US sorry for death of journalist

[cal04]

THE US military apologised today for the death of a journalist following a Baghdad helicopter strike and warned civilians to keep out of combat zones despite US efforts to minimise collateral damage.
"I am sorry he lost his life," Major General Peter Chiarelli, commander of US troops in Baghdad, told angry colleagues from Al-Arabiya, whose fixer Mazen al-Tomaisi was killed on Sunday.

"We regret the loss of any innocent civilians and we do everything in our power to limit these losses in combat operations," Colonel Jim McConville, aviation commander in the 1st Cavalry Division, told a news conference. The 28-year-old Palestinian journalist had been working for the pan-Arab satellite station as a fixer for over a year as well as as a reporter for Saudi television, covering the Iraq conflict.

Tomaisi was killed after rushing down from his flat in Haifa Street to give a report to a Reuters camera on clashes between US troops and insurgents because Al-Arabiya's own crew were blocked from entering, a colleague said. "He just wanted to get the best footage. The sad part was that six hours before he was at my engagement party," said producer Nasseer Younis. "He was hit in the thigh, the arm and the back. Residents took him to hospital and he died there," Mr Younis added. Two helicopters, laden with rockets, were dispatched to Haifa Street after a suicide bomber drove a car into a Bradley armoured vehicle and six soldiers were wounded in clashes with insurgents early on Sunday. Maj. Gen. Chiarelli and Col. McConville both insisted that the pilots had done all they could to minimise collateral damage.Told to destroy the Bradley to prevent looting, they had attacked at close range for greater accuracy, despite the greater risk to themselves, the US officers said.


"The action taken by our soldiers and pilots was clearly within their right. The rules of engagement allow pilots to protect sensitive equipment," said Maj. Gen. Chiarelli.

"Please tell the Iraqi people to stay away from vehicles involved in combat operations. Burning vehicles are particularly dangerous," said Maj. Gen. Chiarelli, warning that ammunition would explode once it reached a certain temperature.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10779200%255E1702,00.html

[jayfish]

1. Bullshit. -NT- (Because It Doesn't Warrant More Of A Response.)

Jay

[saigon68]

36. NOTHING TO SEE---- MOVE ALONG

An employee cleans up a pool of blood at the al-Karkh hospital in Baghdad following a car bomb explosion outside the headquarters of Baghdad Police in the Haifa Street area of the Iraq (news - web sites) capital, considered a bastion of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) loyalists. Forty-seven people died in the massive car bombing, leaving a trail of mayhem in the most lethal attack on Iraq's fledging security services in two months.(AFP/Sabah Arar

[2Design]

2. bs

[denverbill]

3. You mean he died because we were trying to prevent looting?

'We killed him because we wanted to stop him from possibly getting injured by exploding ammo in the burning Bradley.'

Does that sum it up? Christ, do we have so little control there that we can't send out a team to recover a damaged vehicle rather than let it burn, be looted, and ultimately have to blow it up ourselves.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

12. Yes, we have so little control. eom

[tom_paine]

4. Gotta love those crocodile tears

n/t

[biftonnorton]

5. For God's Sake Use A Zoom Lens

and stay the hell away from burning vehicles, especially military vehicles. Tell us a vehicle's on fire and people are dancing around it, hey, we'll believe you even without pictures.

[jayfish]

7. It's Their Country And Unfortunately If...

it's bad news from Iraq, Conservative wont believe it without pictures. Sometimes even with pictures they don't believe.

Jay


EDITED TO REMOVE REFERENCES OF A PERSONAL NATURE

[CHIMO]

23. Up to 110 Dead in Iraq in One of the Bloodiest Days of U.S. Occupation

AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn the Pentagon in defense of what it had done, a military spokesperson said, U.S. troops fired on the Bradley, “for the safety of the people around it.”

PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I mean, that's pretty -- an amazing thing to say, because what we have is not contested by anybody that 13 people are dead and 41 are wounded, most of them in this attack. It's difficult to see, also, why firing at the Bradley would make it safe for these people. But in any case, if you look at the video of the al Arabiya correspondent who was killed, you can see that he's standing about 150 yards from the Bradley and it was here that the rockets landed. It wasn't actually close. They were aiming for the Bradley and they certainly missed it and fired straight into the crowd. There shouldn't be any doubt about this, because sadly, we have film of the moment that the rockets landed killing all these people.

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Patrick Cockburn, he writes for The Independent newspaper of Britain. Why does the U.S. try to destroy its own vehicles once they have been hit? Even if -- I mean, there's no people in them?

PATRICK COCKBURN: I mean, the reason they put forward is that they wanted to destroy the arms and ammunition on board of the vehicle, which had been abandoned in the middle of Haifa Street, but again, this is peculiar to do this from the air because when this vehicle was hit by a bomb, they removed the wounded, and it would have been quite easy to, you know, -- if you wanted to destroy the vehicle at that stage safely to simply put an explosive charge or grenade inside, which I have seen done in Baghdad before, but it's pretty amazing to wait and then attack your own vehicle from the air when there are crowds around it. And in this case, you don't even hit the vehicle. You fire your rockets 150 yards away.



http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/13/1428237

[Dookus]

34. no

how about we don't fire on groups of civilians?

[MaineDem]

6. I don't normally post like this but...

Unfuckinbelievable!!!

[neuvocat]

8. but we could care less about anyone else.

After all, they don't make that much of an impact on our image.

[daleo]

9. What was so sensitive in a armored vehicle?

"The rules of engagement allow pilots to protect sensitive equipment"

Especially an armored vehicle that is burning. Clearly, the gun and ammunition are no big secret in today's world. The Iraqi resistance doesn't exactly seem short of ammunition or explosives either, so they were not denying them anything of critical importance to the Iraqis by destroying the burning vehicle.

