 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters
|
|
|
Subject: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Lox Date: 06 Apr 10 - 10:51 AM This video makes me so proud. Lets tie a yellow ribbon round the old oak tree and pray for our brave boys safe return. Brave Boys ... Teribus is right really - its a hard job but somebody has to be there to do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Lox Date: 06 Apr 10 - 10:58 AM The best bit is when the Van with children in it comes to help an unarmed survivor and bring him to hospital. Makes me wanna holler ... The military and the monetary ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Apr 10 - 12:50 PM It's always "a hard job" trying to conquer the world. No one has yet succeeded. Not Caesar, not Tamerlane, not Hitler, not Napoleon, not Stalin, not the British, not the Spanish, not Tojo, not the USA either. But think of the money made for an elite few while the effort goes ahead. |
|
Subject: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Charley Noble Date: 06 Apr 10 - 08:33 PM Here's a video that I don't have the stomach to watch but documents how things can go very wrong when we're occupying a country and fighting off an insurrection: click here for report Here's the summary: The Web site WikiLeaks.org released a graphic video on Monday showing an American helicopter shooting and killing a Reuters photographer and driver in a July 2007 attack in Baghdad. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Riginslinger Date: 06 Apr 10 - 09:22 PM Gives new meaning to the concept of shooting the messenger, what? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: ichMael Date: 06 Apr 10 - 09:24 PM http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=wikileaks+baghdad&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= Been posted several places on youtube. Grab it while you can. They'll yank this one. The videos also show them shooting up a van with kids in it and then joking about how you shouldn't bring kids to a war zone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 Apr 10 - 11:25 PM What a drag! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: GUEST,rvana Date: 07 Apr 10 - 01:26 AM 38 mins is too long to watch on flaky internet connection, so please how do you download it ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Leadfingers Date: 07 Apr 10 - 05:33 AM In discussion (MudChat) some time ago , it transpired that US News Media had not said anything about "Friendly Fire incidents ! As far as I recall , American forces killed three times as many British soldiers as the Iraqis did in the First Iraq war |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Stu Date: 07 Apr 10 - 06:09 AM Ah - a mudelf removes a post. Censorship in the face of slaughter - wonderful.
-Joe Offer, Forum Moderator- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: GUEST,Neil D Date: 07 Apr 10 - 08:42 AM The 39 minute video is actually almost 1 hour, if it's the same one I watched on Youtube last night. The timer pauses at 39:11 but the video keeps playing for 20 minutes. That same helicopter flies to another location after killing the people in the street and launches 3 missiles into a building where 6 armed men are purported to be hiding. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Bobert Date: 07 Apr 10 - 09:09 AM Let's not forget Ike's warnings... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Riginslinger Date: 07 Apr 10 - 09:18 AM But what happened to his party? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Joe Offer Date: 07 Apr 10 - 01:29 PM Well, this Wikipedia entry says 47 British soldiers were killed during the Gulf War. I suppose it's possible that the US killed 35 and others 12, but it seems a bit unlikely. Still, "friendly fire" IS a significant factor. I didn't see weapons in the hands of any Iraquis in the video - could it be they all were unarmed? -Joe- (rvana, if you go to YouTube and click on the play -> button, the video will begin to download and play. If you push the pause || button, the video will stop but will continue to download (you will see the download bar moving). When the download is complete, push "play.") |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Apr 10 - 04:46 PM What happened to both of those parties? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Charley Noble Date: 07 Apr 10 - 04:53 PM It was reported today in the newspapers that the U.S. Armed Forces are unable to find their own copy of the video so they compare it with what's running on-line. Well, that's what happens when someone orders the video destroyed. Too bad! Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: Ebbie Date: 07 Apr 10 - 05:19 PM I hope these two threads get combined. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Apr 10 - 05:32 PM It appears from the only press stories I've seen about this is that the priority for the USA military authorities is finding out how this tape got leaked. They want to make sure it doesn't happen again. No more leaks, that is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: In the end the truth comes out. From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 07 Apr 10 - 05:38 PM "Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work." Now we see why. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Apr 10 - 07:34 PM "American forces killed three times as many British soldiers as the Iraqis did in the First Iraq war"" Digging into Wiki a little deeper, the following:- Enemy fire:- 38 killed. Friendly fire:- Courtesy of an A10 Tankbuster not recognising two British "Warrior" personnel carriers - 9 killed, 11 wounded. Looks like more than a reversal of the above statement to me. