Iraqi Civilian Deaths... *** Mature Content and Language at some Links in Thread

[michaeledward]

As to if the person in the first video is a nut case or not, a real Ranger or not, a credit card crook or not, there are enough other investigations concerning Iraqi Civilian Deaths that merit very serious concern and investigation.

There is another NCIS investigation taking place right now concerning the death of a young Iraqi, West of Baghdad. Apparently, 7 Marines and a Navy Medic killed the civilian and planted evidence in his home; an AK47 and a Shovel. This incident occurred on April 24, of this year.

The Haditha deaths remain under investigation. Several of the Marines invovled have been returned to Camp Pendleton as the investigation continues.

It would seem important to not dismiss all reports of Iraqi civilian deaths at the hands of United States and coalition forces because of the lack of credibility of one such report. Seems awfully 'swift-boatish', don't you think.

P.S. ... It's similiar to the thread with the Sean Hannity interview. He finds the nuttiest nutball on the planet, and gives him platform of America's airwaves. (Aren't editors supposed to be invovled there, somehow?). What a waste of a platform. Utterly ridiculous.

 

[Rich Parsons]

As to if the person in the first video is a nut case or not, a real Ranger or not, a credit card crook or not, there are enough other investigations concerning Iraqi Civilian Deaths that merit very serious concern and investigation.

There is another NCIS investigation taking place right now concerning the death of a young Iraqi, West of Baghdad. Apparently, 7 Marines and a Navy Medic killed the civilian and planted evidence in his home; an AK47 and a Shovel. This incident occurred on April 24, of this year.

The Haditha deaths remain under investigation. Several of the Marines invovled have been returned to Camp Pendleton as the investigation continues.

It would seem important to not dismiss all reports of Iraqi civilian deaths at the hands of United States and coalition forces because of the lack of credibility of one such report. Seems awfully 'swift-boatish', don't you think.

P.S. ... It's similiar to the thread with the Sean Hannity interview. He finds the nuttiest nutball on the planet, and gives him platform of America's airwaves. (Aren't editors supposed to be invovled there, somehow?). What a waste of a platform. Utterly ridiculous.

Michael,

Like I said, it is sad news. I have no doubt that there are and will be investigations.

Just with John's first post and the links and concentration on this one guy, I personaly think that the two posts you ahve made here should be in a separate thread so that this other CRAP does not interfer with an actual discussion.

I was not trying to shut this down. Only put an end to this guy, so we could move on and discuss as you stated the issue in general with other specific data.

Thank you

 

[crushing]

P.S. ... It's similiar to the thread with the Sean Hannity interview. He finds the nuttiest nutball on the planet, and gives him platform of America's airwaves. (Aren't editors supposed to be invovled there, somehow?). What a waste of a platform. Utterly ridiculous.

Actually, it seems that many people tune in when Howard Dean is a guest on Hannity's show. Like President Bush, you never know what is going to come out of Dean's mouth next.

 

[HKphooey]

What, exactly are you asking about them?

And, they are monitored and tracked and grieved for and remembered on this board, by yours truly ... see the thread, '2000 and counting'.

I am just saying the media focuses in on the sensational and they have gotten to the point that their deaths are glazed over. Many of the soldiers are going some pretty tramatic times. Not saying things like this should be tolerated, but there is also 2 sides to aevery story.

I trully appreciate your posting of the casualties. I have also created one in the study. It saddens me that more people post in an thread about Tom Carnes.

 

[Flying Crane]

My god, there is a lot of effort going into trying to make this military and goverment look bad by means of deception and half truths.

Yeah, we don't need deception and half truths to accomplish that. They do a pretty good job of making themselves look bad without any help.

 

[michaeledward]

I am just saying the media focuses in on the sensational and they have gotten to the point that their deaths are glazed over. Many of the soldiers are going some pretty tramatic times. Not saying things like this should be tolerated, but there is also 2 sides to aevery story.

I trully appreciate your posting of the casualties. I have also created one in the study. It saddens me that more people post in an thread about Tom Carnes.

Gee ... I thought this thread was about 'Iraqi Civilian Deaths...'. I got that idea from the thread's title.

But, knowing I have no control over how others post in a thread, I certainly don't let tangents make me sad. Of course ... posting about Iraqi Civilian Deaths in a thread so named, doesn't seem that tangental, to me.

 

[HKphooey]

.....

 

[Sapper6]

this thread is a waste of forum bandwidth.

the guy in your video is a fake. anybody in the military would tell you that. in the "official military photo", his beret is folded to the wrong side, in the video, he is wearing a white t-shirt with bdu top (perhaps a fashion statement, but an angry ranger is not going to pose out of uniform even for a photo op), his sleeves are rolled up inside-out (the marines are the only branch that roll their sleeves in this manner, and rangers will do everything in their power not to look like marines. to rangers, there is only on breed of combat killing machine, and that is the U.S. Army Ranger.), and all the other reasons as well (lack of unit insignia on beret, mustache out of regulation, etc.

if the goal of this thread was to address the civilian casulties of Iraq, then it should have been started in that manner; without the reliance upon a shady internet video with a million discrepancies. i would have at least checked it out before using it as a reference for a post. (something you should have learned as a freshmen in college).

sure, there are going to be casualties in a combat zone. that's why it's called war. i severely doubt that any of these are of an intentional nature. nearly every combat arms unit in the theater has embedded media attached to them in movement. do you think their stupid?

 

[Makalakumu]

this thread is a waste of forum bandwidth.

the guy in your video is a fake. anybody in the military would tell you that. in the "official military photo", his beret is folded to the wrong side, in the video, he is wearing a white t-shirt with bdu top (perhaps a fashion statement, but an angry ranger is not going to pose out of uniform even for a photo op), his sleeves are rolled up inside-out (the marines are the only branch that roll their sleeves in this manner, and rangers will do everything in their power not to look like marines. to rangers, there is only on breed of combat killing machine, and that is the U.S. Army Ranger.), and all the other reasons as well (lack of unit insignia on beret, mustache out of regulation, etc.

if the goal of this thread was to address the civilian casulties of Iraq, then it should have been started in that manner; without the reliance upon a shady internet video with a million discrepancies. i would have at least checked it out before using it as a reference for a post. (something you should have learned as a freshmen in college).

sure, there are going to be casualties in a combat zone. that's why it's called war. i severely doubt that any of these are of an intentional nature. nearly every combat arms unit in the theater has embedded media attached to them in movement. do you think their stupid?

Sapper6, I'm not in the military. I would know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about. I came across this video and was astounded by what he was saying and I wanted to post it to see if anyone else knew anything about this. You guys who are in the military are providing some excellent information in regards to this individual.

Are alot of innocent Iraqis dying in this war? Yes. Is this person's story true? After hearing what all of you have said, I would say no.

 

[michaeledward]

this thread is a waste of forum bandwidth.

Perhaps, but, I've put my nickle in. And while it is not free, bandwidth is getting cheaper every day, right?

sure, there are going to be casualties in a combat zone. that's why it's called war. i severely doubt that any of these are of an intentional nature. nearly every combat arms unit in the theater has embedded media attached to them in movement. do you think their stupid?

Have you read the Time magazine article? What is reported is intentional deaths of as many as 8 women and several children. The story was reported by an embedded reporter. The investigation was launched by the United States military upon reports from that embedded reporter.

Did you hear the radio broadcast of the April 24 incident, today? NCIS has apparently determined the Marines planted evidence to be used against the killed Iraqi civilian.

I am curious about how many embedded journalists are serving in Iraq at this time. I don't think that nearly every combat unit has a media team. It seems the embed program worked wonderfully in the days of the invasion (from the military's point of view), but has been less popular over the past three years.

 

[Sapper6]

hey john,

no worries. i understand your POV. it is hard to understand things. the internet is a large realm of "stuff". all i ask is that folks don't take what they read or hear about seriously without critical thought involved. investigate everything. dissect. evaluate assumptions. only then can you stand firmly behind what you see, hear, and believe.

there are people out there that want with every hair on their heads to hate everything about bush and what he does. sure, you can despise him for the war; just don't despise the guys "doing it". fabrications are sure to come of these things. i just hope the American public is smarter than to believe nonsense.

Michael,

sure we've paid for it, i just prefer quality over quantity.

i did hear of the investigation to which you are referring. all i can say is that i hope it is resolved soon. these marines are sure to get a militarily-fair trial (not as preferred in comparison to it's civilian counterpart) and will be dealt with appropriately.

contrary to what you believe, every major combat arms division, brigade, and battlion in the theater has embedded media attached to them. i can provide resources if you'd like. you don't hear reports because they are no longer fresh. the American public wants "all things new". this war is growing older with every passing minute. embedded combat reporting just doesn't sell any more, however, they are still there for that "just in case" situation.

i have learned over the years that there is a grain of truth in almost every story. although not always honest in it's entirety, there still lies sincerity in most. not 100%, but at least enough to generate speculation to feed the hungry masses of what it is they hate to hear but sells newspapers. this particular story i believe to be false. even the most elementary of liars will make things appear to be right. this story lacks substance and contains only what a chosen few want to hear.

when something in the media appears "to crazy to be true", change the channel, click the back button, think about it...and then think harder. what are the motives? who can benefit from this? am i one of those people? why?

have a good evening.

:asian:

 

[michaeledward]

hey john,

no worries. i understand your POV. it is hard to understand things. the internet is a large realm of "stuff". all i ask is that folks don't take what they read or hear about seriously without critical thought involved. investigate everything. dissect. evaluate assumptions. only then can you stand firmly behind what you see, hear, and believe.

there are people out there that want with every hair on their heads to hate everything about bush and what he does. sure, you can despise him for the war; just don't despise the guys "doing it". fabrications are sure to come of these things. i just hope the American public is smarter than to believe nonsense.

I would like to say this, about that.

I have read, and heard many things over the past 6 years of his service, and the two years in which he was a candidate. I ave carefully, seriously, and critically thought about those things that I have heard and read. I investigated claims, evaluated assumptions and dissected journalists stories. And with this knowledge, I have come to the conclusion that President Bush is the worst President in the history of the United States (really, not a fair classification, because I am not so familiar with President Filmore, and a few others).

I am not alone in this determination. Over 100 historians have come to similiar agreements.

It feels, well, just "so nice", when people just accuse me of a desire to 'bash Bush', to end a discussion. Not applying critical thought, investigation, or evaluation at all.

Michael,

sure we've paid for it, i just prefer quality over quantity.

i did hear of the investigation to which you are referring. all i can say is that i hope it is resolved soon. these marines are sure to get a militarily-fair trial (not as preferred in comparison to it's civilian counterpart) and will be dealt with appropriately.

contrary to what you believe, every major combat arms division, brigade, and battlion in the theater has embedded media attached to them. i can provide resources if you'd like. you don't hear reports because they are no longer fresh. the American public wants "all things new". this war is growing older with every passing minute. embedded combat reporting just doesn't sell any more, however, they are still there for that "just in case" situation.

i have learned over the years that there is a grain of truth in almost every story. although not always honest in it's entirety, there still lies sincerity in most. not 100%, but at least enough to generate speculation to feed the hungry masses of what it is they hate to hear but sells newspapers. this particular story i believe to be false. even the most elementary of liars will make things appear to be right. this story lacks substance and contains only what a chosen few want to hear.

when something in the media appears "to crazy to be true", change the channel, click the back button, think about it...and then think harder. what are the motives? who can benefit from this? am i one of those people? why?

have a good evening.

Please do offer a reference for embeds. I searched the Department of Defense website last evening. I also searched several journalism sites. I could find no current reference to whom was embedded, where? All of the data available on the web seemed to be about embeds in 2003.

 

[HKphooey]

hey john,

no worries. i understand your POV. it is hard to understand things. the internet is a large realm of "stuff". all i ask is that folks don't take what they read or hear about seriously without critical thought involved. investigate everything. dissect. evaluate assumptions. only then can you stand firmly behind what you see, hear, and believe.

there are people out there that want with every hair on their heads to hate everything about bush and what he does. sure, you can despise him for the war; just don't despise the guys "doing it". fabrications are sure to come of these things. i just hope the American public is smarter than to believe nonsense.

Michael,

sure we've paid for it, i just prefer quality over quantity.

i did hear of the investigation to which you are referring. all i can say is that i hope it is resolved soon. these marines are sure to get a militarily-fair trial (not as preferred in comparison to it's civilian counterpart) and will be dealt with appropriately.

contrary to what you believe, every major combat arms division, brigade, and battlion in the theater has embedded media attached to them. i can provide resources if you'd like. you don't hear reports because they are no longer fresh. the American public wants "all things new". this war is growing older with every passing minute. embedded combat reporting just doesn't sell any more, however, they are still there for that "just in case" situation.

i have learned over the years that there is a grain of truth in almost every story. although not always honest in it's entirety, there still lies sincerity in most. not 100%, but at least enough to generate speculation to feed the hungry masses of what it is they hate to hear but sells newspapers. this particular story i believe to be false. even the most elementary of liars will make things appear to be right. this story lacks substance and contains only what a chosen few want to hear.

when something in the media appears "to crazy to be true", change the channel, click the back button, think about it...and then think harder. what are the motives? who can benefit from this? am i one of those people? why?

have a good evening.

:asian:

Good points Sapper6.