It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Video: US mercenaries Randomly Shooting Iraqis

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   

when a tech support phone operator in India kills 5 people do you blame microsoft because they hired the company that employed the indian murderer? that, my friend, is what you are saying.


Were they allowed entry into a country by a foreign STATE?

Were they given arms to use by a foriegn STATE?

Were they given immunity from the Judicial system?

There were a series of actions leading up to these warcrimes, and none of it would have happened were it not for multiple purposeful actions by the US STATE.

The US STATE chose to do everything other than pull the trigger.

Above the individuals the US STATE holds responsibility for their actions because it was through their actions alone that this was allowed to happen.

No other nation in the world can be blamed because they did nothing to make this happen.




posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
If they were Mercs serving the UN that makes them UN Mercs.

If that is the case what STATE is responsible for their actions?

Is the UN itself a STATE, or not?


the US isn't a state.

The UN is a group of nations banded together to, apparently, further the wealth of the member nations and their ambassadors by any means necessary.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 10:23 AM
link   

the US isn't a state.


I didn't say it was.

I was speaking of the US STATE.


State:
8
a. The supreme public power within a sovereign political entity.
b. The sphere of supreme civil power within a given polity: matters of state.

www.answers.com...&r=67



I use all capital letters to be sure that the finger is pointed at the corperate entity of THE UNITED STATES and its functionaries.

Not the people of America, or the land of America, or any American government other than the Admin of the entity.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngelWere they given arms to use by a foriegn STATE?

Were they given immunity from the Judicial system?

There were a series of actions leading up to these warcrimes, and none of it would have happened were it not for multiple purposeful actions by the US STATE.


please show me your sources for the above statements.

I'm curious to see where it says that the US gov't is arming Aegis.
I'm curious to see where it says that anyone breaking the law while working for a company employed by the US is granted immunity.
I'm curious to see proof that the US said "go shoot Iraqi's at you leisure"
I'm curious to see proof that this video was made during the current occupation and not, say during the period where Aegis was providing securtity for the food for oil program.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Doesn't the S in U.S mean States? If so then U.S State is actually United States State, Arch when you say the U.S State do you not mean U.S State Department?
It's a bit like when microsoft advertised NT as "Built with NT Technology" what they are saying is Built with New Technology Technology".



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   

please show me your sources for the above statements.


Paul Bremmers order #17.

Contractors are given immunity from Iraqi law.

I posted it several pages back already so look up the line that applies for yourself....

www.cpa-iraq.org...



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
Doesn't the S in U.S mean States? If so then U.S State is actually United States State, Arch when you say the U.S State do you not mean U.S State Department?
It's a bit like when microsoft advertised NT as "Built with NT Technology" what they are saying is Built with New Technology Technology".


The word state has many meanings.

So do many other words.

Its not as confusing as you try to make it.


When someone refers to the US STATE they are talking about the Federal Administration.

President is Head of STATE in America.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   
nothing in this provision shall prohibit MNF personnel from preventing acts of serious misconduct by Contractors, or otherise temporarily detaining any Contractors who pose a risk of injury to themselves or others, pending expeditious turnover to the appropriate authorities of the SENDING STATE (S.A. ? or UK?) In all such circumstances, the apporpriate senior representative of the Contractor's Sending State in Iraq shall be notified.

All Contractors SHALL RESPECT RELEVANT IRAQI LAWS, including Regulations, Orders, Memoranda, and Public Notices by the Administrator of the CPA.


It also seems to read that contractors will be dressed and armed by THEIR SENDING STATES. It doesn't indicate that the US will arm or dress these folks so, a South African Merc worknning for a British Security Company would, apparently be sent from the UK and, therefore, be dealth with by the UK. So, a UK Merc was doing this. Of course he broke the laws stated in the provisional authority which I think might be outdated and no longer in effect. Of that I am not sure but the Iraqi elections, constitution etc might have made the provisional authority moot and, therefore, the South African Merc is on his own.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

When someone refers to the US STATE they are talking about the Federal Administration.






A U.S. state is any one of the fifty states (four of which officially favor the term commonwealth) which, together with the District of Columbia and Palmyra Atoll (an uninhabited incorporated unorganized territory), form the United States of America. The separate state governments and the U.S. federal government share sovereignty, in that an "American" is a citizen both of the federal entity and of his or her state of residence.

link



Do you generally make things up? Wait don't answer that.......obviously you do.

Or maybe you're referring to the US Department of State?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

please show me your sources for the above statements.


Paul Bremmers order #17.

Contractors are given immunity from Iraqi law.

I posted it several pages back already so look up the line that applies for yourself....

www.cpa-iraq.org...


A couple pages back, I also posted the revised version of #17....



One of the real problems in regulating all private contractors is their somewhat ambiguous legal status. As Singer wrote in a March 2005 article in Foreign Affairs, "Although private military firms and their employees are now integral parts of many military operations, they tend to fall through the cracks of current legal codes, which sharply distinguish civilians from soldiers. Contractors are not quite civilians, given that they often carry and use weapons, interrogate prisoners, load bombs and fulfill other critical military roles. Yet they are not quite soldiers, either."

In June 2003, the Coalition Provisional Authority handed down Memorandum 17, which grants foreign contractors immunity from Iraqi law while working within the boundaries of their contracted tasks. The memo placed private contractors under the legal authority of the workers' home countries. In June 2004, one day before the CPA transferred sovereignty in Iraq to the interim Iraqi government, Paul Bremer signed a revised version of Memorandum 17, which stipulates that the rule remain in effect until multinational forces are withdrawn from Iraq or until it is amended by Iraqi lawmakers.


www.pbs.org...



