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.

 

U.S. will allow friendly fire video to be released

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:50 AM
link   
A video showing US soldier's reactions to accidentally killing a British soldier was originally kept secret by the US government, but last Tuesday, the newspaper "The Sun" leaked the video, showing the soldier's reactions after finding out they killed a coalition force soldier. Member's of the slain soldier's family had pressed the US government into releasing the video, but until now, the government kept the video classified and the British goverment claimed no such video existed.
 



news.yahoo.com
LONDON - The United States has agreed to release a classified cockpit video showing the dismayed reaction of two American pilots after they killed a British soldier during a friendly fire incident in Iraq, a spokesman for the coroner said Tuesday.

In the video, a U.S. pilot is heard saying "I'm going to be sick," then "we're in jail, dude," after firing on the British convoy in the southern Iraqi city of Basra on March 28, 2003. Lance Cpl. Matty Hull was killed.

The U.S. military had previously refused to release the video to Hull's family, despite requests by British government officials and the coroner investigating the death. The video was leaked and published Tuesday by The Sun newspaper.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I have to say, I sympathize with the family over the loss of their son. It's not unusual for the US government to keep information regarding a slain soldier's death from the soldier's family. Without this video, there's no telling how long it would have taken the British soldier's family to know the events surrounding his death.

[edit on 6-2-2007 by DJMessiah]

[edit on 6-2-2007 by DJMessiah]




posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 03:38 PM
link   
What a bunch of nice guys. They agree to release it after it has already been leaked. How gracious of them to do so instead of doing it before there was a leak and bringing more unneccessary attention on the matter. It makes you appear 10X more guilty when it appears you are trying to cover something up and not co-operating. These are after all supposed to be our allies and our government should have co-operated fully from the get-go instead of having some tabloid do it for us.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   
The family of the dead UK soldier were originaly told the plane that killed their son was flying at between 15000/17000ft, funny how the video shows the aircraft flying at 5000/7000ft.

It is a disgrace in this day and age that with all the technology we have the friendly forces only safegaurd is to paint an orange square on their vehicles. What a joke.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
the final radio exchange between the pilots at least demonstrated that they realised thier error , though there was more SELF pity than remorse or contrition .

but atleast the tape will be very usefull to the UK coroner , and ruled that it is admissible evidence

so the chances of a just verdict [ unlawfull killing ] are rising - so there will be closure for the familiy



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   

It is not known who leaked the video to the newspaper, but the US government has suggested it is likely to have been a criminal act.

Source.


Whoever leaked this footage to The Sun is a hero, IMO.

[edit on 6/2/07 by Implosion]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally by Ignorant_ape
the final radio exchange between the pilots at least demonstrated that they realised thier error , though there was more SELF pity than remorse or contrition .

but atleast the tape will be very usefull to the UK coroner , and ruled that it is admissible evidence

so the chances of a just verdict [ unlawfull killing ] are rising - so there will be closure for the familiy


Im not sure but I think the Pilot when he did find out what had happened had asked for a status from the ground. You are right though it was mostly self-pity as they mentioned Jail. I don't remember hearing him saying anything about how he hoped they were ok or anything in the chatter. Its not all their fault though. There was someone saying there were no friendlies that far north where they were. The fault should not be all directed towards them.

Pie



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
From the UK sun report on the incident...


ERROR ONE came when they asked the Forward Air Controller, call sign Manila Hotel, if friendly forces were around the Iraqi vehicles — not to the west. In ERROR TWO neither pilot gave the precise grid references for the Household Cavalry patrol to double check its identity.

ERROR THREE saw them convince themselves the identification panels were really orange rocket launchers.

In ERROR FOUR POPOV36 decides to attack, saying he is “rolling in” — without permission from the Forward Air Controller. POPOV35 asks for artillery to fire a marker round into the target area to clear up confusion.

But ERROR FIVE came when POPOV36 attacked without waiting for it. In ERROR SIX POPOV36 strafes the column for a second time but still doubts its identity.

The video explained



[edit on 6-2-2007 by sensfan]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
so the chances of a just verdict [ unlawfull killing ] are rising - so there will be closure for the familiy


US military personnel cannot be tried or held by a court system to which the US is not a party of. Only the the UCMJ and a US military court martial can do that, however an investigation was already done (by the US) and none of the soldiers were ever tired (this incident happened March 28th, 2003).

Also, the pilots in question do ask for the condition of the friendly forces and one can even be heard crying later on in the video.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

US military personnel cannot be tried or held by a court system to which the US is not a party of. Only the the UCMJ and a US military court martial can do that, however an investigation was already done (by the US) and none of the soldiers were ever tired (this incident happened March 28th, 2003).

Also, the pilots in question do ask for the condition of the friendly forces and one can even be heard crying later on in the video.


Crying or not, they should have waited until the target was confirmed. It appears they did not, but rather jumped the gun and fired anyway.

If there is any doubt about what you are looking at is the target, then you should bloody well find out.

It's not as if they were even taking any fire or in a rush, they just assumed the HC of being the enemy and fired. Even if they were, an A-10 is built like a Brick outhouse and is particulary hard to down at the best of times (damn good plane, IMO)

Only after the fact do they seem to care and only because they thought they were in trouble.

It's the same very time we have these "blue on blue" incidents. The culprits do not attempt to identify their target, but rather shoot first to be on the safe side.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Actually they asked the FAC if what they were seeing was his target and the controller replied "that's affirm". Furthermore I think it's very appalling that you think they only cared because they thought they were in trouble. To me the reaction of the pilots is genuine and based on sorrow not fear, no one enjoys or wants to kill friendly forces on the battlefield. And for those Brits out there, they (the pilots) did not know they were British forces until some time later.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
It seems now that the existence of the video has been proven to be true, there is a large backlash in the UK, over their government's denial of the video.

In reply to the British government's denial of the video's existence, Hull's widow states:




"I would have preferred to hear the evidence from the U.S. pilots themselves. However, they cannot be compelled to come and they have not come voluntarily. The video is therefore vital evidence and must be shown," Susan Hull said in a statement.

"After years of being told that it did not exist or was secret I feel that it was right not to give up hope."



Source:
"Video of U.S. friendly fire unleashes storm in UK"
news.yahoo.com



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join