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Apr 10 - 07:54 PM That video was stomach churning, and the worst of it was listening to that helicopter crew drooling over the prospect of shooting up a crowd (most of whom were clearly not carrying weapons, as they were in shirt sleeves, and couldn't have concealed anything more lethal than a hand gun), and begging their controller for permission to murder them all. The camera might have caused some doubt, but any British gunner would have made sure before firing, and been more selective in choosing targets. That Gung Ho arsehole chewed up the entire street with exploding munitions which were never meant to be used on human bodies, Isn't that a breach of the Geneva Convention? He kept shooting till nothing was moving. Then he proceeded to shoot up some guys who tried to take the sole remaining survivor of the first attack to safety. This survivor was the Reuters' journalist, and they killed him, shot up his rescuers, then riddled the van hitting two children inside. No wonder the US military wanted to cover it up. I reckon there are grounds for a number of Courts Martial, with twenty years in the stockade at the end. Sheer cold blooded murder, performed with the gleeful enthusiasm of a psychotic serial killer. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: akenaton Date: 07 Apr 10 - 07:55 PM In fairness to the scum doing the shooting, the guy looking out from behind the wall seemed to have a grenade launcher...but very difficult to be sure. More important was the demeanour of the victims before the shooting. they did not look suspicious or furtive...made no attempt to conceal themselves as they moved down the street. The attitude of the shooters to the wounded children was typical of people brutalised by war. I have read that killing becomes addictive, that was apparent in the shooter's wish for the wounded man to pick up a weapon....any weapon, just to give him the excuse to blow the wounded man to pieces! "liberalism" is in safe hands in Afghanistan....:0( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 07 Apr 10 - 09:30 PM My Dad was in the RAAF in WW II & my mother's dad was in both World Wars. They both knew many US serviceman personally, my mother's sister married one! They both had views which they would not shout out about about how'the only way not to be shot up by Yanks' was if they were not there... and that the Yanks couldn't be allowed to have full auto fire weapons cause they would run out of ammo too quickly... The more things change, the more they stay the same... just got more deadly weapons. I personally know many nice, intelligent Americans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: CarolC Date: 07 Apr 10 - 10:47 PM I reckon there are grounds for a number of Courts Martial, with twenty years in the stockade at the end. I tend to doubt that they will be punished in any way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: CarolC Date: 07 Apr 10 - 10:50 PM Keep in mind that this happened a few years ago. If the military and the government had any problem whatever with what these people did, they would have had the courts martial a long time ago rather than burying this video like they did. It was a whistle blower in the military who leaked the video. The military people didn't want anyone to see it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: GUEST,TIA Date: 07 Apr 10 - 11:36 PM Just asking Akenaton... What the fuck does "liberalism" have to do with any of this? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 08 Apr 10 - 02:09 AM "What the fuck does "liberalism" have to do with any of this?" Nothing other than distracting 'spin'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Stu Date: 08 Apr 10 - 05:32 AM "that was apparent in the shooter's wish for the wounded man to pick up a weapon....any weapon, just to give him the excuse to blow the wounded man to pieces!" I noticed that too - sickening doesn't even begin to describe it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: CarolC Date: 08 Apr 10 - 06:04 AM I tend to think that the behavior of that guy who was wishing the wounded man would pick up a weapon is very common in the US military. We apparently have a lot of people in our military who enjoy killing other people. I'm the admin for the Code Pink Facebook group (I'm not a member of Code Pink, myself, I'm just the admin for the Facebook group). There is another Facebook group called, "Fuck Code Pink", in which members of the US military and their friends and family describe numerous times, almost daily, all of the ways in which they would like to kill members of Code Pink. And like the shooter who was hoping the wounded man would pick up a weapon, they're looking for reasons to want to kill Code Pink members. Someone photoshopped a picture of some Code Pink members holding a banner that originally said, "Women Say No To War", and they changed it to say, "We Support The Murder of American Troops", which of course, attracts even more people who express a desire to kill members of Code Pink. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 08 Apr 10 - 06:37 AM "We apparently have a lot of people in our military who enjoy killing other people." I'm not sure it's confined to just the US military... there's lots of US nutters with guns NOT in the military. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: CarolC Date: 08 Apr 10 - 06:59 AM Yes, that's true. It does seem to be a part of our national culture. Which probably explains why it's so much of a problem in our military. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Charley Noble Date: 08 Apr 10 - 09:26 AM "any British gunner would have made sure before firing" And I seriously doubt if this behavior is unique to US military. It's common behavior that surfaces in any insurrection, whether it is the Battle of Algiers, Bosnia, Malaysia, Ruanda/Rwanda, or Columbia. Sad but true. And the individuals responsible should be court-martialed. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: akenaton Date: 08 Apr 10 - 01:37 PM "Just asking Akenaton... What the fuck does "liberalism" have to do with any of this?" Well Tia,Its called irony. Our respective governments would have us believe that we are in Afghanistan to fight terrorism and promote our brand of "liberal democracy", but as you can see from the video, we "liberals" are just as adept at practicing terrorism as the "towel heads". BTW...I dont think the US forces are any worse than other nationalities, the problem is modern warfare. It's conducted at a distance we dont get our hands bloody anymore, there is no longer the chance that the natives get lucky and spear a couple of our guys Modern "sanitised" warfare is a definate step down the ladder of human behaviour. What we saw on video was bad enough, but the unmaned drones which target houses and groups of people with very little idea of who those people are, or if there are women and children in the buildings, are ten times worse. Isn't it disgusting what we allow to take place in our name, then salve our consciences with talk of tolerance and equality and human rights......Oh doesn't it feel GOOD to be a "liberal"! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Apr 10 - 03:49 PM The US forces may well be no worse than other nationalities - but, unlike most countries, the USA - alongside China, Russia, and Israel - has refused to sign up to the International Criminal Court, so there is no effective prospect of prosecutions for any war crimes, even in theory. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Charley Noble Date: 08 Apr 10 - 08:23 PM I also seriously doubt if the copter crew is sleeping well thee days either. What a record to have posted on the internet for all to view. Of course they are still alive. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Teribus Date: 09 Apr 10 - 06:09 AM July 2007, the height of the "insurgency" in Baghdad and central Iraq. Having watched through the long version of the gun camera footage, we have coverage by two Apache Attack Helicopters acting in support of at least two US ground elements, one dismounted who have been under attack and the second one still in their vehicles moving through the area. The Apaches are "looking ahead". At 03:39 into the recording - you see a group of four men two of whom are clearly armed (Man standing on the extreme left is carrying an AK-47 one of the men in the centre of the group is carrying an RPG-7) At 04:06 into the recording - this group of four men move behind a building out of sight, the Reuters cameraman and Reporter had moved there earlier. At 04:08 the man previously seen carrying the RPG-7 is seen crouched down looking round the corner, in this shot can be seen the exhaust cone at the rear of the RPG-7. Number of points raised by the article linked to by Charlie Noble: 1. Reuters employees were allowed to view the video on an off-the-record basis two weeks after the killings, but they were not allowed to obtain a copy of it. So since at least August 2007 Reuters have known all about the incident and had actually viewed the incident. So there has been no cover-up. 2. On the day of the attack, United States military officials said that the helicopters had been called in to help American troops who had been exposed to small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades in a raid. "There is no question that coalition forces were clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force," Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, a spokesman for the multinational forces in Baghdad, said then. But the video does not show hostile action. Instead, it begins with a group of people milling around on a street, among them, according to WikiLeaks, Mr. Noor-Eldeen and Mr. Chmagh. The pilots believe them to be insurgents, and mistake Mr. Noor-Eldeen's camera for a weapon. They aim and fire at the group, then revel in their kills. That the US ground elements had come under fire is not disputed, although they had not yet come under fire from the group that the Apaches were observing, a group positioned "up ahead" of the advancing US Patrols. No-one contributing to this thread so far has addressed those circumstances or even acknowledged them as being contributing elements in what transpired. While calls for courts-martial and demands for lengthy prison sentences have been loudly called for, no-one has asked about, or gone to any effort to determine exactly what "Rules Of Engagement" were in force at the time. There will be no courts-martial, and neither should there be as judging by traffic between Callsign Hotel 26 (Controller?) and Crazy Horse 18 (Helo) the former would have live-feed and he would witness and sanction the action. From the opening coverage the situation as shown justifies the actions taken depending upon the ROE in force at the time. 3. A short time later a van arrives to pick up the wounded and the pilots open fire on it, wounding two children inside. "Well, it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle," one pilot says. This is taken from the article Charlie linked to, and is an example of the bias in reporting this incident. Watch through the "long version" and you will find out that it is only some time after the ground troops arrive on the scene that the actual presence of the two children is even detected, by those ground troops themselves. The Helo is ordered to open fire on the van to prevent removal of personnel and weapons. At the time of opening fire the crew of the firing Apache had no idea whatsoever about who, or what was inside the van. As