Death in RAF Chinook in Iraq

[Airborne Aircrew]

Why the outrage? Prisoners die in custody all the time - in civilian police stations all across our oh so civilized western world. They aren't facing "inhumane torture" they are slapped in the nick high on booze, drugs or just plain out of control angry. I don't see any of the outrage bus riders here going off at that when it happens. Why would that be? Perhaps because you understand the intent of the police officers was not to kill but to simply do their job.

Those with a clue will understand who the II Squadron lads most probably were. They are very professional, highly trained men. They do not apply more force than necessary so they can get their jollies. They try to do their job. If the man's legs fell of because he was struggling, (why would you struggle if you're an innocent cripple?), then what better way to restrain him with minimum force than not give him his legs back????

If the dead man had had an operation recently kindly explain how the Rocks could have known that in the dark and the noise in the back of a Chinook with 64 prisoners to deal with. Even if he was healthy he had clearly made sufficient of a spectacle of himself to be treated more firmly.

As to the MoD and their "stalling"... It's quite possible that, (for once - I'm no great fan of the MoD), they saw this for what it was - an accidental death - and tried to prevent it from becoming what it is now, an over sensationalized news piece for the Media to profit from.

There's many worse things that have occurred from both sides but, right now, they aren't available to sell papers. Time to park the bus and go home. This is a non-story.

[Chugalug2]

tuc's comparison with the response of the MOD and the RAF (including the RAF Police!) to the aftermath of the Mull tragedy is well made. There is currently a thread re the BBC programme "Bomber Boys" in which the morality of the BC Bombing Campaign in WWII was given the default Beeb Moral Equivalence treatment (in this case equating it to the Nazi Death Camps). The lesson I draw from that, and the injustice of Mull, and the alleged conduct of RAF personnel here is that morality is the business of each and ever member of the Armed Forces. BC crew members were, in my view, given legal orders that they obeyed. Many people in the MOD were given illegal orders, both before and after Mull, which they also obeyed. What orders were given to those that are the subject of this thread I do not know, but they were all subject to military law which forbids the giving or execution of illegal orders. Whether you sit behind a desk, risk your life night after night in a WWII Heavy Bomber, or operate a Chinook, that holds true. Easy to say, bloody difficult to do, but do it you must for that is your duty.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

but then again they are all on intercom, and by the report no one appears to have attempted to do anything about it,

Dont suppose they were busy operating an aircraft at night, low level on goggles, in a hostile environment, both pilots flying and both crewman manning weapons whilst looking out for hostile action................................................ nah course not plenty of time for the crew to stop what they were doing and intervene

[Hydraulic Palm Tree]

500N

Thank you for your honesty....... SeldomFFP encapsulates the reality of what might have happened.

HPT

[green granite]

Do bear in mind that this report comes from an extreme left wing paper that champions the 'human rights' of these poor misunderstood terrorists and will twist anything around to embarrass the government, so treat the so called facts with suspicion as they are following their own agenda.

[woptb]

A lot of hyperbole in this thread.Must admit whilst not a fan of the Grauniad I'd never thought of it as an 'extreme left wing newspaper'!
A lot of conjecture,wether we were 'at it' or not is moot. The MOD,I suspect through incompetence - rather than impropriety has given an 'impression' that wrong doing has occurred.
Personally I thought the article reasonably wel informed .
I find it difficult to imagine a member of the RAF apoaching the RAF Police without genuine concerns. We are the ones who wear the white hats,if there has been wrong doing punish the gulity,if not put it to bed with an open.honest investigation.

[Basil]

Small evidential point:

Guardian article said:

The bag had been taped so securely over his head that it needed to be cut off.

not:

One detainee was found to have died because hood was taped too tight around the neck.

[November4]

then what better way to restrain him with minimum force than not give him his legs back????

Wasn't the same thing done to Bader

[SASless]

Legs or no....Bader was unrestrainable!

No Shrinking Violet that Man!

