As MGOH gave us a link to the "Colateral Murder Tape" perhaps he can enlighten us on the following aspects of that incident:

1: What were the Reuters Cameraman and his driver doing there? How did they come to be there?

2: Why were they not wearing their issued, and extremely distinctive, kevlar vests, body armour and Helmets that would have immediately identified them as being representatives of the international "PRESS"?

3: Weapons are easily identified as being present and carried by those on the scene and there was no mistaking any camera or camera tripod - both AK-47 and RPG-7 are unmistakably in evidence, they were found at the scene when the ground patrol arrived, still photographs were taken of them in situ - as the helos filmed everything in real time on cameras linked to a signal time generator there could be no possibility of those guns and weapons being "planted" by anyone.

4: Apart from the Reuters employees, the injured children and the man driving the van, can you give me the name of anyone else killed or wounded in the incident? The Iraqi authorities couldn't because none of those killed at the scene was carrying any form of identification. All those people and not a single wallet, ID card, letter or label - any plausible explanation for that rather odd anomaly Kevin?

5: Care to expound upon why neither helicopter saw the van approach? If the assumption that the van driver was simply a "Good Samaritan" passing by? Apache Attack Helicopters and their crews are trained to protect armour and to do that they become extremely proficient at noticing movement, particularly movement of vehicles - none was noticed which lends to the possibility that the van was already parked up immediately ready to whisk away those about to take part in the ambush that was undoubtedly being set as part of an on-going insurgent operation against the MNF/Iraqi ground patrol that had already come under fire.

6: Reuters reviewed all audio, video tapes, all transcripts and all photographs taken of the incident (Including the "Rules of Engagement" in force at the time) within 14 days of it occurring - now if after reviewing all this information could you put forward any possible explanation why, if THEY (an independent internationally renowned news agency) thought their men had been murdered why they kept quiet about it? Between the incident happening and their review they ran (IIRC) two or three articles on it but then after the review - Absolutely NOTHING.