U.S. Army shoots and kill a Reuter photograph

[EllJay]

Calling it a case of "collateral murder," the WikiLeaks Web site today released harrowing until-now secret video of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter in Baghdad in 2007 repeatedly opening fire on a group of men that included a Reuters photographer and his driver -- and then on a van that stopped to rescue one of the wounded men.

Source

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Debunked. Hardly "murder", this is what you should expect to happen to you if you're hanging around with terrorists in a war zone.

[Poopie]

Propaganda!!!

[EllJay]

That "debunk" is clearly a load of bollox.

In the video, starting at the 3:50 mark, one member of this group starts preparing what clearly looks like an RPG launcher, as well as some individuals with AK-47s.In the video, starting at the 3:50 mark, one member of this group starts preparing what clearly looks like an RPG launcher, as well as some individuals with AK-47s.

If they paid attention they would have seen that the person with the RPG was not at the corner, he couldn't possibly have gotten there, since he was going out of view in the midsection of the block while the camera spots the person at the corner 2-3 sec later. The thing (his camera) that he is holding with a Telephoto lens, clearly showing just before the flight-camera goes over the roof and he is out of view.

He raises the camera to take a photo-shot. A soldier already states there that he shot at them, even though thats obviously is not the case, which even more incite the soldiers.

When the helicopter comes around they just stands there, a group of 8 people just talking, when the helicopter is in clear view.

Hardly something you do if your intention is to shoot it down. Then they calmly starts to walk away, down the street when hell breaks loose on them and they are ripped to shreds.

Another accusation is that US forces fired on and killed rescue workers attempting to carry one of the journalists out of the area. However, the video clearly shows that the vehicle in question bore no markings of a rescue vehicle at all, and the men who ran out of the van to grab the wounded man wore no uniforms identifying themselves as such. Under any rules of engagement, and especially in a terrorist hot zone like Baghdad in 2007, that vehicle would properly be seen as support for the terrorists that had just been engaged and a legitimate target for US forces.

Reported was that the van, with the 2 children in, was a man passing by, on their way to school.

Also 2 bystanders comes running down the street from another block trying to help the injured man on the pavement.

The soldier who outspokenly wished for the injured man on the street to grab some kind of weapons so he could shred him to bits earlier when he tried to crawl up, now cries out for permission to blast the van, the 2 children, their father and the 2 others, clearly unarmed men when they try to rescue the injured man on the sidewalk.

While they didn’t grab weapons before getting shot, the truth is that the gunships didn’t give them the chance to try, either — which is exactly what they’re trained to do.

Their was NO single indication they where going to, they prepared for loading the injured man in to the van

So...NO this has not been debunked...just barely spin-doctored.

[Black Coyote]

Yeah, because Michelle Malkin is the most honest, trustworthy person there is

Then again, I'm fully convinced that most, if not all, of the purported "conservatives" here are simply individuals out to stir up heated reactions from other posters "for the lulz." So, yeah.

Anyway. Anyone who's retarded enough to "confuse" a telephoto lens for an RPG launcher is too stupid to be trusted with anything deadlier than safety scissors, or with the controls of any sort of vehicle, much less with military-grade equipment. If their excuse is that they were "confused" by a telephoto lens, then they ought to be subjected to basic IQ tests - if they're lying (i.e. smarter than a jar of mayonnaise) then bring them up on charges of war crimes. Simple as that.

Then again, I'm not entirely surprised. This is what happens when you're reduced to scraping the bottom of the barrel for recruits - the drooling, illiterate idiots and trigger-crazy rabid, racist rednecks get mixed in with the decent troops, and bring down the quality of the military as a whole.

Incidents like this are an embarrassment to the US military - hell, to the entire country - and ought to be cracked down on with prejudice, not covered up or excused away. End of story. Accepting anything else dishonors and puts at even greater risk the good people of the US military - the ones who abide by the law and serve as exemplary examples to those around them - by allowing lowlifes to run rampant with no suitable punishment whatsoever.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Black Coyote

[Professor Buzzkill]

This is why there are terrorists. If that happend to my family i would strap explosives to myself and blow them up outside a military base

[KingTomis]

Journalists are running around with shady characters, the cameraman was mistaken as a guy with an RPG, setting up on a corner when ground elements in Bradley's are coming close.

The pilots thought they were setting up an ambush utilizing an RPG and small arms fire, knew there were Americans on the ground in the vicinity and did what they felt they had to do to stop what they perceived to be an ambush.

