Why the Wikileak video is important.

[trumad]

Do we want the truth or don't we?

The original version:

July 13, 2007

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.

"There is no question that coalition forces were clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force," said Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, a spokesman for the multinational forces in Baghdad.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/world/middleeast/13iraq.html?_r=2

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. It would appear that the original version is now 'inoperative'. nt

[NJmaverick]

2. That is why the Apache copter was called in. There was combat in the area

in fact to clarify, there were RPGs and rounds (that the EO unit had to detonate) found at the scene. There were also two army investigations conducted of this incident.

[protocol rv]

3. Army Investigations

One can say they investigated, but this doesn't mean the American soldiers acted properly. They also investigated after the Haditha massacre, and the people there are still dead, and nothing really changed, did it?

I have a deeper question, why does the US insist on occupying Iraq several years after invading it, and conducting itself in such a way that combat operations by US soldiers continue to kill large numbers of civilians? Maybe you guys should go home.

[disillusioned73]

4. Sounds like classic CYA to me.....

Anyone that watches the video along with the AUDIO knows the truth - it was an unprovoked attack, plain and simple. They can spin all they want, and the people here @ DU can try and spin - it's not working... but don't worry the "media" is on your side, well the US media is anyway...

My generations VietNam coming home on YouTube... yah!!! (sarcasm)

[slipslidingaway]

5. Exactly knr ...

http://twitter.com/wikileaks

http://collateralmurder.com/

"...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"..."


Lt. Col - 'Rules of Engagement Were Not Followed'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=452032&mesg_id=452032

"Let me make it really clear, though. From your perspective, were the rules of engagement followed from what you see in this piece of videotape?"

SHAFFER: "Let me be clear... based on what I've seen only, and I'm making it on what I've seen: No, they were not. First rule is 'You may engage persons who commit hostile acts or show hostile intent by minimum force necessary.' Minimum force is the key here. If you see eight armed men, the first thing I would think as an intelligence officer: 'How can we take these guys and capture them?' We don't want to kill people arbitrarily. We want the intell take.

Now, most importantly, when you see that van show up to take away the wounded: 'Do not target or strike anyone who has surrendered or is out of combat due to sickness or wounds.' So the wound part of that, I find a bit disturbing by the fact that you have people down, clearly down; you have people on the way here..."