Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks has really misled the public

seminal.firedoglake.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#141

Post by illumin8 »

Maktab wrote: post #48
GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #21

Wow, the apologists are springing into action. Watch the video again. At the exact moment the correspondent is in the crosshairs of the camera and you see that he is carrying a small black bag you hear the crew saying "Yeah that's a weapon." and "Fucking prick". For God's sake, it's a guy sauntering down the middle of the road carrying a little bag and the crew is making out that they're tracking a dangerous insurgen…

There are weapons visible at various points in the video and an RPG was found at the scene, these people were not all unarmed. That the journalists were killed is tragic and may very well be due to mistakes or incompetence or even malice, but none of that is clear from this video. What is clear is that the journalist and his driver were in the presence of armed Iraqis carrying AK-47s and RPGs at the wrong time and in…

Your argument seems to basically be "we can't know what the other helicopter saw, so we have to assume they saw weapons."

Leaving aside your argument, don't you find the voice track coming from the gunner shocking? The man actually had glee in his voice as he was gunning down people that obviously had no possible chance to defend themselves or harm him. An AK-47 vs. an Apache helicopter is no threat.

As others have stated, at the range from the gunner's PoV, an RPG, even if he had one, cannot hit the helicopter.

The fact that there are cold-blooded killers in the cockpit of a helicopter, that take joy in killing innocent civilians should shock each and every one of us.

Aren't you sick of being an apologist for an unjustified killing in an unjustified war?

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#142

Post by illumin8 »

jcnnghm wrote: post #136
greendestiny wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insurgents might do all those things, but the people in van made no moves to go for any weapons. Considering they are happy to watch the injured guy to see if he goes for a weapon, there is no reason they couldn't have waited to see if the van people went for weapons. They misreported the situation on the radio, making it seem like the people in van were picking up bodies and weapons - but they are just surmising tha…

I don't think you understood why the gunner was watching the injured guy. At 8:29 of the 17:47 video he says "Come on, buddy. All you gotta do is pick up a weapon." From his tone and inflection it seems pretty clear to me he wants to engage the guy because he's severely hurt, certainly going to die, and probably suffering. He can't engage him because he's unarmed, so he wants him to go for some kind of a weapon becau…

That's not even what I got. What I got was that the gunner had his adrenaline pumping and wanted to kill. He was clearly wanting to kill the remaining survivor, and just waiting for the opportunity.

Putting him out of his misery? Please...

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#143

Post by stse »

jcnnghm wrote: post #134
GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #21

Wow, the apologists are springing into action. Watch the video again. At the exact moment the correspondent is in the crosshairs of the camera and you see that he is carrying a small black bag you hear the crew saying "Yeah that's a weapon." and "Fucking prick". For God's sake, it's a guy sauntering down the middle of the road carrying a little bag and the crew is making out that they're tracking a dangerous insurgen…

I watched the video multiple times. At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands. At 3:48 you can see another AK-47. Also at 3:48, it looks like a third man has either a handgun or a small submachine gun. At 4:12, it definitely looks like there's an RPG. Even more so at 4:19. The helicopter was called in by ground troops who were taking small arms fire from a small group of men in…

I think 3:38 looks more like a camera strap. An AK is quite heavy and not something you wave around like that. The quality is quite bad so it might be a weapon, but I don't think you can "clearly see an AK-47".

I would be very very surprised if the device at 4:12 is an RPG. It looks and behaves like a long lens camera. At 4:15 you can see a space between the device and the body of the person. An RPG is also quite heavy and has a distinct shape and you wouldn't generally turn it around a corner.