to the pilot's remarks? OK folks or any of you that are parents had you been driving that van with your two kids beside you and you had seen what had happened, would you have driven up there to help? Options open to you would be to call an ambuance; get the kids out of the car and in a safe place, then gone and helped; Or would you all have done exactly as this blithering idiot did just barrel up there jump out discuss the situation, hang about chatting then decide to take the guy to hospital? Action zones are dangerous places, it pays you in spades to keep well clear of them as bad things can happen, and often do. 4. Reuters said at the time that the two men had been working on a report about weightlifting when they heard about a military raid in the neighborhood, and decided to drive there to check it out. In other words "Curiosity killed the cat". Where were their blue "PRESS" Flak-Jackets and Helmets? Exactly how did they "hear about a military raid in the neighbourhood"? I take it that being locals these guys knew which end was up? If covering a story one would think that they had all their kit in their car or van. Being experienced, or supposedly experienced, I would count myself to be the biggest C**T in creation were I to amble into a situation such as that without wearing anything to clearly identify me as a Reporter and accredited member of the international press and an even bigger C**T to wander about carrying anything that looked even remotely like a weapon in a position in advance of US Troops who had already been under attack. I mean just what the hell were they thinking about?? And the answer to that rhetorical question of course is that they were just not thinking at all. 5. "There had been reports of clashes between U.S. forces and insurgents in the area but there was no fighting on the streets in which Namir was moving about with a group of men," Reuters wrote in 2008. "It is believed two or three of these men may have been carrying weapons, although witnesses said none were assuming a hostile posture at the time." Reports of clashes yet these men are improperly dressed to meet a posible encounter situation? I take it that their transport was "Marked Up" so that it could be identified as a vehicle carrying "Press" representatives? No "believed" about it some of those who greeted these two reporters were carrying arms, as reported later weapons were recovered from the scene. Where does this crap about assuming a hostile posture come into the equation? It cannot be in ROE as it is a nonsense as it takes less than a second to shift a weapon from non-hostile to hostile position (People spend hours practicing exactly that skill with whatever weapon it is that they carry). 6. The report showed pictures of what it said were machine guns and grenades found near the bodies of those killed. It also stated that the Reuters employees "made no effort to visibly display their status as press or media representatives and their familiar behavior with, and close proximity to, the armed insurgents and their furtive attempts to photograph the coalition ground forces made them appear as hostile combatants to the Apaches that engaged them." Again from the article linked by Charlie - Just about covers it all. As an exercise in demonstrating poor judgement and monumental stupidity the actions of those Reuters employees beggars belief and to totally condemn those members of the US armed forces out of hand is monstrous. What these guys did acting in the manner that they did was tantamount to committing suicide, they should have know better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Stu Date: 09 Apr 10 - 06:47 AM Teribus, sometimes you just have to admit something was wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 09 Apr 10 - 07:20 AM "to wander about carrying anything that looked even remotely like a weapon" Well as other films have shown, carrying cameras, stretchers and all sort of things look remarkably "like weapons" to drugged up spaced out pilots with itchy trigger fingers - and even being in Allied Tanks with all the magic identifying paraphernalia never stopped US "blue on blue". "in a position in advance of US Troops who had already been under attack" Unlike you they did not posses infallible telepathy that informed them of where US troops were. "I take it that their transport was "Marked Up" so that it could be identified as a vehicle carrying "Press" representatives?" So that has not always saved journalists before now - just how many have died? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Teribus Date: 09 Apr 10 - 09:26 AM Question for you Foolestroupe (This from the article linked to by Charlie Noble) 4. Reuters said at the time that the two men had been working on a report about weightlifting when they heard about a military raid in the neighborhood, and decided to drive there to check it out. The words "military raid" not much telepathy required to guess what it was they thought that they were going to check-out. If you are going to carry a camera in such a situation make fuckin' sure that it looks like a camera to the world and its dog whether they are watching or not - That would have saved them from being identified as potential insurgents all sort of things look remarkably "like weapons" to drugged up spaced out pilots with itchy trigger fingers You know that, I know that, are you trying to tell me that two experienced Reuters Reporters did not know that?? If they did they didn't pay an attention to the application of commonsense on that particular occasion and they paid the price for it. Responsibility and duty of those flying those helicopters was the safety and security of the forces they were protecting, they looked to that responsibility, no US forces were injured or