It wasn't widely announced Jerry. This is actually the first I have heard of it and I pay attention to this stuff. I think that is why we are seeing the outrage now. Keep in mind, the Bush administration did it's best to suppress any negative news coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan when it could contain it. It really limited the media and trained to reign them in to avoid an erosion of public opinion, like what happened during Vietnam...which was one of the first conflicts to be exposed to the public in almost real time. The constant news coming out of Vietnam is what fueled a lot of the anti-war protests. The Bush admin propaganda machine tried to put the best face it could on these wars. That's not partisan conspiracy...that is the facts.
Eric -----Original Message----- From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:59 AM To: cf-community Subject: Re: This is not good.... You dont see the guns? Really? There are clearly 3 out in the open, with another probable on the guy closest to the building. And this area WAS a war zone, not a civilian zone. There was a raid that morning on the corner building, where war material was seized. Which was WHY the Reuters photogs were there in the first place. As for the Lying, yes, The might of the US government and military should drop down like a ton of bricks on those who lie up their chain of command. Mistakes will happen. Lies will happen. But the lies cannot, should not be tolerated. You know where this video came from? From a classified military source who was fed up with the stonewalling, and leaked it. And yes, I hope to hell changes were made after this event. Even if everyone involved acted with the best of intentions, and within their job and rules of engagement, and no one lied, it still needs to not happen again. Because we cannot make enough bullets to win this way (regardless of how you define "win") Did anyone violate their rules of engagement? I cannot know that until we know _what_ their rules were. Were they allowed to shoot anyone with a gun? Were they focused on that block in particular? So I am withholding judgment, with the hope that more facts will become available over the next week or two. Were the rules of engagement wrong, even if followed? I cannot know that until we know _what_ their rules were, and what the situation was. Who were the other men killed? Why were they armed standing on the street? Were they part of the neighborhood watch? Or part of the insurgency? Were they Iraqis or foreign fighters? I want more facts. We knew about this shooting in the summer of 2007. Where was all the outrage then? The facts as we knew them were the same. But we didn't have the video. Is that the only reason this is making waves today? Truthfully, I am WAY more upset about the Afghanistan shootings and coverup than this one. There seems to be way less grey area on that one. And more upset by the stonewalling SO FAR IN THIS STORY about the FOI than about the shootings. Transparency after-the-fact is important. And if people lied, then they should be disciplined. On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: > I cannot understand how a trained operator could look at that footage > and see RPGs and guns. I cannot make out what those objects are. > Iraq is not a military zone..there are civilians. All your actions > should err on the side of the innocents. > We will never know how many innocent civilians were killed in Iraq. > Nor in Afghanistan. > > At some point you need to take stock and question whether these > tactics and these operating procedures are justified and justifiable. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:315156 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