As there also according to wikileaks were photographers on the scene. It's just far more likely that it's one of the front two guys who carries something that picks up his camera and take some pictures. If that is the case, then I would have to question the chopper crews ability to recognize weapons on the ground.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#144

Post by lolcraft »

jcnnghm wrote: post #134
GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #21

Wow, the apologists are springing into action. Watch the video again. At the exact moment the correspondent is in the crosshairs of the camera and you see that he is carrying a small black bag you hear the crew saying "Yeah that's a weapon." and "Fucking prick". For God's sake, it's a guy sauntering down the middle of the road carrying a little bag and the crew is making out that they're tracking a dangerous insurgen…

I watched the video multiple times. At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands. At 3:48 you can see another AK-47. Also at 3:48, it looks like a third man has either a handgun or a small submachine gun. At 4:12, it definitely looks like there's an RPG. Even more so at 4:19. The helicopter was called in by ground troops who were taking small arms fire from a small group of men in…

At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands.

So, no one in Baghdad uses bodyguards? All Iraqi policemen must be at all the time in uniform, even for covert entry? I don't think an AK is any convincing ground for believing them to be insurgents. Americans aren't the only ones with rights to carry guns, specially in the most dangerous city on Earth.

At 4:12, it definitely looks like there's an RPG. Even more so at 4:19.

It's a pity you couldn't be bothered to watch thirty seconds more of the video. At 4:49, when the helicopter goes around the house, we see the full group, one second or so before the fire starts. No one is holding an RPG.

What you say that looks like one is actually a glimpse of some sort of tube. I guess construction workers must have a hard time on Baghdad, if that's grounds for use of deadly force.

The helicopter was called in by ground troops who were taking small arms fire from a small group of men in this area.

They seem very relaxed, for insurgents in the middle of a fire fight. They are walking, move in a close group, are calm and walk exposed in the middle of the street. Not exactly standard military procedure.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#145

Post by jcnnghm »

stse wrote: post #143
jcnnghm wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the video multiple times. At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands. At 3:48 you can see another AK-47. Also at 3:48, it looks like a third man has either a handgun or a small submachine gun. At 4:12, it definitely looks like there's an RPG. Even more so at 4:19. The helicopter was called in by ground troops who were taking small arms fire from a small group of men in…

I think 3:38 looks more like a camera strap. An AK is quite heavy and not something you wave around like that. The quality is quite bad so it might be a weapon, but I don't think you can "clearly see an AK-47". I would be very very surprised if the device at 4:12 is an RPG. It looks and behaves like a long lens camera. At 4:15 you can see a space between the device and the body of the person. An RPG is also quite hea…

The standard AK-47 weighs 9.3 pounds. It's not exactly heavy. There is also a lighter version weighing in at 6.8lbs. The way shown in the video is a plausible, common way to carry that type of weapon. There were AK-47's found at the scene. Those are AK-47s.

You think it looks like a camera now. Keep in mind that the helicopter was called in to look for a group of men that were firing at troops on the ground that are down the street from where the "camera" is pointing at 4:15. Again, an RPG isn't quite heavy. The standard RPG-7 weighs 15 pounds.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#146

Post by jcnnghm »

lolcraft wrote: post #144
jcnnghm wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the video multiple times. At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands. At 3:48 you can see another AK-47. Also at 3:48, it looks like a third man has either a handgun or a small submachine gun. At 4:12, it definitely looks like there's an RPG. Even more so at 4:19. The helicopter was called in by ground troops who were taking small arms fire from a small group of men in…

At 3:38 of the 17:47 video, you can clearly see an AK-47 in one of the mens hands. So, no one in Baghdad uses bodyguards? All Iraqi policemen must be at all the time in uniform, even for covert entry? I don't think an AK is any convincing ground for believing them to be insurgents. Americans aren't the only ones with rights to carry guns, specially in the most dangerous city on Earth . At 4:12, it definitely looks li…

So, no one in Baghdad uses bodyguards? All Iraqi policemen must be at all the time in uniform, even for covert entry? I don't think an AK is any convincing ground for believing them to be insurgents. Americans aren't the only ones with rights to carry guns, specially in the most dangerous city on Earth.

