Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Wikileaks Video Released!!

page: 81
597
<< 78  79  80    82  83  84 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   
well lets see i said when he was pointing the camera around the corner of the building not when it was lung over his back or shoulder was when it did realistically look like a rpg. and how can you say the video is just fine. you cant make out hardly anything in a versions thats been cleaned up. i do know for fact that it is less distinguishable when looking at it from inside the heli. I was in the army and knew many people when i was stationed at Fort bragg that worked at simmons army airfield i do know what you can see on them its not pure speculation on my behalf and 3 ft might have been an exaggeration but not by much watch the video again the thing is at least 2 ft long. you basicaly just put your opinions against mine and told me im wrong. you can disagree without being so condescending. its two points of view. and like i said before i even posted my comment i had several people watch an unlabeled version of the video and not a single person saw any of the things that had to be pointed out except for the kids being carried away from the bongo. i also said hind sight of course this is horrible and how the military handled was even worse but at the time. no one can look at that video and say they saw cameras without having known it before hand. Also if there was a helicopter looking there in the first place, there would have been some sort of information or intelligence that suggest it wasnt a friendly area. and look up the % of Christians. these areas are also well known to the military it can easily be assumed that they knew they werent christian. but that still doesnt change what i said because when i talked about the sunni and shii i only mentioned people dont get involved because they dont want to get caught in the fight between the two because they really do fight each other nearly as much as they fight the US. and general consensus of the country is to not risk yourself for someone not of your tribe. So all you accomplished was twisting my words to make them sound worse or more callous then in the way they were meant and then called me stupid (im summarizing) if i must i can pull up the specs for an ak, and a camera and then the diameter of the same camera and a rpg, and then break down christian/muslim and muslim sect percentages. you assume alot about me and being brain washed. i am one of the biggest advocates you can come across for how the military mistreats local muslims in the middle east. when i was there i can definitly say that i never saw a single iraqi with a 2 foot camera but i can say i saw plenty carrying weapons.... if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck then it must be a duck but occasional you get a goose.




posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   
and yay i finally hit 20 post so i could create the thread i have been wanting to for some time now. here and it does pertain to my previous post or at least the last little bit.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 10-4-2010 by joel.ohman]

[edit on 10-4-2010 by joel.ohman]



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I see a lot of anger and name calling, like cold blooded and such but what of their intentions, in their minds eye at that moment they believed they were engaging people with guns and anti aircraft weaponry. A case of bad intelligence and neglect to even secure solid information about the targets, I do believe they are guilty of negligent manslaughter, but that doesn't put them on the same moral platter as if they knowingly attacked innocents. It's not as if they are raping, pillaging and set on an uncoordinated attack of anything and everything. It is a war and war produces friendly fire and unwanted casualties occasionally, always has and always will as long as there is a war being fought. We should be angry that this world is always so divided in a way which propagates wars.

Be thankful that the people that fight our wars are people of moral principle in that they would never intentionally do something like this and not people that would knowingly destroy a large number of innocents just to set an example or make some point. This doesn't mean I think they should be off the hook, whoever it was that "gathered" and "confirmed" that poor intelligence shouldn't be in a position to do so ever again.



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
Please stop trying to defend the indefensible


No one seems to be defending the indefensible. They are trying to get the narrowminded posters here to actually take a look at what happened that day. How about people take off their blinders and actually doing some research. "Well, shucks, if wikileaks said it was murder, I guess it is..."

Has anyone actually read the FOIA? Everyone is crying, "Oh, the poor children were murdered!" Nope, they weren't. Wounded, not killed.

"Oh, the poor children were not allowed in a US Hospital." Nope, wrong again. The kids were taken to the US CSH and then a day or so later, taken to an Iraqi hospital.

"No one found any RPGS." Wrong again.
mypetjawa.mu.nu...

My personal fav of the moment is how everyone says, "It's too blurry to tell if they are carrying weapons", yet in the same breath they say, "The men were clearly carrying a Canon GL2 cam-corder and a Manfrotto 732CY M-Y Carbon Fiber 3 Section Tripod."