Do you even read other people's posts?



[edit on 2-12-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
If they were Mercs serving the UN that makes them UN Mercs.

No they are mercenaries, UN mercs implies the UN owns them or they belong to the UN.
They clearly dont.


If that is the case what STATE is responsible for their actions?

Is the UN itself a STATE, or not?

The UN is not a state and I heard 0 stories about people being killed then, so this implies it was a bunch of idiots.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Do you generally make things up? Wait don't answer that.......obviously you do.


Do you understand the difference between A US State and THE US STATE?

Again, the word state has many meanings.

I think this explains the large part of everyones problem in this thread.




posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   
That video really isnt any proof of anything but that a gun is being fired. I recently have watched new videos that show very disturbing images of more horrific brutalities. What was done in that video is not right, even if they were their own people but its pretty bold just to say it was americans. America is doing enough crapping things to that country, you dont have to add to it by just guessing on things.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I just watched the film and frankly these guys are a bunch of idiots, dropping pyrotechnics out of cars, firing blanks at cars coming by then finally actually SHOOTING at a damm car....one thing I wanna know is this...how come there isnt much more dammage caused by the gunfire? I mean look at it and you see very little dammage done.



posted on Dec, 3 2005 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
I just watched the film and frankly these guys are a bunch of idiots, dropping pyrotechnics out of cars, firing blanks at cars coming by then finally actually SHOOTING at a damm car....one thing I wanna know is this...how come there isnt much more dammage caused by the gunfire? I mean look at it and you see very little dammage done.


How can you tell if blanks are being shot?

You can clearly see the bullets hitting in the scenes.

Take off your rose colored glasses, and look again.



posted on Dec, 3 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
How can you tell if blanks are being shot?

Because in most of them you dont see any shots hitting anything and I'm pretty sure they cant miss at 50 yards.


You can clearly see the bullets hitting in the scenes.

Yeah in SOME scenes as I said They did fire bulllets.
[qoute]
Take off your rose colored glasses, and look again.
Rose coloured glasses? I take it you mean the same glasses that I wore when I AGREED with you several seconds ago, but no ofcourse not.....
Take off your own glasses and report both sides.



posted on Dec, 4 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   
I have been a long time lurker, but could not let this thread continue with my comments. I am a security contractor working in Iraq.

Nobody carries blanks in Iraq. Sorry, but this is just too silly to consider. This is a war zone. Flashbangs, flares, etc are commonly used to alert the vehicles that they are in danger if they continue towards the convoy. We are not idiots. This is a war zone.

While I respect your right to comment on the video, you need to realize that if you have no experience with what the current situation is, you run the risk of showing your ignorance. Strong opinions become weak if they have no foundation. Do you know what the ROE are? Do you know what the Trunk Monkey’s job is?

This is a war zone. The video does not show random shootings. It shows action taken against vehicles that fail to slow down and fail to take notice of the warnings. You cannot see what the Trunk Monkey is doing in this regard. You cannot see the warning sign on the back of the vehicle or the flashing lights. This is a war zone. Over 200 contractors have been killed, and nearly 4000 wounded. This is a war zone. The press only reports deaths, and hardly ever mentions the constant attacks against security contractors, ranging from random gunfire, to car bombs, to complex ambushes. I have been wounded twice in action and have been working in Iraq since early 2004. I know this is a war zone.


As for the apparent lack of visible damage from the gunfire, it is very difficult to stop a vehicle with just engine shots, especially with 5.56. That is why you have to target the driver if he continues in on you. Bullet hits on vehicles don’t splash like they do in the movies. They make nice little holes and knock off a bit of paint.



posted on Dec, 4 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   
No one caries blanks? Thats a big statement for one contractor.

Also, your statement about the no apparant damage, one small question; "Why is there no sign of the windshield being dammaged in some of the videos?



posted on Dec, 4 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   

This is a war zone. The video does not show random shootings. It shows action taken against vehicles that fail to slow down and fail to take notice of the warnings. You cannot see what the Trunk Monkey is doing in this regard. You cannot see the warning sign on the back of the vehicle or the flashing lights.



Are you saying that all security contractors in Iraq use some flashing lights, and hang a warning sign on their vehicles?

Or is it just that they drive around with hazard lights on?

Since you can't see it in this video how do YOU know that these warning systems are being used at this time?

If they were simply trying to get the people to back off why did they slow down to a stop, and continue firing????

Would that be self-defense, or attempted murder?



posted on Dec, 4 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
No one caries blanks? Thats a big statement for one contractor.

Also, your statement about the no apparant damage, one small question; "Why is there no sign of the windshield being dammaged in some of the videos?


With most modern rifles blank rounds require the use of a blank firing attachment (BFA) on the muzzle of the weapon in order to generate enough pressure to cycle the action. This means that live rounds and blanks cannot be fired at the same time with out removing the BFA. This takes time.

Also what is the point of carrying blanks in Iraq? This would make it too easy to stick the wrong mag on the weapon at the most inoppertune time, probably getting the firer killed. This is not the type of risk that a professional would take, and trust me, the majority of these guys are from the most professional of backgrounds, if you know what I mean!

Bottom line - either there are all live rounds being fired her, or all blanks. As there is no evidence of a BFA and there is evidence of rounds hitting, my money is on live rounds.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join