Thread: The murder of innocence

http://collateralmurder.com/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPr...edded&aia=true

I dedicate this post to those who wish to put the world in its place. To break those who resist and smite them into submission. Those who gleefully bring war onto others or those too foolish to know its horrors.

Come, let the apologia begin.

I am in the process of watching this and am raging unbelievably fucking hard .

I mean seriously...

"Oh yeah look at those dead bastards."
"Nice. Nice (laughing)."

or

"I think they just drove over a body."
"Haha really?"
"Haha yeah."

Phenomenal footage.. I'm surprised it was released at all, Freedom of Information Act or otherwise.

But at least we go to such great lengths to verify that the people we're shooting at are hostiles, right?... Right?

this is pretty sad stuff. Casualties are sad enough. I think the worst part is that it doesnt surprise me

Originally Posted by Invader

Phenomenal footage.. I'm surprised it was released at all, Freedom of Information Act or otherwise.

But at least we go to such great lengths to verify that the people we're shooting at are hostiles, right?... Right?

It wasn't from the FOIA. It was leaked by a whistleblower. Just FYI.

You know, I watched some video called the "History of Execution" (something like that) once. Do not want to ever see it again.

Shooting at unarmed medical personal is a war crime. If a van shows up and it starts picking up injuried people, and it doesn't appear to be hostile then what is it?

I saw it yesterday.

It's simply a disgrace.. I don't think the pilot and gunner have been punished or reprimanded, they should.

Originally Posted by Specialis Sapientia

I saw it yesterday.

It's simply a disgrace.. I don't think the pilot and gunner have been punished or reprimanded, they should.

You need to understand that to these guys this was just another group of people posing a threat to people, so they dealt with it. They couldn't possibly tell that the guns were actually cameras.

The way that the guys talk about it has no meaning. Do you expect soldiers to shed tears everytime they shoot an enemy?

Originally Posted by Marvo

You need to understand that to these guys this was just another group of people posing a threat to people, so they dealt with it. They couldn't possibly tell that the guns were actually cameras.

The way that the guys talk about it has no meaning. Do you expect soldiers to shed tears everytime they shoot an enemy?

If they can see the shoulder strap of a camera, then it's kind of hard to miss the Lack of the actual AK-47. They are standard trigger-happy idiots, of which there are probably thousands in all militaries, militias or wherever... it's what is to be expected. It's not right (duh) and makes me kind of angry, but it seems that the decadent modern world turned me into a mostly apathetic person regarding these things. It's just another picture of the absurdity that is the human existence. This is just one thing and just as terrible things are happening and going to happen as long as human beings exist.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Do you expect soldiers to shed tears everytime they shoot an enemy?

I think we expect them to correctly identify targets before they fucking shoot them.

Originally Posted by Marvo

You need to understand that to these guys this was just another group of people posing a threat to people, so they dealt with it. They couldn't possibly tell that the guns were actually cameras.

The way that the guys talk about it has no meaning. Do you expect soldiers to shed tears everytime they shoot an enemy?

Of course they could tell the difference from a gun to a camera, they should! It is so apparent in the video that it's not guns. Those pilot and gunner have (or should) been educated on identified such objects, but they failed miserably. They saw what they wanted to see.

Tell me, why the fuck are they so quick to get permission to kill the people in the van, who comes to pick the wounded up. That is beyond reason and Rules of Engagement!!

They should should be charged with homicidal war crimes in a military court. But no no, the superior officers won't even admit anything, that they were in fact civilians, and that children was among the victims.

What happened when the ground soldier found the two injured kids? He requested MEDEVAC to a nearby field base, which has a proper hospital facility. But no, superiors said that the Iraqi police could take care of it, and a local hospital. Not even were they unjustified shot, but they couldn't get the best treatment available, and the risk of bleeding to death while waiting for the IP to arrive.

Did you even watch the video? Cameras do not look like AK-47s. I wouldn't have seen them as weapons if I wasn't told they were cameramen. If your job is to fight an enemy which is only possibly recognized if he's carrying a weapon, then you're expected to know what a rifle looks like. They were not in a hurry, they could've circled around an x ammount of times to see what was going on and in the last resort send the ground troops to intercept. If they didn't have time, then they definitely don't have a reason to engage. You cannot recognise a short, thick camera and a shoulder strap as a rifle which is the length of a human torso. Why do you keep defending them? There are ways to deal such a situation and it's not shooting people casually walking down the street just because you're pumped up with adrenaline and seeing ak's everywhere.