The van? The AIF TTP's included removal of insurgent dead, wounded and weapons so when soldiers secured the area and eventually journalists would arrive it would appear as if only women/children/old men were killed. If they remove the bodies of all military aged men they create the propaganda that US forces are targeting crowds of women/children.

The pilots stopped that. In their minds, and from what they saw that day and based on their experiences in Iraq that's what they stopped.

Pretty much everything involved can be viewed from two polar opposite sides.

Was it murder as the webpage suggests? Absolutely not. What you have is a case on mistaken identity occurring after soldiers in the area received small arms fire.

The warrant officers piloting those aircraft do not posses superhuman eyesight, in the midst of a battle they mistook a camera for a weapon. It does not mean they are poorly trained or the "bottom of the barrel" of american society like one hate filled and asinine poster commented. Do not pass judgement when you have never been in a situation even remotely close that the one they were put into.

And if you truly believe the demographics of those serving are as you say, "the drooling, illiterate idiots and trigger-crazy rabid, racist rednecks", perhaps you might want to educate yourself. Although though I doubt it will help, if you have gone this long into your life and are still so brainwashed and naive things like facts dont do much to change ones opinion.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2005/11/Who-Bears-the-Burden-Demographic-Characteristics-of-US-Military-Recruits-Before-and-After-9-11

http://www.blackmilitaryworld.com/blackmilitaryworldtest/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=229:the-joomla-community&catid=38:platforms

[Black Coyote]

The warrant officers piloting those aircraft do not posses superhuman eyesight, in the midst of a battle they mistook a camera for a weapon. It does not mean they are poorly trained or the "bottom of the barrel" of american society like one hate filled and asinine poster commented. Do not pass judgement when you have never been in a situation even remotely close that the one they were put into.

Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher

Nikon camera mounted with telephoto lens

(For further future reference, a DSLR camera with an average telephoto lens, fully zoomed out, is about 12-14 inches long - a far cry from the 48 or more inches most RPG launchers measure out to. Not to mention they're held very differently - you don't see many RPG wielders holding their equipment square in front of their face or chest, and you don't see many still photographers holding their cameras over their shoulders. Neither of those situations would provide very satisfactory results. I mean, can you imagine what would happen if you somehow managed to fire an RPG while the butt of the weapon was level with your chest, neck, or face? That would probably hurt, just a little. And trying to capture noteworthy still photos while your camera body is hanging somewhere behind your shoulder would require some superhuman skill. Or a tripod and remote... which isn't equipment most war zone photographers carry when out in the thick of things.)

If those two things look even remotely similar to you, you need your eyes checked because you're probably legally blind, or close to it. Even a big 500mm lens (which most photojournalists in situations like this would not likely be carrying, due to its ponderousness at the very least) would only resemble an RPG launcher under the loosest possible scrutiny.

And if you truly believe the demographics of those serving are as you say, "the drooling, illiterate idiots and trigger-crazy rabid, racist rednecks", perhaps you might want to educate yourself. Although though I doubt it will help, if you have gone this long into your life and are still so brainwashed and naive things like facts dont do much to change ones opinion.

* snip *

I'm well aware of the makeup of the military, thanks. I come from a military family myself (and the only thing that kept me from being a military brat when growing up was a crippling knee injury on my father's part, otherwise he would have joined the Marines.) All of my uncles are former military, and several served in Vietnam - two are still active National Guardsmen, and many of their kids are in the military now (as are a number of my friends from school.) And my grandfather and my grandmother's best friend both served during WWII. And need I go into the fact that a staggeringly large number of my friends and acquaintances have friends and family in the military as well? Brothers, fathers, sons, and husbands? Sisters, mothers, daughters and wives? Many of whom are serving in the Middle East as we speak? Yeah, I sure do hate those military folks, yes sir.