Perhaps the communications gear in the vehicle might be considered sensitive, but since it was in a burning vehicle, presumably getting burned up, it wouldn't have been much good to the Iraqi resistance.

So, basically they are claiming they had to endanger dozens of people (and kill or wound many of them) to destroy something that was already on fire, that presented no great danger even if it fell into the wrong hands.

[saigon68]

10. We are making the place SAFE FOR DEMOCRACY

Just wait until the "FREE" elections

[daleo]

11. My morning paper quoted Allawi that they might be postponed

Big surprise - lack of security, they claim. They can't be secure that the result will come out the way they want, I guess.

[saigon68]

33. No Doubt

Its hard to put on a play -- when the director has to take cover in a fox hole periodically

[DoNotRefill]

22. apparently the ammo supply is drying up....

or at least getting harder to get.

[sr_pacifica]

13. They knew they were aiming at a journalist

The helicopters were low and slow enough for the crew to see there was a man with a camera in front of him---obviously a journalist. Possibly the camera had the letters al-arabiya, and if that was the case, certainly, his killing was deliberate.

[JSJ]

32. absolutely, and not the first time us troops deliberately...

...murdered a journalist.

[w4rma]

14. But Repugs aren't. You can read their thoughts on that other board. (nt)

[UpInArms]

15. well, that should bring him back to life /sarcasm .... n/t

[wsswss]

16. Will you be consistent?

Imagine when Kerry is POTUS and the military, operating under its standard rules of engagement, destroys a military vehicle to prevent the theft of sensitive equipment. Inevitably, some bystanders will die. Will you blame Kerry for the incident?

[jayfish]

17. Ummm... No.

Kerry did not invade Iraq. See how that works? Secondly, exactly what sensitive equipment is on-board a BFV? Was it the weapons of mass destruction? Third; if the vehicle is dangerous because of exploding ordinance, why did they need to destroy it? And finally; once Kerry is President I'm sure you will see a huge change in the ROE. We are trying to win hearts and minds...rememebr?

Jay

[Ms. Clio]

27. Like Jon Stewart once said, it's like they think we're retarded

The burning vehicle was dangerous to the people around it, so we had to fire missiles at them to protect them.

And the freepers nod sagely and say, yeah, that makes perfect sense to me.

[UpInArms]

18. well, if you have been reading any of my posts

you will notice a great deal of "consistency".

I imagine (knowing me for who I am) that the "consistency" will not change.

How about you?

Will you be consistent?

Did you just show up here?

Why are you questioning me?

Why do you question my statement without offering your own?

Are you afraid you can maintain a "consistent" viewpoint?

What's your take on dead people? Do they come back to life if one regrets their murder?

Would you have pardoned Tammy Faye?

Not to flame, but really, who in the world are you to question me?

(edited for html)

[wsswss]

19. Sorry

Sorry to burst your bubble, buddy, but I wasn't questioning you. I didn't even notice you. But having just read you, I wouldn't have bothered anyway.

And, yes, I always try to be consistent. Anything else is intellectually dishonest.

Finally, communications equipment is very sensitive.

[UpInArms]

20. well, wswss with 3 posts to your credit

how in the world would anyone know of your consistency?

And why did you "respond" to my post if not to "bother" me?

Consistency would require me to "welcome you to DU", but as you have made me rather annoyed, I believe that I'll pass.

If you hang around and post your opinions, I will reserve that for later.

[Q]

24. Communications equipment isn't worth one LIFE....

...and it's naive to defend the military shooting up bystanders and onlookers.

- Jesus...when will people 'get it' that these kinds of situations can be AVOIDED by not shooting at targets you can't identify? How many times has the US killed civilians only to say 'whoops' afterwards? There is simply NO EXCUSE for it any more.

[jayfish]

28. Oh Yes, Very Sensitive Indeed.

Lets kill 20 of em for A radio that was probably melted from the fire. The BFV had only been sitting there burning for an hour. :eyes: Intellectual dishonesty? I hear a lot of that on Yawn Hannity, could you define it for me?

Jay

[CHIMO]

31. U.S. Response to Death of Palestinian Al-Arabiya Journalist:

U.S. Response to Death of Palestinian Al-Arabiya Journalist: "He Was One Of The Terrorists"


http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/15/1419231

[Ms. Clio]

26. I'd say you are already demonstrating a consistent viewpoint

Why don't you talk about Bush instead of Kerry, for a change?

[wordout]

21. golly those are some really brave flyboys!

"Told to destroy the Bradley to prevent looting, they had attacked at close range for greater accuracy, despite the greater risk to themselves, the US officers said."

Y'know, they didn't *have* to murder this photographer they could've radio'ed back that they secured the area and let him live. As far as i'm concerned the pilots involved dont need to come home. fuck em don't want em back here. Any asshole that does what these guys did is just gonna cause major grief back here in the states. What's that you say- they were just "following orders™?" OK THEN, to the HAGUE with them where all the "good" nazis go!!

[leesa]

25. Yup. Just like we're sorry for the Iraqi children and the multiple wedding

celebrations we have blown to bits, and the innocent bystanders and the people trying to drive to work....yada, yada, yada.

[pinniped]

29. I'm not buying that sensitive equipment line.

There are burned out IFVs all over Iraq. I can't recall hearing about those being re-destroyed.

Sounds like payback to me.

[pinniped]

30. dbl post.

.

[PurityOfEssence]

35. Good thing nobody suggested we off one of ours to make it "even"...

I'm sure they'd mull it over...

No, I don't mean the military, I mean the political apparachiks in the Pentagon; the military is caught in quite a fix here.