He does? really? Killing people who don't slow down at checkpoints, after you run out of other options, is standard operating procedures.

Quote:

"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Mr Massey.

A moron.

You call him a moron. Ok, Mr. Genius: If a car is headed towards your checkpoint, how do you tell if it is a car bomber or simply a (slightly stupid ) civlian who wasn't paying attention? Its simple, you don't. You shoot, or there's a chance you'll get blown up. The alternative is death.

Soldiers very rarely set out to commit "atrocities". Most of the "attrocities" they commit are forced upon them by the situation they are in. They are fighting an enemy with no uniforms, which uses stealth and deceit and disguise to carry out their actions, they look like and drive the same cars as everyone else. Yet you call them stupid if they can't tell difference.

Still, the most blatant civilian deaths commited in iraq don't come from infantry, they come from air bombings. The military regularly bombs buildings when it isn't quite sure whats there. A study of civilian deaths in iraq, involving a poll of iraqis, found that most of the deaths came from air bombings.

Quote:

Mr Hinzman earlier argued in the tribunal, which started on Monday and was due to end Wednesday, that he gradually realised after joining the Army in 2001 that he could not bring himself to kill another person.

"I was faced with being deployed to Iraq to do what the infantry does, kill people, and I had no justification for doing so," said Mr Hinzman.

Another moron. Didn't he think about it before he joined up?

This time i agree with you... he really has no case as he wasn't drafted.

Quote:

There is no way that any commander in any US military unit would order anyone "to commit war crimes in Iraq." There is just too much media attention with any unit that even if there was a crazy commander out there he would not dare an try to give such a stupid order.

To disseminate such utter garbage is unconscionable.

your view is simplistic, and wrong.

You are correct in that a commander would order anyone specifically "to commit war crimes"

They do, however, regularly order people to bomb targets when they don't know whats there, to shoot people who don't stop fast enough at checkpoints, and to search and secure every single building in a populated city. They also order soldiers armed with deadly weapons to stand guard over very angry often agressive protestors. And just because a commander doesn't order it doesn't mean it won't happen, as rumsfeld pointed out, there are a few "bad apples." There is also a very large chain of command, and its certainly possible that a lower level officer with a few soldiers reporting under him could be one of those bad apples.

All of these inevitably lead to civilian casualties, despite the will of the leadership, and despite the will of the vast majority of the army. It is the realitity of a guerilla war.

Now would you concider mistaken civlilian deaths war crimes? Would you consider attacking uncertain targets out of self-preservation, leading to the deaths of innocent civilians war crimes? You probably wouldn't, in most cases i wouldn't either. Apparently this deserter does, however, equate mistaken civilian deaths with atrocities based on him calling the checkpoint guard as a witness. ( i'm assuming that this deserter isn't the kind of guy who would go crazy and kill civilians on his own, or participate in the unlikely event that his platoon starts shooting at unarmed demonstrators. )

...

Anyway, as has been mentioned earlier he really has no case...

The12thMan · #5 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by The12thMan";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by myopicmouse";p=&quot

Mr Massey told Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) that men under his command in the 3rd battalion, 7th Marines, killed "30 plus" civilians within 48 hours while on checkpoint duty in Baghdad.
"I do know that we killed innocent civilians," Mr Massey told the tribunal, relating the chaotic days after the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

He certainly belongs in jail.

He does? really? Killing people who don't slow down at checkpoints, after you run out of other options, is standard operating procedures.

He also said they killed four unarmed demonstrators. I don't consider someone racing toward a checkpoint to be 'innocents.' He does. He says men under his command committed crimes - if that is true, he is responsible.

Quote:

"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Mr Massey.

A moron.

You call him a moron. Ok, Mr. Genius: If a car is headed towards your checkpoint, how do you tell if it is a car bomber or simply a (slightly stupid ) civlian who wasn't paying attention? Its simple, you don't. You shoot, or there's a chance you'll get blown up. The alternative is death.

I'm Mrs. Genius, if you please. He's the one who doesn't know who the enemy is. You put his statement in the context of speeding cars. He didn't.

Quote:

Soldiers very rarely set out to commit "atrocities". Most of the "attrocities" they commit are forced upon them by the situation they are in. They are fighting an enemy with no uniforms, which uses stealth and deceit and disguise to carry out their actions, they look like and drive the same cars as everyone else. Yet you call them stupid if they can't tell difference.