[green granite]

If you analyse the article there is not one attributed quote from the MOD or other government dept. The only one is from an inquiry by Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas Mercer and is not really relevant.
I also find it quite surprising that an 'odd job man' living in the sort of totalitarian regime that ran Iraq would have a passport, and even more surprising that it ended up in the hands of the paper, once again in an unattributable manner. Frankly I've seen more convincing conspiracy theories than this story, and I suspect they may be being used by people who's only aim in life is to attempt to discredit the armed forces for propaganda purposes. I'll leave you to sort out who they might be.

By the way, my 'left wing' comment earlier referred to the papers extreme liberalism, not communism.

[500N]

green granite

Do you class this as an MOD Quote ?

"Asked about these mysterious deaths, the Ministry of Defence named one of the deceased as Tanik Mahmud, and said he had "sustained a fatal injury" while travelling aboard an RAF Chinook. Perplexingly, the ministry added that the cause of his death remained unknown."

and this ?

"Asked how they could be sure he had suffered a fatal injury when the cause of his death was not known, the MoD took five weeks to answer.Eventually, officials admitted that the RAF had received a complaint – anonymously, they said – that "three RAF Regiment personnel on board the helicopter had kicked, punched or otherwise assaulted Mr Mahmud leading to unlawful killing"."

[green granite]

Possibly, but as it's unattributed it could just as easily be fiction.

Today a MOD Spokesman said they desperately needed some MPAs and have decided to buy several Orion Aircraft from America.


Easy enough to write

Newspapers are very good at fishing.

[500N]

Good point and tend to agree.

The only reason I chose those two was because they were in quotation marks.

[Airborne Aircrew]

the ministry added that the cause of his death remained unknown

kicked, punched or otherwise assaulted Mr Mahmud leading to unlawful killing

As an ex-Crewman myself I know that, (assuming as stated the cockpit crew would have been a tad busy to be spectating a punch-up), I was utterly unqualified to determine whether or not an assault I had seen in the darkness of the back of a Chinook had contributed to an "unlawful killing" especially when the cause of death is unknown... Someone is being a little presumptuous.

[dead_pan]

I also find it quite surprising that an 'odd job man' living in the sort of totalitarian regime that ran Iraq would have a passport

Not so much innocent until proven guilty, more guilty until proven dead?

Sounds to me as though you're attempting to twist the story to suit your agenda.

[high spirits]

Look dead pan,
There is a world of difference between a detainee move and a rendition flight. The Guardian is twisting it into the latter. Why? To sensationalise in order to sell papers and to pursue its own anti forces agenda.

Sh!t happens. War (and the ensuing peace) can be a nasty business. I have flown detainees and will sleep with a clear conscience tonight. This is conspiracy guff. If not, the authorities will prosecute based on evidence....not some empty words on a journos page.

[dead_pan]

high spirits - I admire your faith in the MoD's due process. Despite its leanings the Guardian has a decent track record of uncovering stories of genuine public interest when the powers that be were adamant there was none, most recently last year with the hacking allegations. At the very least the story once again suggests serial bungling at the MoD, with which we are all familiar.

an assault I had seen in the darkness of the back of a Chinook had contributed to an "unlawful killing" especially when the cause of death is unknown

Riiight, so if you witnessed an assault and saw two 'unresponsive' detainees being offloaded you wouldn't even question as to their wellbeing or the actions of your colleagues? I'd contend most reasonable people would connect the assault to the detainee's cause of death. Also, I think that anyone would be hard-pressed to argue than the assault was lawful, given the detainees were apparently restrained and hooded.

[500N]

Well it's now hit the Australian media so today should be interesting.

[Mach Two]

I was restrained and hooded and naked, but they still kicked the crap out of me. And that was just "Conduct after Capture" TRAINING. Training for we aircrew (presumably so that if we were captured, we'd recognise the symptoms) AND the interogators/handlers. If that's the training they get, this doesn't surprise me at all.

[dead_pan]

Shurely the training is to simulate what they may do to us, not to show us what we should do to them? Are you suggesting that differentiation wasn't made clear on the course?

Its good to know you are now fully trained to recognise the symptoms of having the crap kicked out of you . Tax payers money well spent