US drone strike that Pentagon said killed Kabul suicide bomber actually ‘killed aid worker and seven children who ran to greet him when he arrived home’

The drone strike that the Pentagon claimed killed an ISIS-K suicide bomber in Kabul actually targeted an aid worker who had filled his car with water jugs, rather than explosives, according to a shocking new report.

Zemari Ahmadi, 43, was driving the 1996 Toyota Corolla that was destroyed in the August 29 drone strike, killing him and nine family members, including seven children, according to a New York Times investigation.

The Pentagon still maintains that only three civilians died, despite the family now detailing in the new report how their 10 relatives were killed in the blast.  

Days after the attack, President Joe Biden gave a speech in which he marked the withdrawal of American troops in Afghanistan by the August 31 deadline. He touted America’s ability to strike terrorists and targets without boots on the ground. But he failed to mention the high civilian casualty rate from the August 29 drone strike, and he failed to mention that children had been killed.  

‘We struck ISIS-K remotely, days after they murdered 13 of our service members and dozen of innocent Afghans. And to ISIS-K, we are not done with you yet,’ he said in his speech.  

According to the Times, killed in the drone strike were Ahmadi and three of his children, Zamir, 20, Faisal, 16, and Farzad, 10; Ahmadi’s cousin Naser, 30; three of Ahmadi’s nephews, Arwin, seven, Benyamin, six, and Hayat, two; and two three-year-old girls, Malika and Somaya. 

The drone strike in Kabul came as US forces were on high alert following an ISIS-K suicide blast on August 26 that killed 13 US troops and scores of Afghans on August 26. 

A separate US drone strike in remote Nangarhar Province on August 27 killed two alleged ISIS-K planners and facilitators, according to the Pentagon, though their identities have not yet been publicly confirmed.

On the morning of August 29, Ahmadi left his family home a few kilometers west of the Kabul airport at around 9am. It was around this time that US officials tell the Times that his car came under surveillance.

An MQ-9 Reaper drone tracked Ahmadi’s Corolla as he went about his day, picking up two passengers and the laptop from the home of N.E.I.’s country director on his way to work.

The Pentagon claims that the vehicle was tracked after leaving a known ISIS-K safehouse, but it is unclear whether this refers to Ahmadi’s home or one of his stops on the way to work.

However, an improvised rocket attack on the Kabul airport was launched from a car near the home of the non-profit director the morning after the drone strike. The Times visited the director, who said he had nothing to do with ISIS and had his own refugee resettlement case pending in the US.

Ahmadi arrived at the N.E.I offices at around 9.35am, security camera footage shows. 

Witnesses say he and his co-workers went to a Taliban-controlled police station that morning to request permission to distribute food to displaced refugees living in a nearby park. 

They returned to the offices at around 2pm, and surveillance footage shows that Ahmadi began filling up water jugs with a hose, which his family say he brought home from the office after water service was cut off in their neighborhood.

‘I filled the containers myself, and helped him load them into the trunk,’ a guard at the office told the Times.

Meanwhile, US officials say that their surveillance drone tracked Ahmadi to a compound eight to 12 kilometers southwest of the airport, where he was observed loading heavy packages into the car.

The location matched the offices of N.E.I., a California-based non-profit that promotes the cultivation of soy crops in Afghanistan. Witnesses say Ahmadi loaded nothing into his car other than the water jugs in the trunk and two laptops in the passenger compartment.

Leaving work, gave his two co-workers rides home. They told the Times that it was a normal commute, except that Ahmadi did not turn on his car radio to listen to pop music as normal, for fear of running afoul of the Taliban.

When Ahmadi arrived home, his children, nieces and nephews ran out of the house to greet him, some of them piling into the car as he backed it in to the gated courtyard, according to witnesses.

US officials say that operator of the Reaper drone quickly scanned and saw only a single adult male greeting the vehicle, and therefore assessed with ‘reasonable certainty’ that no women, children or noncombatants would be killed.

A Hellfire missile struck the Corolla before its engine shut off. 

Ahmadi’s brother Romal was sitting on the ground floor with his wife when a sudden blast blew out the windows. They ran outside to discover a scene of devastation and death.

Six of those who died were inside the car, the others were in the garden of the home in the tightly-packed Khajeh Baghra neighbourhood. 

Samia Ahmadi told the New York Times she was in a room next to the courtyard when she was struck by the impact of the blast and, at first, ‘thought it was the Taliban’.

She staggered outside where she was greeted by the dismembered bodies of her family members. ‘I saw the whole scene,’ she said, weeping over the death of her cousin and fiancé Naser. 

‘America used us to defend itself, and now they’ve destroyed Afghanistan,’ she said. ‘Whoever dropped this bomb on our family, may God punish you.’ 

Pentagon officials, including General Milley, insist that there was a second blast after the missile strike, proving the vehicle carried explosives.

But expert analysis of photos of the scene show no evidence of a second blast. There were no collapsed walls, and the security gate had a single dent, suggesting one shock wave. 

‘It seriously questions the credibility of the intelligence or technology utilized to determine this was a legitimate target,’ Chris Cobb-Smith, a British Army veteran and security consultant, told the Times. 

All the writing, words, images, and graphics used in this blog post belong to their respective owners and this website does not claim any right over them.

Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s