The fact is, I have absolutely nothing but respect for the vast majority of those who serve this country. I hate this disturbing trend of people who only go in to "play soldier" and "kill them some brown folk." They tarnish our military's reputation, dishonor their fallen teammates, and make their law-abiding comrades' lives - the lives of my friends and family, and my friends' friends and families - many times more dangerous than they need to be by spawning still more terrorism with their reckless and frequently homicidal behavior. And the people who condone this behavior are just as disgusting and responsible for the escalating violence as the "soldiers" who go around treating this war like some sick game. Every single apologist for these reckless gun-slinging mouth-breathers, from the officers who sweep crimes under the rug to the beer-swilling bar jockey who hoots and hollers at the TV when a NASCAR driver crashes into a wall, has blood on their hands - that of innocent bystanders as well as that of our nation's finest. They're either just too ignorant to see it, or too arrogant to care.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Saru
Removed personal attack

[Benz]

saw this on the news about 10mins ago in HD, i gotta admit it looks pretty bad for america

[Q24]

I wonder how many other civilian killings have been covered-up as “combat operations against a hostile force”?

The Lancet medical journal published a peer-reviewed study in 2006 which estimated 654,965 excess Iraqi deaths.

Was it really worth it to keep us safe from those non-existent WMDs?

Perhaps, I hope, there will be more opposition to the next unnecessary war.

[GreyWeather]

Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher

Nikon camera mounted with telephoto lens

That's a very small telephoto lens (that's the starting mm for a telephoto lens.)

Try something that looks like these;

My link

My link

My link

My link

Being so high up, it's easy to see now how it's easy to mistake this for a a device that can propel an explosive.

Most journalists would be carrying an array of lenses, a 500mil is the most beneficial as it gives you (an obvious) better zoom from a 'safe' distance in a war zone. It states in the article that the man is setting up his camera. You don't need to set up a 200mm on a tripod, even at it's full 200m zoom, as they'd have OS installed on that specific lens. The only lens you'd take the time to set up is a lens with a long focal length.

Imagine being up in the air and seeing a guy setting up a long tube on a support, being around guys with AK's in a war zone. I don't think your first thought would be "I suppose he's a photographer. Let's wait 10 minutes and see."

But I understand what you're getting at in the last paragraph and fully agree with you.

Edited April 6, 2010 by GreyWeather

[J Gab]

I think the issue with the guy setting up his camera is that he appears to be sneaking around the corner so he can't be seen entirely. If he had been out in the open, a camera in hand, that'd be another story- but when he peeks around the corner it looks suspicious.

If you get into the mindset of being ultra paranoid of being shot down by anyone too- because the enemy looks like everyone else does- and add this suspicious looking around the corner you can see why the guy freaked out. Take away the knowledge these guys are photographers, add some paranoia times 10 and the situation explains itself.

Reading how these guys say certain things versus how they actually say them also gives the idea they're worse than they actually are. Them asking to open up fire on the van seems to be out of paranoia- as well as telling the guy to pick up a weapon. The only thing I found inappropriate was the line about the children- but in a war I can see how they're mindset would be to blame others about what they've done. You couldn't be in a war if you didn't.

I will say though, this is probably why we have people becoming terrorists. We have our guys out there, super paranoid, asked to take down anyone who has weapons or what appears to be weapons- and they kill civilians. Their families want revenge, and blow up something to get such- and even if terrorist groups had nothing to do with it you know they'll claim it as their own person for political reasons. And who's gonna disagree? It looks worse if you have a lone civilian doing it...though I wouldn't doubt some of them do in fact join terrorist groups after an event like this.

But there's nothing to stop it, unless we want more of our men dead. In war it's very much an "us or them" situation.

[acidhead]

End the invasion and occupation immediately... please.

[Belial]

Hey these news hounds will run with anyone to get the jump on each other, he as paid the ultimate price for hir story, just makes the americans look like murdering savages now, just what they want to be press released

[GreatFenris]

I don't know what terrifies me the most. The brutality of the event or people trying to justify it :/

[Freddie AppsHero]

It's quite obvious from the video that the chopper crew thought that the men on the ground were insurgents. So, it's clearly not the malicious shooting of innocent journalists as the liberal media would have you believe.

[acidhead]

The reason the video has been kept from public eyes until now is clear-- its release doesn't threaten national security or any ongoing operations. Instead it bares the wanton killing and cheap rational for taking a life for some fighting in Iraq. Like a video game addict, some of these soldiers come off as trigger happy and unhealthily detached from the value of the lives they hold in the balance each day of operations.

Much of the dialogue recorded during the incident is quite chilling to hear, particularly when mocking one of their targets, dismissing the dead or wounded, or eagerly urging clearance for "engagement" and readiness to shoot.:

-----

"Come on. Fire"

"Alright, I hit him." (Ha ha)

"Oh yeah, look at those dead b*******."

