"Canadian diplomat says soldiers fired on her SUV without warning;

[iverglas]

... U.S. military disagrees"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060202.wxshooting02/BNStory/National/
(free, no registration required)

This article contains the verbatim description of events given by a Canadian govt employee who was in the car fired on by the US military in the Green Zone in Bagdad. It is very different from the account given by the US military, and dispels various speculation offered in yesterday's thread on the topic. (Emphasis added below)

The Cdn vehicle was NOT speeding or attempting to overtake the US convoy -- if one believes the account given by all of the Canadians present.

After leaving the British embassy, where Canada's diplomats are housed while its new embassy is constructed, "we yielded to an oncoming convoy of five Humvees with gunners on the top," she said.

... "About three to five minutes into the journey, they <the Humvees> turned to enter a forward operating base. So they turned left into a special lane for the forward operating base. ... Like we do every day, we stay at 20 to 25 kilometres an hour and we continue on ... and then all of a sudden we heard what we initially deemed an explosion."

Cdn TV newscasts provided diagrams showing these movements (see the CBC video link below) -- the US convoy PULLED OFF THE ROAD into a "checkpoint". The Cdn car continued along the road.

Apparently the US military regards this as "overtaking" and expects all traffic to stop when its vehicles pull off the road -- or signals traffic to stop.

"From what I know, if the hand signals had been seen -- and I'm not saying the Americans didn't give them -- they would have been followed," said a Canadian embassy spokeswoman in Jordan.

"The Canadian ambassador's vehicle sustained damage from U.S. military gunfire yesterday afternoon in Baghdad, when it attempted to pass a U.S. military convoy after ignoring signals to stop," is the official version of events released by U.S. military in the Iraqi capital. "The U.S. convoy vehicle defended itself by firing a three-round rifle burst."

The shots were initially described by the US military as "warning shots". The first shot is described by a Canadian in the car as hitting the hood, going through the windshield -- which the Globe reports had "a Maple Leaf flag plastered to" it, and barely missing a passenger.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/02/01/diplomats060201.html
-- link to video of news report at bottom of page, "U.S. fired on Canadian diplomats without warning, envoy says". See Donald Rumsfeld saying ""I wasn't there. I, obviously, don't know" ... "It's being investigated, and we'll see." Either CTV
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060201/canada_iraq_060201/20060201?hub=TopStories
(video not available on line) or CBC used a word like "dismissive" to describe his demeanour.

Apparently a member of the US military on the scene apologized immediately; no doubt he'll be reprimanded, as we Canadians once again wait ("friendly fire" aerial bombing of Canadians in Afghanistan, anyone?) for anyone who actually matters to apologize.

Al Jazeera's got the story:
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10521
(found through Google News)

Stars & Stripes sure doesn't have much to say today:
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=34750

So, has anything been said in the US media? There's a distinct dearth:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&ncl=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060202.wxshooting02/BNStory/National/
except for the Houston Chronicle repeating the US military's talking points yesterday ...

How to win friends and influence people ...

[Tyler Durden]

1. Switch from "Maple" to "Yukon Jack" on your pancakes...

...I do. It makes me feel better.

[semillama]

2. not surprising

considering there were what, over 10,000 IED detonated in Iraq last year? who wouldn't be jumpy? Expect to see more of the same. I think people are just going to have to assume that it's going to be really dangerous to be close to any American soldiers in Iraq, regardless of your own nationality.

[Bassic]

3. The problem is that they can hardly be avoided

so more canadians may yet be shot at.

[Spazito]

4. What is reprehensible, imo, is the US military lying about the facts

of the 'incident' instead of simply apologizing and working to ensure it doesn't happen again.

[iverglas]

6. excuse me?

Sorry, no, this is not an appropriate response.

It really just is not appropriate to say oh well, "people are just going to have to assume that it's going to be really dangerous to be close to any USAmerican soldiers". And so what if they do? Will this assumption keep them from getting killed?

What's appropriate for a USAmerican to say is this was our military that did this, and we want to know what happened, and why it happened. And if your military acted improperly, to say we want to know what is being done about it.

Boilerplate blah blah about bad shit happening isn't what is needed.

"Who wouldn't be jumpy?" Who the fuck cares? "Jumpy" is NOT an appropriate response to a situation when it results in the death of innocent people. It didn't in this case, apparently through sheer luck, but it sure does in all those cases outside the Green Zone with victims who don't happen to be diplomats and don't get quoted in the international media.

Don't want to get blown up in Iraq? Don't go to Iraq. Go to Iraq? Accept the dangers, and behave in a way that doesn't violate international law.

Shooting at civilian vehicles that have presented no threat -- let alone a vehicle that has been following you for some time and that you can hardly have helped noticing has the internationally and immediately recognizable symbol for CANADA plastered on its windshield -- is a violation of international law. Period.


edited to insert missing word

[saigon68]

11. Suck it up Lady "FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH"

That's how democracy works. You take a hick from the back woods

teach him to hate Brown Guys and let him shoot anything that moves.

[cantstandbush]

5. Anybody traveling in Iraq should have camera mounted in their

vehicles so as to be able to refute US military when necessary.

[hopeisaplace]

7. Or a CD Player blasting "Oh Canada"

[daleo]

12. That might just become a target

"Make sure to take out the camera if you decide to fire."

[EuroObserver]

8. Sue them for everything they've got. n/t

[Kagemusha]

9. Poor diplomat doesn't realize the 3-shot burst WAS the warning.

She's lucky to be alive. If the rest of the convoy had opened fire once the first man had, well, there'd be a big state funeral for her just like that Italian secret service guy...

[tabasco]

10. Morale and discipline have broken down in the military.

It might as well be a free-fire zone anywhere in Iraq.

Bush,Rumsfeld, and their ass-kissing generals have done major damage to the military that will take a long time to fix.

[Canuckistanian]

13. My goodness, how familiar

Someone said we should ship a truckload of glasses for the US troops. I say we just pull out unilaterally.