They shot at the van because "We have individuals goins to the scene, looks like possibly uh picking up bodies and weapons" (before the van even stops - It appears these airmen were not only very good at recognising AK-47s and RPGs but also proficient in telepathy) ..."Picking up the wounded, -Yeah, we're trying to get permission to engage"... I don't even know what's up with this. How strange is it for a person to help another one in distress. I mean I know we in the western world are used to the bystander effect and let people die in our streets, but if you're driving down a street and see a man crawling around in a pool of blood and bodies calling for help, then you don't pass by and leave him there. I'm sorry, there is just no sense in shooting up a person that's trying to help. Especially if it's a van that is easily tracked and stopped if you really are convinced that it's driven by evil incarnate. This is a fucked up situation which is being coverd up exactly for that reason. There is no need to defend it.

I agree with you to some extent, though you're not completely right. If you watched that video without the knowledge that those guys were cameramen, you wouldn't be able to tell whether they were holding weapons or not. In any case it doesn't matter. The guys in the helicopters are watching this stuff on much smaller monitors than we have. Sure, if you snapped out pictures you could identify the cameras more easily. On the other hand, you can snap out other pictures and identify weapons.

It still all comes down to the fact that war does a lot of shit to people, like this. You are attacking the wrong people when you say "give them reprimands". The real culprits here would be the politicians.

Just watched the video. Absolutely disgusting.

I don't care if a bunch of youtubers can't tell the difference if it's a camera or a weapon. The video we are watching isn't the same as the real 3D experience which always has more detail than some video online.

If they can't tell the difference between a camera and a weapon, what's next? A cell phone and a gun? How many innocent people have died out of some irrational fear they MIGHT have weapons, which no real confirmation that they do? How many innocent people have been shot down, just for trying to help someone on the street. Marvo, I think you're the one missing the larger picture. Do you really think this is an isolated event?

In the event that a tragedy happens and innocent civilian is murdered by an idiot who can't tell the difference, does that mean he should just be pardoned like that? "Oops, sorry, tough luck." This is a real human life here that was ended by a paid professional. These army boys are trained. They are there to serve a role, and we should insure that they are doing their job right - which means no killing random civilians on the street like trigger happy murderers - and if they aren't doing their job, which we are paying them do - then justice on them needs to be served. Even if its as simple as taking their wings away.

I don't even understand on what grounds can they possibly imagine that they should fire this vehicle. There is no sense in it at all. I mean, why are they so pissed that they are picking up dead bodies? What, to raise the dead by the hand of Satan? Have you asked yourself this? Why are they so upset that they were trying to pick up dead bodies? Is it because they want the americans to pick up the bodies before anyone can investigate? These men don't even sound worried or scared that it was an enemy, they just sound trigger happy. It's disgusting. The army should be ashamed, they should come clean and admit that they have murdered innocent people for stupid ass reasons.

If they don't come clean, we are the ones who are going to pay. We are the ones the terrorists will target in the future, fueled by events such as this. The army puts us in danger by lying and deceiving.

"They thought they had weapons" is an extremely weak excuse. How anxious was that guy to pull the trigger? I think verifying that what they had were actual weapons was put on the back burner in this situation. It's pretty obvious they were just looking for what they'd call a good time. I'd say the laughing and congratulating themselves on the pile of bodies they made was a good indication of this.

I see a whole lot of commenting and opinions from people who have absolutely no idea what its like to be in a situation like that. Good god people, when shit happens, morality and critical thinking almost disappear. To show you what i mean I'm going to go ahead and tell you a little story.

