New Tapes of Another U.S. Massacre of Civilians About to be Released

[Michael Tee]

http://tinyurl.com/36ftsap

<<After several days underground, the founder of the secretive website WikiLeaks has gone public to disclose that he is preparing to release a classified Pentagon video of a U.S. airstrike in Afghanistan last year that left as many as 140 civilians dead, most of them children and teenagers.>>

Fantastic!  The truth is coming out and those lying bastards can't keep a lid on it any more.  Took long enough, faced with the measures of suppression of the press that the murderous scum developed over the past decade (restricted access, pool reporters, embedding) but it's amazing how, one way or another, and no thanks to the MSM, the real truth eventually emerges.  Not that the American public gives a shit, but it might motivate some of the more laid-back Taliban fighters and their supporters to escalate their activities from lukewarm to red-hot.  Maybe someone's heart will be moved enough to let the Taliban have some of those ground-to-air missiles they seem to need so badly.  Ya never know.

[Christians4LessGvt]

The article linked is a misleading lie that has no current basis in fact.
There is no proven evidence of any "massacre".
It is possible there was a terrible mistake.
A mistake is not a massacre.
Doubt there has ever been a war in human history without terrible mistakes.
If a mistake was made it is very sad, but attempts to demonize error usually have political agendas.

[sirs]

If a mistake was made it is very sad, but attempts to demonize error usually have political agendas.

Consider the source, Cu4

[Michael Tee]

<<The article linked is a misleading lie that has no current basis in fact.
There is no proven evidence of any "massacre".
It is possible there was a terrible mistake.
A mistake is not a massacre.>>

You saw the tapes of the New Baghdad massacre.  Did that look like a mistake to you?  The Army called it a "battle" while refusing to release the tapes - - did it look like a "battle" to you?

These fucking bastards lie and lie and lie and lie, but no matter how many times they get nailed, you are always ready to believe their next lie.

How come?

[Plane]

<<The article linked is a misleading lie that has no current basis in fact.
There is no proven evidence of any "massacre".
It is possible there was a terrible mistake.
A mistake is not a massacre.>>

You saw the tapes of the New Baghdad massacre.  Did that look like a mistake to you?  The Army called it a "battle" while refusing to release the tapes - - did it look like a "battle" to you?

These fucking bastards lie and lie and lie and lie, but no matter how many times they get nailed, you are always ready to believe their next lie.

How come?

Because they are not the only liars.

Did that film show us the whole story?

I can't tell , but I remember something simular a few years ago , when an edited version I saw first made the shooting of a small group of men seem unprovoked , later seeing the longer version these guys were conceiling wepons before they were shot at.

I do not know yet what the full version of this film might look like , or if I might have already seen the full version.
Being aware of the eagerness to edit < I will hold judgement untill I know more.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"You saw the tapes of the New Baghdad massacre. Did that look like a mistake to you?"

I saw a small snippet of a day of war in a battle zone/war zone in a Baghdad
neighborhood back before the surge was completed when the country was spinning out of control.
There is no way to tell if it what took place was a mistake or not. We have no way
of telling the context of what happened in this area before the video begins.

If it was a mistake or an intentional mis-use of power then it would be a very isolated
incident that should be handled in the appropriate manner. If...big "IF" there are some
"bad apples" in this incident that in no way indicts the entire US Military.

The Army called it a "battle" while refusing to release the tapes - -
did it look like a "battle" to you?

Some of those killed were holding weapons/guns/rpg's.
This is a war zone...not the Galleria Mall.
This particular area was a "hot zone" where we
were losing American soldiers every day.
This was a very, very dangerous area.
US choppers had been shot down by RPG's in this exact area.
Yes the area appears to be a battle zone before and
after the choppers fired a shot.

These fucking bastards lie and lie and lie and lie,
but no matter how many times they get nailed,
you are always ready to believe their next lie.
 How come?

I nor you have the complete story...thats why.

