[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Video and Audio Title: Neo Cons Defend Massacre Of Iraqi Journalists, Children Neo Cons Defend Massacre Of Iraqi Journalists, Children Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet.com Tuesday, April 6, 2010 Bloodthirsty neo-cons who would defend barbecuing Arab babies on the White House lawn if they were told it was part of the “war on terror” are disgracefully scrambling to defend a shocking video released by Wikileaks which shows U.S. Apache helicopters massacring Iraqi journalists and children in Baghdad while laughing about it. “The newly released video of the Baghdad attacks was recorded on one of two Apache helicopters hunting for insurgents on 12 July 2007,” reports the Guardian. “Among the dead were a 22-year-old Reuters photographer, Namir Noor-Eldeen, and his driver, Saeed Chmagh, 40. The Pentagon blocked an attempt by Reuters to obtain the video through a freedom of information request. Wikileaks director Julian Assange said his organisation had to break through encryption by the military to view it.” The video shows the journalists openly walking down the middle of the street with tripods and video cameras while talking to other Iraqis and preparing to set up filming. Claiming the men are carrying RPG rocket grenade launchers, the Apache pilots indiscriminately open fire on the group, before firing again at people who attempt to rescue the dying men. The rescuers’ van, which is seen to contain at least two children, is blown to pieces as the soldiers laugh and chuckle, “Hahaha. I hit ‘em,” and “Oh yeah, look at those dead bastards.” “One of the men on the ground, believed to be Chmagh, is seen wounded and trying to crawl to safety. One of the helicopter crew is heard wishing for the man to reach for a gun, even though there is none visible nearby, so he has the pretext for opening fire: “All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.” A van draws up next to the wounded man and Iraqis climb out. They are unarmed and start to carry the victim to the vehicle in what would appear to be an attempt to get him to hospital. One of the helicopters opens fire with armour-piercing shells. “Look at that. Right through the windshield,” says one of the crew. Another responds with a laugh. Sitting behind the windscreen were two children who were wounded.” Shortly after, a U.S. Humvee drives over one of the dead bodies. “I think they just drove over a body,” one of the pilots says, while chuckling. The video arrives in the same week it was revealed that U.S. special forces dug bullets out of victims following a botched raid in Afghanistan and then lied to their superiors about the incident in an effort to cover-up the murder of innocent civilians – two pregnant women, a teenage girl, a police officer and his brother. As the following clip highlights, this latest horror is merely the most recent in a long chain of videos cataloging the unreasonable and unprovoked abuse and brutality innocent Iraqis have been subjected to since the March 2003 invasion. Watch the massacre clip in full below. Some apologists, people like CFR stooge Brett H. McGurk, have blamed “fog of war” for the attack, while acknowledging the tragedy of the incident, but others have shamefully blamed the very people who were slaughtered for the entire incident. Despite the fact that U.S. military admits that none of the men were carrying rocket launchers, Hot Air writer Ed Morrissey claims the Iraqis were gunned down because they were aiming RPG’s at U.S. troops. “It’s difficult to imagine any other purpose for an RPG launcher at that time and place. That’s exactly the kind of threat that US airborne forces were tasked to detect and destroy, which is why the gunships targeted and shot all of the members of the group,” Morrissey absurdly states, completely lying about the nature of the entire incident. As the Guardian report clarifies, “One of the helicopter crew is heard saying that one of the group is shooting. But the video shows there is no shooting or even pointing of weapons. The men are standing around, apparently unperturbed.” The men are clearly walking openly and casually down the middle of the street, and are at ease with the fact that there are two Apache attack helicopters hovering over them. If they were preparing to attack the choppers or U.S. troops nearby, they would hardly be strolling around talking on mobile phones and chatting, they would be hunkered down amidst nearby buildings. The men are clearly at ease and not in an attack posture – as is born out by the fact that they were journalists preparing to film interviews. Or as Wikileaks director Julian Assange puts it, “Why would anyone be so relaxed with two Apaches if someone was carrying an RPG and that person was an enemy of the United States?” Unsatisfied with just running defense for people who massacre innocents and kids while laughing about it, Morrissey then has the temerity to justify the subsequent slaughter of the brave individuals who tried to help the dying victims. “Another accusation is that US forces fired on and killed rescue workers attempting to carry one of the journalists out of the area. However, the video clearly shows that the vehicle in question bore no markings of a rescue vehicle at all, and the men who ran out of the van to grab the wounded man wore no uniforms identifying themselves as such. Under any rules of engagement, and especially in a terrorist hot zone like Baghdad in 2007, that vehicle would properly be seen as support for the terrorists that had just been engaged and a legitimate target for US forces. While they didn’t grab weapons before getting shot, the truth is that the gunships didn’t give them the chance to try, either — which is exactly what they’re trained to do. They don’t need to wait until someone gets hold of the RPG launcher and fires it at the gunship or at the reinforcements that had already begun to approach the scene,” he writes. Again, Morrissey’s entire twisted logic is based around the premise that the men were carrying RPG rocket launchers, which is confirmed and admitted not to be the case by Major Shawn Turner, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command. Claiming the Apache pilots mistook the cameras for RPG rockets is one thing, but Morrissey continues to claim that the cameras were RPG’s in order to justify the slaughter, despite the fact that it’s fully confirmed that the men were not carrying RPG’s – they were journalists with tripods and long lens cameras. “A military investigation concluded that the ‘RPG’ was really a long-range photography lens and the camera looked like an AK-47,” reports Sky News. Morrissey’s characterization of the victims