>.....
>Jeg har ikke sett nyheter om noen som har trukket flygerens vitnemål i tvil
>(jeg er sjølsagt interessert hvis noen har slike opplysninger). De tidlige
>vestlige spekulasjonene var sjølsagt slike som unnskyldte NATO. Men flere
>parallelle og innbyrdes avvikende spkeulasjoner blei lufta fra vestlig og
>NATO-hold, og dette rimer dårlig med konspirative teorier om at NATO
>forsøkte seg med EN utspekulert dekkoperasjon. Mitt inntrykk var at
>forvirringa var stor.
Nå ser det ut til at det fortsatt er NATO-sprik i denne saka:
Fra <http://www.independent.co.uk/>, 18.april:
>Nato splits over raid on Kosovo refugee convoy
>
> AFTER four weeks of public unity, simmering
> dissent between Nato allies broke into the open
> yesterday as the Pentagon contradicted alliance
> leaders in Brussels. The split came over the handling
> of the alleged Nato air strike on a refugee convoy on
> Wednesday, in which 74 Albanian Kosovars were
> killed.
>
> By MARY DEJEVSKY in Washington, and JOHN
> DAVISON in London
>
> A Pentagon spokesman said yesterday that the US
> F-16 pilot, whose taped account of his attack on a
> military convoy had been played to reporters in
> Brussels, had nothing to do with the bombing of the
> refugees.
>
> There were two incidents, Captain Steve Pietropaoli
> said, and the one recounted by the unidentified pilot
> was "quite separate". It had taken place north, not
> south, of the Djakovica-Prizren road in Kosovo, and
> had targeted (and hit) only military vehicles.
>
> Questioned on Friday about the discrepancy, the
> Nato official who played the tape, General Giuseppe
> Marani, suggested first that the lead vehicle in the
> convoy - identified by the pilot as a military truck -
> could have contained civilians, and then that it could
> have been a tractor.
>
> Asked yesterday whether Gen Marani had been
> "not accurate with the facts", Capt Pietropaoli
> withheld comment. He did not dispute, however,
> that a Nato plane probably did hit a refugee
> convoy, saying carefully: "I believe that is what
> Nato believes to be the case."
>
> The Pentagon's comments appeared to reflect pilot's,
> and his squadron's, unhappiness about being
> associated with a fatal mis-strike. "For his peace of
> mind . you don't want to have that sort of thing
> hanging there. It is terribly important to those pilots
> to clear up the issue," Capt Pietropaoli said.
>
> Asked about the debris bearing serial numbers
> collected at the scene by the Independent's
> correspondent, Robert Fisk, and whether Nato could
> match a particular piece of ordnance to a specific
> mission, Gen Marani said: "We can narrow it down
> at least to which batch. But as to the relevancy of
> knowing which batch, debris can be carried
> around."
>
> Last night, Nato repeated that it could not comment
> further while it was investigating the incident. But a
> spokesman did confirm that the tape had been
> received and broadcast by Nato on the
> understanding that it was of a pilot who had bombed
> a civilian target.
>
> "The problem appears to be confusion between more
> than one incident," he said. "It was worsened by a
> tape that was played that seems now to have not had
> anything to do with the errant strike." As to how that
> could have happened, the spokesman said: "I
> couldn't tell you where the error entered into the
> chain of events."
Trond Andresen