Since I've been in Afghanistan, I've been shot at, hit with several IEDs, and seen young soldiers of several different nationalities blown apart. To say the least, life is tense out here. About 4 months ago a suicide bomber on a motorcycle decided to blow up my convoy. He was traveling along the side of the road, swerved onto the road as we were passing, and detonated next to our lead truck. I had the pleasure of seeing his head and neck flying through the air. Some of my guys got wounded, and thankfully nothing more because it was a small bomb. The attack could have been stopped had the guys on our truck shot him. Since then I've been a little more cautious with who i let near our vechicles. This is why we have "EOF"

EOF is "escalation of force". We honk or horns first, then aim our weapons, then fire a warning shot, and only THEN do we use lethal force. I've had to do the whole thing more than once. And it hasn't always been against insurgents.After watching this video, I can tell you several things. 1) The video has been doctored so that you don't see much of the leadup to the engagement. They were obviously watching those guys for a while before that. 2) The Apache operators used proper EOF for helicopter pilots (EOF depends on different jobs. Obviously a helicopter pilot isnt going to honk his horn) 3) I saw weapons. ABSOLUTELY. There were definately AK style weapons and I believe i saw a guy slinging around an RPG tube (with no warhead on it) at about 3:50 into the video.

Notice how they didnt shoot the guy who was crawling. Good job pilots on that. What happened from then on IS NOT PROPER EOF. The van should not have been shot. Whoever gave them permission to fire made the wrong decison.

Its regretable that innocent people died. But I would have done the same thing. This shit sucks, Im telling you. Either risk killing innocent people, or risk letting your friends get killed. It just sucks.

A question that needs to get asked though. What the hell were these reporters doing with armed men in civilian clothing?

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

What the hell were these reporters doing with armed men in civilian clothing?

I think what you and many others are forgetting, is that its legal to own guns in Iraq. What a big shocker. Ak-47s which are legal to own in the US, are also legal to own in iraq.

Which brings up another point. You can't just shoot anyone you see who has a gun, what the hell happened to the right to bear arms?

Hmm so why was the reporters with a group of armed men? Maybe so they can avoid getting shot by terrorists? Or maybe for protection so they dont get captured and have their heads cut off? Apparently they should of been more worried about the US military however.

Originally Posted by Alric

Hmm so why was the reporters with a group of armed men? Maybe so they can avoid getting shot by terrorists? Or maybe for protection so they dont get captured and have their heads cut off? Apparently they should of been more worried about the US military however.

I read that as....

Originally Posted by Alric

Hmm so why was the reporters with a group of armed men? Maybe so they can avoid getting shot by terrorists? Or maybe for protection so they dont get captured and have their heads cut off? Apparently they should of been more worried about the terrorists.

Originally Posted by Alric

I think what you and many others are forgetting, is that its legal to own guns in Iraq. What a big shocker. Ak-47s which are legal to own in the US, are also legal to own in iraq.

Which brings up another point. You can't just shoot anyone you see who has a gun, what the hell happened to the right to bear arms?

Hmm so why was the reporters with a group of armed men? Maybe so they can avoid getting shot by terrorists? Or maybe for protection so they dont get captured and have their heads cut off? Apparently they should of been more worried about the US military however.

You clearly have not taken into consideration the fact that they're in a state of war. Yes, it's legal to own and carry a weapon in Iraq, but not during a war. War journalists do not carry weapons. If they did, they would be considered dangerous by soldiers of either side of the war and would be shot much more often. They usually have special vests on or are otherwise clearly distinguished as journalists. Things like this are the exact reason for that.

You can't see enough to identify exactly what they're holding, but there is a definite problem with one part. When the guy is peeking around the corner, the way he is posed and holding his camera (?) is easily interpreted as holding a weapon ready to fire.

The soldiers in the video were doing exactly what they were there to do - prevent an ambush. These reporters should have done something to identify them as reporters. Why did they fail to notify the military of their movements? Why did they fail to show ANY signs of being journalists?

How can you say that the military was in the wrong when you have no idea what it's like to be shot at and have to kill people on a daily basis as part of your job?

That said... I don't understand why they opened fire on the van. It wasn't a threat.

And with regards to the soldiers laughing about it... that's just what they do. If you can't be comfortable with killing people, then you don't belong in a war.

Originally Posted by Vampyre

And with regards to the soldiers laughing about it... that's just what they do. If you can't be comfortable with killing people, then you don't belong in a war.

Am I the only one that when I read such?

Originally Posted by Specialis Sapientia

Am I the only one that when I read such?

Indeed, it is unfortunate, but it's true. Reporters shouldn't even be in warzones, but they insist on getting that story...