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
This latest video reminds me of many other incidents, like these;





In both of the above examples, the military denied any wrongdoing and tried to cover everything up so I can't say I'm surprised that they have attempted to do the same with the latest one.

The only thing I am surprised by in this thread is some posters' naivety when it comes to how the Iraqi public has been treated by the occupying forces.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Goathief
 



thank you once again for getting off point. we are not addressing the military in general we are talking about a specific one. are there soldiers who do things wrong. HELL YES!!! but if the video was so clear on what was going on why did the editor that posted it need to put little arrows and titles and blow up certain parts.... come on thats says alot. yes what happened is horrible that is not what is being defended we are defending against the people who want to rail against these guys who have seen and gone through this stuff time and time again. I cannot look at that video and see anything that suggests they were friendly and if you think there is nothing wrong with gathering together with what from a distance looks like weapons why dont you see how well that works out for you... try getting 8 black guys together, give them big ass cameras, put them in harlem wearing gangbanger attire and now put a cop several hundred yards away with crappy bino's that cop will probably make the same type of assumption. the difference here is that is in america and not in a literal war zone.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by joel.ohman
 


I really don't have the time to really dissect your post at the moment so I will tell you something that you're probably not aware of and would be probably be the biggest difference between your examples of inner-city America and anywhere in Iraq.

It is not legal for the public to carry machine guns around New York whereas almost every household in Iraq has at least a couple of AK47s (legally) and other weaponry to boot. Because of this, it is extremely important for our military to be very careful when picking targets there; this is just the locals remember - we haven't even covered private security firms, contractors, etc. Funnily enough the latter have limitations on the weapons they can import, but that's a different story.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


It doesn't matter how you paint it. The American invasion of Iraq is illegal (the invasion is based on false pretences), so that makes every death caused by an American soldier a murder and plainly adjustable.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Goathief
 


It is not legal to carry weapons around in new Baghdad they have stricter rules there. You know part of the rebuilding of Iraq and what not.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Interesting audio/video interview ...

“This is How These Soldiers Were Trained to Act”–Veteran of Military Unit Involved in 2007 Baghdad Helicopter Shooting Says Incident Is Part of Much Larger Problem


We speak with a former member of Bravo Company 2-16, the military unit involved in the 2007 helicopter shooting of Iraqi civilians that killed twelve people, including two Reuters employees, as seen on the military video released by WikiLeaks. “The natural thing to do would be to instantly judge or criticize the soldiers in this video,” says Josh Stieber. “Not to justify what they did, but militarily speaking, they did exactly what they were trained to do…If we’re shocked by this video, we need to be asking questions of the larger system, because this is how these soldiers were trained to act.”


Also a couple of twitts from WL:



[edit on 12 Apr 2010 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



Originally posted by jerico65


No one seems to be defending the indefensible. They are trying to get the narrowminded posters here to actually take a look at what happened that day. How about people take off their blinders and actually doing some research. "Well, shucks, if wikileaks said it was murder, I guess it is..."




I see a lot of posts trying to justify/defend/excuse this, have read this thread from the start and there have been some shockingly ignorant posts on here.

And I didn't mention Wikileaks at all.... i couldn't give two craps about wikileaks... I saw what I saw with my own eyes, I know that the Government have tried to cover this up for over two years.... I know that those pilots Murdered those people.... and then Murdered the people who come to clear away bodies.... :shk:

It's sick.






Has anyone actually read the FOIA? Everyone is crying, "Oh, the poor children were murdered!" Nope, they weren't. Wounded, not killed.
"Oh, the poor children were not allowed in a US Hospital." Nope, wrong again. The kids were taken to the US CSH and then a day or so later, taken to an Iraqi hospital.
"No one found any RPGS." Wrong again.
mypetjawa.mu.nu...




Never mentioned the children or what happened to them... so I guess that's more aimed at others.
But seeing as you have some sort of issue with people voicing concerns or getting upset/annoyed/angered by this cold-blooded murder, then I'd say it is you who needs to look at this a bit more, weigh up the facts and perhaps open your mind a little more.








[edit on 12/4/10 by blupblup]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by joel.ohman
reply to post by Goathief
 


It is not legal to carry weapons around in new Baghdad they have stricter rules there. You know part of the rebuilding of Iraq and what not.


