Most of the analysis of the vidseo in that last post is correct, except for the bit about the rpg being aimed round the corner.

The device going round the corner is a camera.

But this serves as evidence (as i have agreed earlier) that there were armed men in the group.

The problem I have consistently expressed is that of the Van.

Analysis of the video shows that the helicopters circled the area repeatedly.

In the surrounding streets we can see numerous vehicles parked, no dark coloured Van though, so that weakens that assertion.

So what do we see?

We see lenty of footage of a guy who can't stand up he has been so badly mutilated by the initial attack.

We see unarmed men in civilian clothes trying to help him into a van and showing NO interest in weapons.

After that its "ha ha" all the way.

You might see a job being done within the context of a war that makes it alright, I just saw a load of people being murdered and the murderers laughing about it.

I see Iraqi civilians, in Iraq, being killed by an occupying foreign force that had no right nor mandate to be there.

Rules of engagement?

I preferred when you were using mild insults like "fool", "twat" and "fucking idiot" or whatever your exact words were.

I can't be bothered to check exactly, because none of that comes even close to how insulting it is to humanity to say that what happened there was anything less than coldblooded murder.