WikiLeaks: Murder of Journalists Video Released

spike

spike

New Member
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0


Overview

5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff.

Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.

The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.

After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement".

Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.

WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.

WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.

WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.
Click to expand...

http://collateralmurder.org/en/
 
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
Wait, wait!! Pick Me! Pick Me!

Ahem: "....whachooomean,Willis? As a lib I luvs dis country."
 
ResearchMonkey

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
Again, it's a war-zone, its not safe, you might get raped, they did.



1270208298658.gif
 
spike

spike

New Member
ResearchMonkey said:
Again, it's a war-zone, its not safe
Click to expand...

So any unsafe mistakes that happen should be covered up?

This seems to be a common response for you. She got raped by her co-workers? It's a war zone! We shot up a van with unarmed civilians trying to save lives? It's a war zone!
 
V

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
No one is going to win hearts and minds if they can't control their soldiers. :rolleyes: The best they can hope for out of this incident is that the Taliban doesn't use this incident to recruit more suicide bombers.
 
ResearchMonkey

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
Hanging out with insurgents carrying weapons holds certain inherent dangers with Apache's circling. Especially when trying to get "that shot" when a US Convoy is approaching.

I'll give you that is doesn't look pretty but you live and die by your choices.
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
That video shows war. The actions of the soldiers was reasonable. They described the situation & got permission to fire. The (pilot?) said all that needs to be said. It's their fault for bringing their kids to a firefight.

Thankfully no Americans were hurt.
 
Dave

Dave

Well-Known Member
Gonz said:
That video shows war. The actions of the soldiers was reasonable. They described the situation & got permission to fire. The (pilot?) said all that needs to be said. It's their fault for bringing their kids to a firefight.

Thankfully no Americans were hurt.
Click to expand...


+1
 
spike

spike

New Member
Gonz said:
That video shows war.
Click to expand...

That video shows indiscriminate killing of unarmed civilians. Even if they mistook cameras for guns there was no excuse for killing the unarmed rescuers.

We an also see that there was a cover up of this incident.

"The American military said in a statement late Thursday that 11 people had been killed: nine insurgents and two civilians. According to the statement, American troops were conducting a raid when they were hit by small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades. The American troops called in reinforcements and attack helicopters. In the ensuing fight, the statement said, the two Reuters employees and nine insurgents were killed."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0DEED81E3EF930A25754C0A9619C8B63

It's their fault for bringing their kids to a firefight.
Click to expand...

No it's the fault of the shooters for firing on unarmed people who posed no threat. Your comment assumes the driver knew he was going to be trying to save wounded civilians that day and knew there was going to be a firefight and said "oh kids, let's all go to that firefight that's going on later and try and rescue some reporters!".

Thankfully no Americans were hurt.
Click to expand...

Fuck that. The goal is not to kill innocent people whether they are Americans or not.
 
spike

spike

New Member
ResearchMonkey said:
As I said, you believe it.
Click to expand...

I actually have never said anything at all on the subject or even thought about it until you brought it up. You made up irrelevant crap for some reason.

I did link you to some info on the subject if you'd like to research it on your own. I'm not really interested as it has nothing to do with the conversation.
 
ResearchMonkey

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I know.....you don't say a lot of things while alluding to say something.

...but I'm glad we agree that he never was a constitutional law professor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top