It's unwise to approach an active combat zone with weapons.

It's a pity you couldn't be bothered to watch thirty seconds more of the video. At 4:49, when the helicopter goes around the house, we see the full group, one second or so before the fire starts. No one is holding an RPG.

I see a crowd of people at that point. It's difficult to tell what the people in the back are doing. Presumably, there could still be someone peaking around the corner at the Humvee down the road. Further, I already saw several guns, and so did the apache crew. The decision to fire had already been made.

They seem very relaxed, for insurgents in the middle of a fire fight. They are walking, move in a close group, are calm and walk exposed in the middle of the street. Not exactly standard military procedure.

This isn't Mission Impossible. When the bullets aren't flying and there is no enemy in sight, there isn't a reason to expect people to move like there are.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#147

Post by jcnnghm »

illumin8 wrote: post #142
jcnnghm wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you understood why the gunner was watching the injured guy. At 8:29 of the 17:47 video he says "Come on, buddy. All you gotta do is pick up a weapon." From his tone and inflection it seems pretty clear to me he wants to engage the guy because he's severely hurt, certainly going to die, and probably suffering. He can't engage him because he's unarmed, so he wants him to go for some kind of a weapon becau…

That's not even what I got. What I got was that the gunner had his adrenaline pumping and wanted to kill. He was clearly wanting to kill the remaining survivor, and just waiting for the opportunity. Putting him out of his misery? Please...

Maybe you're seeing something that isn't there because you've got a political agenda, kind of like Wikileaks.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#148

Post by jcnnghm »

illumin8 wrote: post #141
Maktab wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are weapons visible at various points in the video and an RPG was found at the scene, these people were not all unarmed. That the journalists were killed is tragic and may very well be due to mistakes or incompetence or even malice, but none of that is clear from this video. What is clear is that the journalist and his driver were in the presence of armed Iraqis carrying AK-47s and RPGs at the wrong time and in…

Your argument seems to basically be "we can't know what the other helicopter saw, so we have to assume they saw weapons." Leaving aside your argument, don't you find the voice track coming from the gunner shocking? The man actually had glee in his voice as he was gunning down people that obviously had no possible chance to defend themselves or harm him. An AK-47 vs. an Apache helicopter is no threat. As others have s…

What about that troops on the ground that were being shot at by insurgents in the area that the armed camera crew was in? Do you think that the helicopter crew might have been thinking that they, the troops on the ground, were in danger. They did call in the gunship because they were getting shot at from that area. How about a little less hyperbole.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#149

Post by uriel »

araneae wrote: post #138

It's clear that the author felt "let down" by the video. But I don't think he can make a case that wikileaks misrepresented the video. Rather, I think he had unrealistic expectations. He got his expectations up because a) Reuters had been unsuccessfully trying to obtain this video via FOIA b) wikileaks employees had been detained by various gov'ts and c) the video had been heavily encrypted. All of these things are f…

> b) wikileaks employees had been detained by various gov'ts and

This turned out to be false, the guy that was detained in Iceland was detained for breaking into somebody's business and there is little or no evidence it had anything to do with his relationship to wikileaks.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#150

Post by jacquesm »

jcnnghm wrote: post #133
jeswin wrote: post #54

I am not American; though I usually side with democratic countries as much as I can. However, if you made a really big mistake and went to war with a country which posed no credible threat to you (at least in hindsight when this shooting took place) I'd imagine people would err on the side of caution when shooting somebody's family and loved ones. At least in this part of the world, what is coming across is that your…

What was your solution, pull out immediately? Did we really want another Afghanistan. You can't go into a country that unstable, knock out most of the infrastructure and kill the majority of the high command, then just leave. The country would have just descended into civil war. Things aren't that simple, thinking otherwise is short sighted. It'll be much better if the strategy continues to play out as it has been. T…

>What was your solution, pull out immediately?

How about "Not going there in the first place" ?

Post reply on HN