Evidence, please.

Not that I'm saying you are incorrect, but the last I heard all these weapons were still legal throughout the country.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
You have to really love being critical and skeptical to argue in favor of the US on this. Can you not see what has been happening over there for decades now? I mean damn, it pisses me off how some people can ignore reality just to make themselves feel a certain way. And those are the people who call everyone else "ignorant" and "delusional"?

I'm 100% positive if anyone actually research's what's going on, they will see it, and if they don't see it, then who is really the "Delusional" one?



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Check this out!
www.liveleak.com...


PHOTO TAKEN RIGHT BEFORE ENGAGEMENT WITH CRAZYHORSE 18, SHOWING EXTREMELY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO US FORCES. CRAZYHORSE PERCEIVED THIS TO BE IMMEDIATE RPG THREAT AND ENGAGED.


I just showed my husband this footage. He was there and had a role in reviewing the investigation on this case. His response below might clarify some things.

This footage shows the final engagement of the Reuters field reporters in New Baghdad. Missing is the overwatch video and earlier AH64 footage showing the development of the situation where the two reporters and armed men supported by a van and cars were shadowing a Coalition patrol. These reporters accompanied the armed men who were tracking a Coalition patrol about a city block away. The camera man would peek around corners to shoot a few digital frames of the patrol and then show the pictures to the armed men. If you have all the video footage, you will see this activity happened repeatedly. The operational suspicion was that this was enemy TTP (tactic, technic, or procedure) to help prepare for an attack; the digital photos would be used to quickly evaluate the target — to judge what it looked like, its shape, distance, terrain in between, where to aim, etc. This way, the RPG operator would select the right warhead, he’d preset the mechanical sights (elevation), and fix in his mind a visual picture of the target so he would limit his exposure time when stepping out in the street to fire. The recovered camera showed how the cameral man was aiding the enemy. What you also don’t have is the operational history of RPG attacks in New Baghdad. This was heavy JAM territory. I understand that it is disturbing to see calculated killing, but the engagement was not without cause. The engagement of the van should be understood in the overall context of earlier events. It is obvious the AH64 pilots and the operational commander conferred. This was not a war crime.


Interesting more footage not being shown, I would like to see more of it.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


Who just showed it to their husband and where is this footage? I just saw a report on television saying it has been confirmed that there was no firefight preceding this incident so I would really like to know more about the above quote.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


So now the reuters photog is a spotter for an rpg?
He took one photo around a corner and that's it. The next frame on the camera is his last photo and shows his hair and blood and is assumed to been taken when he was shot. To claim that he was somehow aiding insurgents is far fetched at best.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Here:

147 civilians killed in one incident last year. We admitted to killing fewer than this and apologized. The number was refuted....

Wikileaks supposedly has the video in the oven...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13-4-2010 by David9176]



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
So the 18 minute video on youtube now has over 5.8 million views but it is not listed on the "most viewed" videos for the past week.

The #1 video is a ipad being blended with 5.1 million views.

So why would youtube not have it listed as #1?

I love google but so i don't know why they would try to hide it. Maybe if the video is over 10 minutes long they don't count it as a normal video? Any thoughts on this?

www.youtube.com...



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 



Why is it far fetched? You seen the video of him standing and walking, interacting with the insurgents like hes a member of the group. Shouldn't he be far away from them? Sneaking a peek around the corner to take a photo of a Humvee raises suspicion. Way too suspicious.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by BeastMaster2012
So the 18 minute video on youtube now has over 5.8 million views but it is not listed on the "most viewed" videos for the past week.

The #1 video is a ipad being blended with 5.1 million views.

So why would youtube not have it listed as #1?

I love google but so i don't know why they would try to hide it. Maybe if the video is over 10 minutes long they don't count it as a normal video? Any thoughts on this?

www.youtube.com...




certain types of adult related content or violence wont show up in the most popular list for fear of exposing kids to stuff which its not like they cant see it anyway but thats the idea behind it. they dont mind gore or almost naked chicks on youtube they just dont put them on the front page.





new topics

top topics



 
597
<< 78  79  80    82  83  84 >>

log in

join