Two United States advisers who were shot dead in Afghanistan’s interior ministry by an Afghan colleague had been mocking anti-US protests over the burning of the Koran, a government source said.
. . . .
Describing the sequence of events that led to the interior ministry shootings, the source said the US advisers were “scolding the protesters and calling them bad names” as they watched videos of protests in Kabul.
“They called the Koran a bad book in the presence of (an Afghan colleague). After all this the guy had verbal arguments with the advisers and was threatened by them. He gets angry and shoots them. Eight rounds were fired at them,” the source added, requesting anonymity.
“He then sneaks out and disappears. No-one knew about the incident for more than an hour because the room is soundproofed,” he said, adding that CCTV cameras had been viewed in the investigation of the shooting.
The source apparently knows what went on in a soundproof room from which shots were not heard. Look at the odd formulation at the end of the story. He “adds” that CCTV cameras had been viewed. But he does not say explicitly, in his earlier description, that what he described was on the CCTV tapes. He leaves the implication.
I will believe it when-if-these tapes are made public.
Another reason to call bull: why was the driver of an officer who was not present in a secured, soundproof room with 2 US officers? It might have made sense-might-if the officer himself were in the room. Or if the officer had left, momentarily-not for an hour. But his driver there alone? And would an O-4 and O-5 with obviously very sensitive jobs, who were detailed to work with Afghans and hence almost certain to be careful of what they said about them, be spouting off in front of a driver, for crissakes, given the circumstances then prevailing in Kabul then?
This story is apparently illustrating Mark Twain’s adage that a lie gets around the world while the truth is getting its boots on.
The fact that some Afghan source would be peddling such a story does not surprise me in the least. It also does not surprise me in the least that he is peddling it primarily through foreign sources. It further does not surprise me that journalists are credulously repeating the story despite the fact that it is farcical on its face. The key to getting a lie believed is that the target wants to believe it.
And I wonder. Who is standing up for the two US officers who cannot defend themselves? Why is the US military seemingly way behind the Afghan agitprop OODA loop here?