
02-04-2007, 11:51 AM
|
 |
The Special one
Discussion Leader
|
|
Join Date: Feb 12 2003
Location: Behind your ear
Age: 45
Posts: 7,188
Thanks: 208
Thanked 468 Times in 325 Posts
|
|
|
Why wont the US tell us why this soldier died?
From the Grauniad
Quote:
Why won't the US tell us how Matty died?
Trooper Hull died in a hail of 'friendly fire' from our American allies in Iraq in 2003. Last week an inquest echoed to the fury of a coroner and the grief of a widow, but failed to answer why such a terrible accident happened. Here we reveal how ministers have battled for years to force the US to uncover the truth of this tragedy
Mark Townsend
Sunday February 4, 2007
The Observer
Maybe she was naive to expect the truth. Four years after being killed by an American pilot, Mandy Hull has still to discover why her son was shot by US forces one morning in Iraq. As she left Oxford coroners court shortly before midday last Friday, she wept briefly. Her sense of betrayal had never felt keener.
The British government had, she suspected, misled her. The Pentagon had point-blank refused to even identify the American servicemen who shot her 25-year-old son. Her only son. 'It makes you sick,' she said.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The inquest into the death of Lance Corporal Matthew 'Matty' Hull is more than the tale of a man killed by people who were supposed to be on the same side. His death at the hands of American pilots who ignored British army pleas to stop shooting has led to strained relations between both sets of soldiers and frayed diplomatic ties amid fresh fears of an increasingly lopsided relationship between Britain and its closest ally in the 'war on terror'.
The refusal of American authorities to discipline US servicemen who have killed British troops bolsters a perception among UK soldiers that the Pentagon has little regard for the sacrifices made by the British army in its support of the US-led coalition. But the inquest into Hull's death has also raised questions over the Ministry of Defence's attempts to ensure that soldiers' families are told how and why their sons died. Particularly damaging are claims that MoD officials ignored calls to install a system that could have saved Hull's life and that, despite the frequency of 'friendly-fire' incidents, also known as 'blue on blue', the government still has no central database of the killings.
Most serious, though, are suggestions that the British government misled Hull's wife and family amid claims that it kept secret knowledge of vital evidence into the failures of the US pilots who mistakenly fired upon Hull's convoy.
Hull's widow, Susan, was 'categorically' informed that no recorded footage from the cockpit of the two A-10 aircraft from which the shots killing her husband were fired was available. Then, unexpectedly, the tape arrived at the coroner's court last Thursday. Only then did it emerge that the MoD might have known about the vital evidence for years. It was the moment that relations between the US and UK over the treatment of British soldiers mistakenly killed by US servicemen began to unravel. Senior British defence officials asked the US authorities to declassify the cockpit recordings so its allegedly 'incriminating' footage could be screened at the inquest. The Pentagon refused, a reaction that surprised no one who has monitored its attitude towards Britain's inquest system.
The Observer has learnt that ministers have been demanding that US troops involved in friendly fire incidents attend UK inquests for the past nine months. Each request has been snubbed. Not a single US soldier has so far appeared in court. The Pentagon only sanctions a brief anonymous statement that denies families the opportunity to cross-examine US servicemen.
Weeks before Hull's inquest, the constitutional affairs minister, Harriet Harman, said she did not 'expect an anonymous, short, written statement' in his case. Again, the minister was snubbed. 'My letters haven't proved successful, phone calls haven't proved successful, requests from the coroners haven't,' admitted Harman. 'It's just not fair on the relatives to sit in on an inquest and to know that they can't ask questions. They're entitled to know the truth from our allies.'
Britain maintains it would be glad to send soldiers to an inquest in America, but the fact remains that no UK soldier has killed an American counterpart in Iraq or Afghanistan. What rankles with many within the army is the Pentagon's refusal to even release the identities of US soldiers and pilots involved in friendly-fire deaths to the coroner or the MoD. The pilots involved in Hull's death are understood to have never faced disciplinary action, let alone a court martial. A US Board of Inquiry on 28 March 2003 into the killing of the young lance corporal has never been made public. Sources claim that the cockpit footage, which is waiting to be declassified, records an American accent saying that 'someone's going to jail for this'.
|
This is a good point, we are best of allies right? In fact the UK is mini me to the US especially in Iraq so why wont the US reveal what it knows about the circumstances of this friendly fire incident.
__________________
|