as the “terrorists that had just been engaged” is also completely at odds with the fact that the men were civilians, journalists and children. Illustrating the level of denial and delusion that neo-cons wrap themselves in when acting as apologists for war crimes, one Hot Air reader even goes so far as to claim that the entire video is fake, despite the fact that the U.S. military admits it is genuine and has spent years trying to block its release. “This has all the hallmarks of some bullshit Hollywood production. The soldiers sound scripted, the Bradley Fighting vehicles look inauthentic,” a poster named Cr4sh Dummy ludicrously claims. “My conclusions is that (t)his is simply and unequivocally a viral video for some bullshit antiwar movie based on this event,” the commenter blathers. Again, the U.S. military itself admits that the video is genuine, but that’s not enough for the tragically retarded “fans” of Michelle Malkin. This reminds us of when Malkin hysterically claimed that a video showing U.S. soldiers throwing a puppy off a clip was a hoax and that the dog was a stuffed toy. “Watch the clip closely. The puppy doesn’t move. It’s clear to me that it’s either dead or a stuffed toy. The sound effects of a dog yapping seem to have been dubbed in,” wrote Malkin. The soldier who threw the puppy off the cliff, Lance Cpl. David Motari, was later kicked out of the Corps, and a second Marine involved was disciplined. Malkin never retracted her ridiculous claim that the dog was a stuffed toy. In another Malkin-linked blog piece, the writer recycles the lie that “the video shows armed insurgents engaging or about to engage US troops,” when it shows the exact opposite, as every analyst who has watched it agrees, and the author all but praises the murdering Apache pilots while attacking Wikileaks for releasing the video as, “Beyond stupid, they’re evil.” Apparently, ripping innocent men who have families and children limb from limb for no good reason is perfectly acceptable, but releasing a film of the incident is “evil”. What pit of hell did these monsters climb out of? Directing his vitriol at the brave van drivers who attempted to save their dying loved ones, the blogger snaps, “You are stupid. Innocent, but stupid. You’re asking to be killed.” The rest of the article attempts to convince the reader that cameras and tripods were in fact RPG’s, when as we have exhaustively stressed was admitted not to be the case by the U.S. military itself. The victims were Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen and his driver who also worked for Reuters news agency – they were not RPG carrying terrorists. “Military spokesman Turner said that during the engagement, the helicopter mistook a camera for a rocket-propelled grenade launcher,” reports the Mail. There were never any RPG’s, yet neo-cons are still trying to make the case that the slaughter was justified because the men were carrying RPG’s. The scale of this deception knows no bounds. The vulgarity in seeing Malkin and her ilk defend these murderers is underlined by the fact that the soldiers immensely enjoyed killing these innocent men, laughing and chuckling all the way, and as Assange points out, “The behaviour of the pilots is like a computer game. When Saeed is crawling, clearly unable to do anything, their response is: come on buddy, we want to kill you, just pick up a weapon … It appears to be a desire to get a higher score, or a higher number of kills.” Amidst the myriad of obfuscation and denial, neo-con apologists have no come-back for this blatant barbarism. Blowing up vans containing little kids with enjoyment cannot be explained away by Malkin’s bloodthirsty readers, but judging by the comments in response to the article, many of them would indeed support barbecuing Arab babies on the White House lawn to ’send a message that we are getting tough with the terrorists’ – to these thugs, the means justifies the ends. Neo-Cons will go to any lengths to defend and downplay wanton acts of cruelty and barbarism. To them, “supporting the troops” means defending people who slaughter kids and murder little puppies. These people are truly devoid of any human emotion. That’s why they have to invent convoluted theories and outright lies in a desperate effort to explain away something that fits every definition of a war crime.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 13.
#2. To: All (#0)
And you clowns think Owe-bama's predator attacks are just killing Islamic Jihadist of various stripes? Bookmarked this thread, cause eventually the video of whats been going on in the last FIFTEEN MONTHS, not to mention between now and 'then' will come out. I'm going to enjoy feeding the posts back to you. Really enjoy it. Its a war. There hasn't been a 'war' in human history that didn't have casualties among the host civilian population, any more than there's been one that didn't result in variations of 'friendly fire' deaths. Doesn't matter if you were swinging a battle axe in the middle of a mideval killing ground, or a modern day Apache helicopter strike. Its regretable, to be sure. But you all need to grow the fuck up. You sure don't bitch when Islamic fundies bomb pizza parlors in Tel Aviv.
Fuck you, you little putz.
What? No whining about spelling and grammar, oh outted one? (laughing) Fuck you too, sweetie. You're just pissed I've handed your ass to you twice in the past seven days.
What do you mean I'm outed? Are you going to break the rules here? You'll be gone before Derby Day, you friggin' idjit.
Oh, and btw, I don't care about being 'banned', I don't suck the forum owners ass anywhere. I post what I think. Don't like it, tough shit. Forum owner doesn't want me here, the account is theirs to delete. I abide by the rules of the given forum. When the host doesn't ENFORCE THEIR RULES, after repeated requests, and a final clear warning, I respond 'in kind'. As I did at Sally's storm front lite. YOU care about being banned, thats why FR sticks in your craw a DECADE LATER. I don't, cause its just the fucking internet, Freddie.
#16. To: Boofer, A K A Stone, Fred Mertz (#13)
Oh bullshit Boof...you still whine like a bitch about Goldi banning you and you whined like a bitch about lucianne banning you and you whined like a bitch about Bill banning you. Look around this place, asshole. Nobody who is anyone here likes you. But the point is...why in the fuck does it MATTER who Fred is? It has no bearing on anything. Just because your own Asperger's over compensates for your inferiority complex and thus unveils your need to reveal who you are when no one really gives a shit it doesn't mean that we ALL HAVE TO SUFFER from your pathology.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|