[Michael Tee]

Bullshit.  You saw enough to convince any reasonable man that this was a massacre.  Furthermore, when the army thought it could hide the tapes successfully, they claimed this was a battle.  The tapes were released over a month ago.  There was nothing resembling a battle on them.  They've had a month to produce the minutes before the massacre and show them as one huge battle but of course have not done so.

This is obviously a documented massacre and there is no evidence to the contrary.  Your arguments to the contrary are lame and pathetic.  I bet you don't believe them yourself.  You are just grasping at straws.  Maybe there is something else that would make it not a massacre . . . Yeah, WHAT?  Where is it?  Why was the Army hiding those tapes forever if some part of it shows there was no massacre?

Those lying bastards know God-damn well there is no other evidence and you know it too, but continue to make lame and pathetic arguments, maybe one of those guys fired - - only nobody sees it. 

Tell me, did all that laughing and joking sound to you like these guys were in a battle, being shot at, could be shot out of the sky and killed from one second to the next?  Did you hear even the slightest concern for their own safety in all that time?  Anything in the tone of their voices to indicate they were in a battle, were under attack?    BULLSHIT!!!

If that tape didn't convince you that this was a massacre, then nothing could convince you that it was a massacre.  Yet on far less evidence, you are willing to believe almost anything of "Islamonazis" etc.   You are just totally destroying your own credibility to defend a bunch of lying, murdering cowards.  You need, as an American, to step up to the plate, to denounce these most obvious crimes for what they are, cold-blooded murder, otherwise you become morally complicit in the crime.

[Plane]

I am not just indirectly complicit.

I work to make these wepons dependable .


And no , I do not know what led up to the decision to shoot, neither do you.

[Michael Tee]

The army, when it was hiding the tapes, said that the men were engaged in a battle.

Did this look like a battle to you?  Did the guys sound like they were in a battle to you?  I've seen numerous newsreels of men in battle, being shot at, and none of them sounded anything like those jokers in the helicopter.

You know God-damn well that was no battle.  Not even close to one.

[Christians4LessGvt]

Michael you are completely wrong if you are implying I don't believe what I have stated.
I have arrived at a different conclusion than you. As usual you are in a rush to judgement
of anything and everything American military.

Basically in my opinion there are two explanations to this story.

#1. This action was justified when the whole picture is considered.

#2. This action was not justified, was a mistake, or was improper conduct by a handful of people
      that should be dealt with in the appropriate manner if purposeful wrong-doing is proven. But this
      video in no way indicts the entire US Military because there are countless stories of our men
      and women in the US Military doing all kinds of good deeds and life-saving actions towards
      the Iraqi people.

Michael I dont think war can be micro-managed from Starbucks Coffee counters in Berkley.
Men facing unfathomable circumstances chuckle during an engagement when they
see people carrying weapons in an area where American soldiers bodies are being
blown to bits daily.....So F-ing what?...I would probably chuckle too....I would hate
the enemy too....and I would enjoy seeing a guy with a weapon that is probably
involved in killing Americans lit up like a bottle-rocket. Give me a break...leftist
sitting in Starbucks judging - second guessing these guys while these guys are
living and dying in a hell-zone!

If I was a helicopter pilot in a very hot zone during a bloody war and was watching
fellow helicopter pilots getting shot down, watching fellow Americans being killed
everyday in this same exact hot zone battle area HELL YEAH I might be concerned for
my own safety like every minute! You think these guys are like taking a stroll down
5th Avenue?....Death could come at any moment....One RPG shot away from death.
In a war because one side is destroyed by superior force does not mean there is no
battle. These exact streets were a battle zone every single day. There are no
time-outs like in a football game.

We would prefer fighting an enemy that would not run in and out of civilians
all the time...hide behind women/children/schools/hospitals but thats the enemy's
choice. We have to deal with it the best we can...it is no easy chore fighting an
enemy that will kill you in a second with an RPG and 5 minutes later look like a
shopper with women and children in a bazaar. I can't imagine the difficulty
our guys face....and I am astounded by what an over-all great job they have
done.

