US re-examines Afghan civilian deaths.....

Unfortunately we can't simply bomb and destroy villages in sovereign nations like Afghanistan by killing innocent civilians - including children - regardless of how much we want to 'get Bin Laden'. When we kill innocents, we are just as bad as the enemy... and saying that they hide behind the civilians and often look just like them is no excuse - that is our problem - not theirs!

If we can't work more closely with the Afghanstan government to prevent such tragedies, perhaps we should simply pull out of there too and with international surveillance keep the various terrorists at bay as a police action rather than massive military search and destroy tactics.

I hope our new president, whomever he may be, has the sense to figure this out - we don't need any more enemies!

US re-examines Afghan civilian deaths from attack
By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer

KABUL, Afghanistan - The U.S. military said Sunday it has new evidence about civilian casualties from an American attack that Afghanistan says killed scores of women and children and it is sending a senior officer to the country to review its initial finding that no more than seven civilians died.

The military did not say what new information had emerged. But Afghan and Western officials say Afghanistan's intelligence agency and the U.N. both have video of the aftermath of the Aug. 22 airstrikes on Azizabad village showing dozens of dead women and children.

"In light of emerging evidence pertaining to civilian casualties in the August 22 counter-insurgency operation in the Shindand District, Herat province, I feel it is prudent to request that U.S. Central Command send a general officer to review the U.S. investigation and its findings with respect to this new evidence," Gen. David McKiernan — the senior U.S. officer in Afghanistan and the commander of the 40-nation NATO-led mission — said in a statement.

"The people of Afghanistan have our commitment to get to the truth," he added.

The attack has further strained relations between Afghanistan's U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai and the foreign forces operating against the Taliban and al-Qaida in the country.

An Afghan government commission has said 90 civilians, including 60 children and 15 women, died in the bombings, a finding that the U.N. backed in its own initial report.

But an initial U.S. investigation released Tuesday said only up to seven civilians and 35 militants were killed in the operation in the western province of Herat.

A U.N. official who has seen one video of Azizabad told The Associated Press it shows maimed children. The official became highly emotional describing rows of bodies.

A second Western official has said one video shows bodies of "tens of children" lined up and he called the video "gruesome." The two officials spoke on condition they not be identified because the videos had not been publicly released.

Although the U.S. said Tuesday its investigation of the attack was complete, the military at that time appeared to leave open the possibility that photographs or video from the scene could emerge. American officials said privately last week that they were aware photographic evidence apparently existed, but that they did not have access to it.

"No other evidence that may have been collected by other organizations was provided to the U.S. investigating officer and therefore could not be considered in the findings," the initial U.S. report said.

On Saturday, a statement attributed to McKiernan on Azizabad said: "We realize there is a large discrepancy between the number of civilians casualties reported" and McKiernan would continue to "try to account for this disparity."

The New York Times reported on its Web site Sunday that one of its reporters had seen cell phone video in Azizabad of at least 11 dead children among some 30 to 40 bodies laid out in the village mosque. The Times also said Azizabad had 42 freshly dug graves, including 13 so small they could hold only children.

Karzai has for years warned the U.S. and NATO that it must stop killing civilians in its bombing runs, saying such deaths undermine his government and the international mission. But the Azizabad incident could finally push Karzai to take action.

Shortly after the Azizabad attack, he ordered a review of whether the U.S. and NATO should be allowed to use airstrikes or carry out raids in villages. He also called for an updated "status of force" agreement between the Afghan government and foreign militaries. That review has not yet been completed.

Nek Mohammad Ishaq, a provincial council member in Herat and a member of the Afghan investigating commission, has said photographs and video taken of the victims are with Afghanistan's secretive intelligence service.

Ahmad Nader Nadery, spokesman for Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission, has said a villager named Reza, whose compound bore the brunt of the attack, had a private security company that worked for the U.S. military at nearby Shindand airport.

Villagers and officials have said the operation was based on faulty information provided by a rival of Reza. Aziz Ahmad Nadem, a member of parliament from Herat, has told the AP that the rival is now being protected by the U.S. military.

Afghan officials say U.S. special forces and Afghan commandos raided the village while hundreds of people were gathered in a large compound for a memorial service honoring a tribal leader, Timor Shah, who was killed eight months ago by a rival, Nader Tawakal. Reza, who was killed in the Aug. 22 operation, is Shah's brother.

The U.S. investigative report released Tuesday said American and Afghan forces took fire from militants while approaching Azizabad and that "justified use of well-aimed small-arms fire and close air support to defend the combined force."

The report said investigators discovered evidence that the militants planned to attack a nearby coalition base. Evidence collected included weapons, explosives, intelligence materials and an access badge to the base, as well as photographs from inside and outside the base.

Associated Press reporter Fisnik Abrashi contributed to this report.