You obviously read the man's quote with a different context than me.

Quote:

You are correct in that a commander would order anyone specifically "to commit war crimes"

Now would you concider mistaken civlilian deaths war crimes?

I believe the comment was in response to...

Quote:

The South Dakota-born soldier is claiming refugee status based on his contention that he was right to refuse to fight in a war which he says was illegal and violated human rights and the Geneva Conventions.

You seem to have taken a lot of what I said and turned it 180 degrees. I doubt if many people on the board (who are more familiar with me) would make that mistake.

BtD · #6 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The12thMan";p=&quot

He also said they killed four unarmed demonstrators. I don't consider someone racing toward a checkpoint to be 'innocents.' He does. He says men under his command committed crimes - if that is true, he is responsible.

I read an Iraqian blogger some day, who wrote about this. The problem is, that there are several civilians, who really don't know how to behave with the American checkpoints. Most people from the city do know, but people from the country-side have had problems. They have simply not been informed with this.

Offenly the Iraqians seem to avoid Americans, who are more or less unpredictable and very lethal.

I can see it very stressful to be forced to fire innocent civilians for simple communicational reasons. The only people who can be totally neutral about this must be sosiopaths.

Quote:

I'm Mrs. Genius, if you please. He's the one who doesn't know who the enemy is. You put his statement in the context of speeding cars. He didn't.

And, in which context the claim can possible be? It is well known, that the Iraqian rebels use guerilla tactics. The only enemies there are exist are the ones, who are very difficult to spot.

- BtD

The12thMan · #7 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BtD";p=&quot

And, in which context the claim can possible be? It is well known, that the Iraqian rebels use guerilla tactics. The only enemies there are exist are the ones, who are very difficult to spot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by myopicmouse";p=&quot

"I was never clear on who was the enemy and who was not," said Mr Massey.

There is no context. The quote stands alone. Unless, you put it with the following sentence.

Quote:

"When you don't know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?" asked the former Marine, later honourably discharged from the service with severe depression and post traumatic stress disorder.

Do you know any soldiers? Ask them who the enemy is. They know.

Collateral damage and accidents do happen, but that's not why Massey is in Canada. He's in Canada to testify on behalf of a man who is "claiming refugee status based on his contention that he was right to refuse to fight in a war which he says was illegal and violated human rights and the Geneva Conventions." If, as he says, men under his command killed "30 plus" civilians, it was either accidental or he should be prosecuted. By virtue of the fact that he went to Canada to testify, I would assume that he feels as if he broke the law.

Sickntiredofliblies · #8 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 10:49 PM

Quote:

He also said Marines killed four unarmed demonstrators, and more Iraqis the next day during another spell of checkpoint duty in the occupied Iraqi capital.

Quote:

"I was faced with being deployed to Iraq to do what the infantry does, kill people, and I had no justification for doing so," said Mr Hinzman.

Quote:

Mr Hinzman and his wife and two-year-old son arrived in Canada early this year, after deserting from his unit, an action which carries a maximum five-year term in jail.

Quote:

The South Dakota-born soldier is claiming refugee status based on his contention that he was right to refuse to fight in a war which he says was illegal and violated human rights and the Geneva Conventions.

Quote:

Mr Hinzman first requested conscientious objector status in 2002

It is obvious that he is an unworthy commander. All of these statements above prove that he should be jailed.

It is understandable to open fire on cars that ignore the checkpoints and their signals to stop.

The12thMan · #9 (**permalink**) 03-07-2005, 10:54 PM

This parallels with John Kerry's statement that he personally committed atrocities. He was either lying or he should be prosecuted. Take your pick.

And if this guy Hinzman is not a deserter, who is? Conscientious objector, my ass. COWARD.

MUNKO1970 · #10 (**permalink**) 03-08-2005, 04:38 AM

..Say what you want about this man..But is there a slight possibility, remote ..that maybe..just maybe he is telling the truth?

Civilian deaths happen in war. I don't believe the US Army purposely targets civilians and I for one would probably shoot a car that refuses to stop at a checkpoint.

But the fact that this man is a deserter does not mean he is not telling the truth. Lets simply consider that.!!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode