On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Mike Hale <[email protected]> wrote: > Except that they weren't obviously unarmed. > > Not only where they not obviously unarmed, they appeared to be armed. > > Look at the 4 minute mark. > > That sure as shit looks like an RPG. > > The crew thought the group was armed. Ergo, they were cleared to engage. > > This wasn't a war crime...and the allegation that it was just makes > people look ridiculous. Listen to yourself: we weren't sure if they were armed, so we killed them. Put yourself and your family in the shoes of the dead folks. Its not a comfortable place to be, is it?
Jeff > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:05 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:44:44 PDT, Mike Hale said: >>> Seriously! Think about the injustice of having American helicopters >>> engage armed individuals shadowing American soldiers. >> >> Shooting at "armed individuals" is one thing. If it's "civilians and Reuters >> employees" who *aren't* obviously armed, it's something else. >> >> > > > > -- > 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