killed. Armed insurgents amongst that party on that street corner intent on killing US forces however were killed. Drive around in a big white van marked with PRESS in as large lettering as can be used on both sides; the rear; bonnet and on the roof - That would have saved them from being identified as potential insurgents |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 09 Apr 10 - 10:08 AM ""In fairness to the scum doing the shooting, the guy looking out from behind the wall seemed to have a grenade launcher...but very difficult to be sure."" I would have agreed with that, Ake, but for the fact that they had just circled him, as they watched him walk across the street, with the camera slung over his shoulder. No military man would have thought that was a grenade launcher, neither did he ever point it in the direction of the chopper, which would have been a prerequisite for a British Gunner to engage. Also, when they opened fire, the group had gathered round the Cameraman, and were simply talking. At that point it would have been impossible for him to use an RPG, without producing five or six crispy critters with the back blast. Sorry mate. For me, still cold blooded murder. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 09 Apr 10 - 10:15 AM ""I also seriously doubt if the copter crew is sleeping well thee days either. What a record to have posted on the internet for all to view. Of course they are still alive."" Sorry to burst your bubble Charlie, but, knowing there is no chance of retribution, those guys have probably been dining out on that story ever since, and are almost certainly pleased that others than their mates can see what rough, tough, heroes they are. To call them scum is insulting to scum. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 09 Apr 10 - 10:26 AM ""At 03:39 into the recording - you see a group of four men two of whom are clearly armed (Man standing on the extreme left is carrying an AK-47 one of the men in the centre of the group is carrying an RPG-7)"" Nice try Teribus, but in the shorter version of that video, the cameraman and the journalist were clearly identifed as being in that group crossing the open space. The one you describe with an RPG-7 was the cameraman, and it was he that was seen kneeling at the corner, with his camera pointing across the street. At no point did the "barrel" lift toward the chopper, he simply panned left and right. When the shit hit the fan, he was one of the two men who ran to the gunner's right. Neither man was carrying anything. The gunner walked his tracers right into them. Twist it how you like, that gunner wanted to kill everything in sight, and finished off with a callous dismissal of shooting two kids. Making excuses for them would, in my opinion, make you as bad as they were. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Teribus Date: 09 Apr 10 - 11:56 AM No, the cameraman and the reporter were identified as targets potentially armed because of what they were carrying on straps over their shoulders. In the video they walk directly over to the shadow of building. As they cross the street that is when you see the group of four men at 03:39 into the video coverage, as stated before the one on the extreme right is holding an AK-47, while one of the men in the centre of the group is holding an RPG-7. Please do not say that they weren't, remember the weapons were found and photographer in situ when the US forces arrived at the scene. But let us take your version of events: Your cameraman, what was he doing? What was he expecting to see round that corner? Why did he at no time at all raise the eye-piece of the camera to his face and look down the viewer? No military man would have thought that was a grenade launcher: Look at the video again and compare the dark object projecting round the corner to the tail-end of this http://poznanie.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/rpg-7aa.jpg neither did he ever point it in the direction of the chopper, which would have been a prerequisite for a British Gunner to engage. Firstly the guys hanging around that street corner had no idea that they were under observation of two helicopters. At best they might be vaguely aware that those aircraft were in the air, the Apaches are probably about 5,000 to 7,000 metres away. Our, i.e. UK ROE would have directed the mission in exactly the same manner, where on earth did you get this crap about weapons having to be aimed or pointed at you before they are regarded as being threatening? Our ROE stipulate if they are carrying a gun then they are fair game and a legitimate target. Also, when they opened fire, the group had gathered round the Cameraman, and were simply talking. At that point it would have been impossible for him to use an RPG, without producing five or six crispy critters with the back blast. When the guy with the RPG looked round the corner he was just checking, he had no intention of firing at that point, which was why the RPG-7 was still slung over his shoulder. I take it then Don T that your reference to the two children who were wounded in the attack on the van indicates that you as a parent would have done exactly the same as the driver of that van? I know for an absolute bloody certainty that I would not have done had they been my children. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Apr 10 - 01:19 PM ...remember the weapons were found... That's pretty well standard operating procedure when unarmed civilians have been shot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: GUEST,CS Date: 09 Apr 10 - 02:58 PM The most interesting thing for me was the assertion by the authorities that this was perfectly normal behaviour for military forces. All quite normal and usual, nothing out of the ordinary going on here - move along folks. This is the most troubling thing. It begs the question, if this isn't anything unusual how many regular civilians who do not happen to have the support of a major organisation like Reuters are being routinely blasted by brain-dead jerk-offs with big 'bam bam'? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Teribus Date: 09 Apr 10 - 04:05 PM Kevin, have a look at the video from about 03:39 onto 04:08 a group of four men three of them are clearly carrying weapons (two with AK-47's and one with an RPG-7) so so much for the standard-operating-procedure-when-unarmed-civilians-have-been-shot crap. More likely than not your two reuters men were probably invited along, or at least tipped the wink, by some insurgent group that a bunch of Americans were going to get whacked and asked if they wanted a ring-side seat. Unbeknown to this bunch of insurgents the Apaches were already onto them and the hunters became the hunted. To try and pass this thing off as being 100% the fault of the US Military is ridiculous, there were a large number of contributing factors that would have made recognition plain as a bloody pikestaff and the Reuters guys ignored them all. One thing is for certain, going by attitude and body language the two Reuters guys were well known by the group they approached. As for the guns and grenades photographed at the scene, those photographs were shown to Reuters Staff within two weeks of the incident and there did not seem to be any questions from them then. The inference of the whole recent disclosure appears to attempt to foster the lie of some sort of cover up when in fact there was no cover up and as with any instance of live firing there is a debrief and investigation to analyse the action from start to finish, immediately the guys come in from patrol or land. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 09 Apr 10 - 05:15 PM Ah teribullbus - again ...:-) "Our ROE stipulate if they are carrying a gun then they are fair game and a legitimate target." Oh I see - shoot first & ask questions later. You admit it. "Drive around in a big white van marked with PRESS in as large lettering as can be used on both sides" Walk around in a hat with "PRESS" in big letters on the side and idiots keep hitting you in the head. Pity not everybody reads English... "those photographs were shown to Reuters Staff within two weeks of the incident ... The inference of the whole recent disclosure appears to attempt to foster the lie of some sort of cover up when in fact there was no cover up" "The most interesting thing for me was the assertion by the authorities that this was perfectly normal behaviour for military forces. All quite normal and usual, nothing out of the ordinary going on here - move along folks." So then why all the Official refusals to release this material that had to be dragged out thru FOI procedures. Only ONE answer - ONE BIG COVERUP. The US Military wants to prevent 'the softening of public moral fibre' that happened when the truth started to leak out in the Vietnam conflict. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: GUEST,David E. Date: 09 Apr 10 - 05:35 PM "More likely than not your two reuters men were probably invited along, or at least tipped the wink, by some insurgent group that a bunch of Americans were going to get whacked and asked if they wanted a ring-side seat." I am agreeing with Teribus on this one. David E. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Lox Date: 09 Apr 10 - 05:45 PM "Just asking Akenaton... What the fuck does "liberalism" have to do with any of this?" It allows Ake to be the centre of attention. Instead of talking about the thread topic, we all end up, for the ten thousandth time, wasting time reading about how this is just an example of Akes fully comprehensive world socio/political/economic theory. In fact, just abut everything that has ever happend in history if proof of Akes theory, and as noone would pay any attention to a thread entitled "Liberalism - the new Fascism" he is forced to hijack every thread going and turn it into a diatribe anaginst the "liberal fascists". When noone is paying any attention, he throws us a bit od conroversy to stir things up - stuff like "the bnp have a point" or "my goan mate says moslems think they're bettr than us" or " gays are a scourge" or "immigrants take our jobs and our benefits" or "tinkers are dodgy" etc etc etc. I think that sums it up once and for all for me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Video of US Killing of Reuters Reporters From: Lox Date: 09 Apr 10 - 06:06 PM "I take it then Don T that your reference to the two children who were wounded in the attack on the van indicates that you as a parent would have done exactly the same as the driver of that van? I know for an absolute bloody certainty that I would not have done had they been my children." This is pesumably based on your deep end extensive experience as a resident in a warzone where people you know have been mutilated and killed. In the Blitz, while the rest of London was helping each other to survive, Teribus would have refused to stop his van and help a guy dying on the ground. Or maybe teribus thinks that the father was irresponsible bringing his kids into a warzone ... ... er ... I think the warzone was brought to their home Teribus ... They were residents, passing through their own neighbourhood, helping a dying man. By the way, the oject being pointed around the corner was not an RPG. It was a camera completely exposed so you could see the full length of the lens, the camera itself, and a gap where the hands were holding it. As for the Pilots, they are lusting for blood. No amount of circumstance or pomp may change that. They lust for it and they enjoy spilling it. Are you really backing them up? |