"We have an individual trying to crawl away" (Moments later) "Come on buddy. (to the man crawling) All you have to do is pick up a weapon" (and then he could open fire)

"I'm trying to get permission to engage." (for the van collecting the injured man) "Come on, let us shoot"

"Oh yeah, look at that. Right through the windshield! Ha ha!"

(Upon discovering that they had shot children) "Well, it's their fault for bringing kids to a battle." "That's right"

"I think I just ran over a body." (Laughter) "Maybe it was an illusion."

The acts of these individual soldiers undermine the dignity and honor with which the others have served. Still further, it is yet another layer clouding the "mission" in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and many other locations of engagement across the globe. Who are the good guys when these types of acts continue to occur? Why are we fighting in these places? How can we justify over 1 million dead Iraqis? We are the wars expanding when President Obama campaigned on ending the wars?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIvGhYQVPoQ&feature=player_embedded#

[The Silver Thong]

Mods could you please merg these threads.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=179457&st=0

[.AKUMA.]

a bunch of savages they represnt their country well

[Freddie AppsHero]

The reason the video has been kept from public eyes until now is clear-- its release doesn't threaten national security or any ongoing operations. Instead it bares the wanton killing and cheap rational for taking a life for some fighting in Iraq. Like a video game addict, some of these soldiers come off as trigger happy and unhealthily detached from the value of the lives they hold in the balance each day of operations.

Much of the dialogue recorded during the incident is quite chilling to hear, particularly when mocking one of their targets, dismissing the dead or wounded, or eagerly urging clearance for "engagement" and readiness to shoot.

Are you ****ting me? God knows the Islamists laugh when they kill their victims, but you expect Western troops to be held to some kind of high moral standard?

They're soldiers. They kill. That's what they do. If they're going to kill people, they might as well enjoy it. Or would you rather they mope around for the entire length of their deployment?

Edited April 6, 2010 by The Frederick

[The Silver Thong]

It's quite obvious from the video that the chopper crew thought that the men on the ground were insurgents. So, it's clearly not the malicious shooting of innocent journalists as the liberal media would have you believe.

So you only watched 30 seconds of the clip. You are grossly mistaken please watch the whole thing befor making such comments.

[Freddie AppsHero]

So you only watched 30 seconds of the clip. You are grossly mistaken please watch the whole thing befor making such comments.

I watched the whole thing. The crew never knew that they were shooting at men that were (possibly) just journalists. I have no problem with the malicious killing of terrorists.

At worst, this is a case of mistaken identity.

[The Silver Thong]

I watched the whole thing. The crew never knew that they were shooting at men that were (possibly) just journalists. I have no problem with the malicious killing of terrorists.

At worst, this is a case of mistaken identity.

So when you see people in the street helping other people you just shoot them and laugh about it. Did you not read the comments of the cammander and what he said about the incodint. He lied about it to cover his ass. Right there is addmition of guilt.

[Freddie AppsHero]

So when you see people in the street helping other people you just shoot them and laugh about it. Did you not read the comments of the cammander and what he said about the incodint. He lied about it to cover his ass. Right there is addmition of guilt.

When you see people in the street helping insurgents, that means that they are also insurgents. Whom you then shoot.

The incident was covered up because the US military (correctly) believed that people wouldn't be able to comprehend that this is what happens in war, and that it would be blown up into a big "Look at how evil America is" fest.

Edited April 6, 2010 by The Frederick

[acidhead]

Are you ****ting me? God knows the Islamists laugh when they kill their victims, but you expect Western troops to be held to some kind of high moral standard?

They're soldiers. They kill. That's what they do. If they're going to kill people, they might as well enjoy it. Or would you rather they mope around for the entire length of their deployment?

YES - of course they should show high moral standard.

We are told and many are convinced that 'we' are the liberators.

Morality and the preservation of human life is our duty during an occupation on any sovereign land.

The soldiers in the video sound like they are playing the video game Call of Duty when beg for permission to kill and laugh afterwards at the carnage and death on the ground they created..

Its truly sickening to witness this in real life.

More videos have been reported to be released soon.

And guess what?

-its soldiers who are the whistle blowers releasing the videos.

Soldiers who are sick and tired of this invasion and occupation for the giant corporations™.

Vietnam was fought on cameras and the public was stunned and spoke out in large protests.

These invasions and occupations we witness today have had minimal coverage on the ground in a effort to suppress the western world from eye-witnessing whats really happening.

Edited April 6, 2010 by acidhead