GOVERNMENT PLAN FOR FANNIE, FREDDIE or The Other Shoe Droppeth On Its 'Heels' ! However, note that both presidential candidates agree with the government's position - after all, it is an election year! Also, note that the reason for the government's action is that foreign investment has sold their stocks in the mortgage giants and those stocks have dropped about 90%. Somebody's lost a lot of money - mostly poor dumb working shmuck's 401k's, I'll bet! (all of the smart money bailed a long time ago - gives you a good reason for not wanting Social Security to be privatized - it wouldn't be funded by smart money any more than 401k's are.) After all, it has become increasingly true that Americans don't actually own America - the rest of the world does. So we had better keep on showing a profit or we'll be dumped - it is very easy to sell stock - and we don't even have any industry left! I heard someone during the Republican convention remark that we shouldn't be trying to get along with the rest of the world because our own principles are more important! I wondered at the time what American principles she was talking about. The epic decision highlights the size of the threats facing the housing market and the economy. On Friday, Nevada regulators shut down Silver State Bank, the 11th failure this year of a federally insured bank. And earlier this year, the government orchestrated the takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns by JP Morgan Chase. "Any government action must help to strengthen our economy, which is suffering a crisis brought on by the administration's failure to stop predatory lending," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who chairs the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. "Any intervention also must minimize the cost to American taxpayers, and should not put other financial institutions at risk." GOVERNMENT PLAN FOR FANNIE, FREDDIE TO HIT SHAREHOLDERS By John Poirier and Patrick Rucker The U.S. government plans to take over Fannie Mae (FNM.N) and Freddie Mac (FRE.N) and all shareholders of the two mortgage giants will take a hit, an influential lawmaker said on Saturday. The move to take control of the two companies, expected to be announced on Sunday, could amount to the largest financial bailout in the nation's history, and is a bid to ward off further damage to a housing market in its deepest downturn since the Great Depression. "I think all shareholders will be disadvantaged," Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, told Reuters. "The government will act as the new management," implying the chief executives would be ousted, according to Frank, who spoke to U.S. Treasury Secretary Paulson on Friday about the plan to put the companies into federal conservatorship to protect the interest of all parties. An industry source said the two government-sponsored enterprises were sent a letter by their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, detailing shortcomings at the companies and explaining why the federal government was taking control. The source said the letter suggested the companies, which own or guarantee almost half of the country's $12 trillion in outstanding home mortgage debt, should agree to the arrangement in order to avoid the more onerous step of being placed in a receivership in the interests of debtholders. In a separate interview with The Washington Post, Frank said the government was expected to control the companies for at least a year as it considers whether they should remain government-run, or be restructured. Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and the director of the companies' regulator, James Lockhart, met with the chief executives of the two companies on Friday to detail the plan. Other sources said the boards of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were briefed in meetings or conference calls on Saturday. Fannie Mae argued it was in a stronger capital position than Freddie Mac and had fulfilled a promise to raise funds, but there was no sign that argument gained traction. The U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve and Freddie Mac declined to comment. Fannie Mae did not return calls seeking comment. The planned intervention reflects concerns among U.S. officials that financial markets had begun to lose confidence in the companies, after they suffered combined losses of nearly $14 billion in the last four quarters. The stocks of the two companies have fallen more than 90 percent in the past year and in recent months foreign investors have pared their holdings of the companies' securities. In an emergency move in July, the U.S. Congress gave the Treasury the authority to extend an undetermined amount of credit to the companies or take a stake in them if they ran into trouble. ECHOES ON CAMPAIGN TRAIL Paulson discussed the plan with Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama on Friday and Republican candidate Sen. John McCain on Saturday. "I think it has to be done," McCain said in an interview with the CBS program "Face the Nation" to air on Sunday. "There's got to be restructuring, there's got to be reorganization, and there's got to be some confidence that we've stopped this downward spiral." Obama also agreed action was needed. "Intervention was necessary," he said in an interview on the ABC program "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" that will also air on Sunday. But at a campaign stop in Terre Haute, Indiana, he said he was withholding final judgment until he could see details. "We have to protect taxpayers and not bail out the shareholders and management," Obama said. McCain also said it should not be a "bailout of Wall Street speculators and irresponsible executives." FINANCIAL MARKETS SAW IT COMING Financial markets have come to expect that an investment by the U.S. Treasury would explicitly back the companies' $1.6 trillion in debt, but leave their shares nearly valueless. The Washington Post reported on Saturday that the value of the company's common stock would be diluted but not wiped out, while the holdings of other securities, including company debt and preferred shares, would be protected by the government. Separately, The New York Times said the executives and their boards would be replaced and shareholder value diluted, but the companies would be able to continue functioning with the government generally standing behind their debt. Analysts at Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, and Goldman Sachs have issued reports since mid-August saying the companies had plenty of capital to operate for the near term, and both have successfully rolled over debt in the meantime. However, since August22, all the major credit rating agencies have cut their ratings on the companies' preferred stock on expectations that the share price declines had cut access to capital, increasing the need for emergency financial support. While the companies never lost their access to capital markets, the biggest buyers of their debt had grown more cautious. Foreign central banks reduced their holdings of "federal agency" debt in custody at the Federal Reserve in the past week for the seventh week in a row. With foreign demand now in question, "it sounds like they said, 'Why wait until there's a total panic? Let's go ahead and forestall it somewhat.' But there's still so much uncertainty of how investors will be treated," said James McGlynn, portfolio manager at Summit Investment Partners in Southlake, Texas. (Additional reporting by Deborah Charles in Terre Haute, Indiana, Jeff Mason in Colorado Springs, Al Yoon in New York and Mark Felsenthal, David Lawder and Glenn Somerville in Washington; Writing by Tim Ahmann; Editing by Peter Cooney)