Rush to judgement and second guess these guys?...while they are living
and dying in a hot, stinky, dangerous, hell zone? I dont think so. Are
there isolated "bad apples" in very facet of life? Yes. Does that
tarnish the big picture? Not in my mind.

[Michael Tee]

Well, apparently it's not as cut-and-dried as I first thought it was.

Here's the Wikipedia account of the entire episode, including the aftermath:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,_2007_Baghdad_airstrike

But even if I buy the soldiers' account that they really thought that the people on the ground were insurgents or otherwise a threat, how can they get away with firing on the van that arrived on the scene and was attempting to pick up one of the wounded men (who turned out to be one of the two journalists on the scene?)

There was absolutely no hostile action from the van, the driver, or the wounded man crawling towards it on his belly.  That was a cowardly and inexcusable attack with absolutely no justification.  To me, it's the same as firing on a Red Cross ambulance rescuing the wounded.

[Amianthus]

There was absolutely no hostile action from the van, the driver, or the wounded man crawling towards it on his belly.  That was a cowardly and inexcusable attack with absolutely no justification.  To me, it's the same as firing on a Red Cross ambulance rescuing the wounded.

How would they know that the van was not carrying more insurgents? It didn't have a red cross or a red crescent on it, did it?

[Michael Tee]

Now they're supposed to be shooting at any vehicle on the streets because of what it MIGHT be carrying?  There was no hostile activity whatsoever from the van, in fact it looked like what it actually was, a civilian passenger vehicle with two kids inside whose father had the goodness of heart to pull over and try to rescue an injured civilian.  Nobody in the street had been shooting at them, then the van arrives and nobody in the van is shooting at them, no "insurgents" are jumping out of the van, but MAYBE there are insurgents inside so let's shoot 'em up?  Keeping in mind that throughout the entire episode, no one fired a shot at them?

Why can't you see the obvious?  These are trigger-happy, bloodthirsty punks out for some cheap thrills which they get by blowing people up.  And I have never yet seen a newsreel of men in combat where guys under fire are as happy and jocular as these guys sound.  Either they're fearless supermen or they are lying punks in no sense of danger or combat whatever.  It is obvious that this "battle" and "combat" bullshit was made up, before the lying bastards realized that outsiders could get their hands on the tapes.

[Amianthus]

[snip]

From your provided link:

"The wounded Chmagh was crawling on the ground, when an unmarked van arrived at the scene. Unarmed men attempted to get him to the van. The watching helicopter crews requested permission to engage, stating the men were trying to remove 'bodies and weapons' from the scene, and upon receiving permission opened fire on the van and its occupants. Two children sitting in the front seat were wounded in the attack but survived. Chmagh was killed along with the father of the children."

This is in a combat zone, and these are soldiers. If you want them to act to like police officers and wait until they're fired upon, then you should send some Mounties over there. Police are trained to ask questions and wait for provocation, soldiers are trained to react with deadly force when in a combat situation (which means just being in a combat area, NOT waiting until they're fired on).

Also, the van was shown in the video attached to that page, you cannot see children in it. The windows are darkened.

[BSB]

6,000,000 Jews were murdered in WWII. SIX MILLION. How can 6,000,000 million people act so passively as to be murdered day after day for years? Cowardice?

If that is in your history it would serve your self esteem to see Nazies everywhere and then PRETEND to fight them like a two bit punk in no threat of real battle. Like on the internet. On the internet you can call anyone a Nazi, then start insulting them, safely hiding behind your anonymity, and PRETENDING you're a lot tougher then your forefathers who were so passive they got lined up by the millions and stuffed into ovens.

Are all Jews cowards?  I don't know.  Are all American soldiers murdering thugs? Are all Vietnam vets torturers?