|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13835803 - 01/23/11 08:03 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ScavengerType said: Also I might add that the image that you claimed looks like the RPG looks a lot like a camera man holding his camera around the corner as is a common filming technique used to film action in active fire zones.
care to show us a picture of his camera looking like the anti tank weapon, what happened to his tripod, as a combat photographer with a driver that carries his tripod why wasnt he using it? he wasnt in a combat situation so the tripod should have been in use... unless of course it wasnt a tripod which you cant find a picture of either in the video or online
Quote:
If you watch it on the film, you can see it as he turns the corner.It's quite clearly barely half long enough to be the RPG that you are claiming it is and it actually appears to be thicker at the base where he is holding it than at the end,
can you show us that picture from the video? your description sounds very unlike a telephoto lens because typically they're either consistent in size throughout the length or they taper toward the base and are wider at the objective lens, you're welcome to show us a lens that tapers toward the objective though
did these look like the lenses with the hood that looks like a Saab AT4

Quote:
You wana fucking spout this retarded nonsense? Go ahead, but don't fucking post blatantly inconsistent bullshit like that as proof and expect me to look through pages of Google images looking for a specific image of an old tripod,
I understand, you prefer to work on assupmtions and post crap and demand you're right but you've yet to show anything that proves your case
really though, since the basic design of a tripod hasnt changed in a hundred years, just how hard could it be to fine the one he used
|
Shr00m0fD00m
Ancient Astronaut



Registered: 12/23/10
Posts: 521
Loc: The intergalactic, transd...
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Chespirito]
#13836010 - 01/23/11 09:42 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Chespirito said:
Quote:
imachavel said: with all the younger voters, people will just third party, since they always have some 'legalize cannabis' act included, of course obama did also, which is why I voted for him
I'm pretty sure that's not accurate
Yeah, Obama only eluded to decriminalization. He never said he'd actually do it.
But that's the brilliance behind it. You can get thousands of votes based on a false idea as long as you have corporate media backing you up to reinforce the idea into peoples' brains.
Ahhhh, Capitalistic Democracy in action.
USA, USA, USA!
But anyway, yeah, Bush and Obama's policies are virtually identical. Obviously there are some subtle differences, but the same fundamentally flawed idealistic bullshittery that causes the national debt to rise, senseless war to spread and the government to tighten it's bloody grip on your rights.
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Shr00m0fD00m] 1
#13836099 - 01/23/11 10:11 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
He didn't even elude to it.
There was no reason to presume he would support lessening prohibition and so forth at the time of the election. While in the past he had taken various positions (as is usual for Obama) he changed his stance and was pretty clearly a drug-warrier right up there with Biden. They were pretty much the DEA's "Dream Team" ticket to quote somebody who I can't recall (might have been for Reason magazine).
Here's an amalgamation of prior posts I was going to make earlier but held off on due to length. I'm posting it now as there seems to be some confusion. Ches is absolutely right that Obama was always very pro-drug war during his presidential bid- the few points he actually made that were somewhat more nuanced were cloaked in the misleading, deceptive, double-speak that has come to define his campaign (i.e. discussing stopping the feds from raiding sick people for smoking medical marijuana, which wasn't happening anyways; discussing the possibility of some federal tolerance of medical marijuana legal by state law if its administered by doctors via prescription, which it isn't)
copy paste job:
This was one of the most ridiculous reasons people were voting for Obama. It completely defied all logic: the man who has admitted recreational use of marijuana and cocaine, continues to not only fail to support legalizing cannabis" (as imachavel said) but actively promotes jailing people for this and other victimless crimes and using violent force to send people to 'reeducation camps', i.e. marijauna rehabilitation programs with jail waiting for those who resist.
It is amazing that people still believe this guy is at all equivocal on marijuana or victimless crimes. (hell, he wants feds seizing you and your property if you don't buy health insurance of his liking- you think this is the kind of guy who would let it slide when kids are messing around with drugs like he has and centuries of people have before him?)
I really think its just proof that these campaign slogans and the overall tone of the ad campaign works in conveying messages without the need for the politician to actually say them and risk criticism. (how else do you get people who think Obama was for ending the wars when he funded them every chance he had and didn't even try to change from the Bush administration's timetable in Iraq while increasing the commitment in Afghanistan?)
So, what does Obama think about people like our President who mess around with substances in the privacy of their own home while harming nobody?
We have many proven methods for reducing the demand for drugs Keeping drugs illegal reduces their availability and lessens willingness to use them That is why this Administration firmly opposes the legalization of marijuana or any other illicit drug Legalizing drugs would increase accessibility and encourage promotion and acceptance of use Diagnostic, laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological studies clearly indicate that marijuana use is associated with dependence, respiratory and mental illness, poor motor performance, and cognitive impairment, among other negative effects, and legalization would only exacerbate these problems -White House National Drug Control Strategy 2010, pg 8 http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/ndcs10/ndcs2010.pdf
Even the limited and contradictory statements he made during his campaign that expressed even the slightest change in treatment of victimless crimes such as marijuana use appear to be just bullshit, as Obama picked a drug czar to speak for him who has said: “Legalization is not in the president’s vocabulary, and it’s not in mine,” who cites the rising death toll in the Mexican drug war as evidence of prohibition's success (lol), and who expressly contradicts Obama's campaign pledges:
In a townhall meeting Obama said:
"The Justice Department going after sick individuals using this as a palliative instead of going after serious criminals makes no sense." - 7/21/07, NH
Now, once he gets into power, he handpicks a Drug Czar who explains the President's position as:
"Marijuana is dangerous and has no medicinal benefit" - Obama Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, 7/22/09 http://reason.com/blog/2009/07/23/legalization-is-not-in-the-pre
I mean, that's just unequivocally false and totally ridiculous. Either this guy is purposely lieing, or he really doesn't know what he's talking about and has confused the misleading bullshit policy statements that they put out with reality i.e.: 'marijuana is associated with schizophrenia', which of course is true just like its true to say wearing lipstick is associated with dieing of ovarian cancer but purposely deceptive and designed to convey a false meaning to those not familiar with the subject or statistics/science. Not even those opposed to medical marijuana would say something as ridiculous as this, rather; they speak of balancing the harms and benefit and 'better options'.
Add to this clown the fact that Obama's DEA chief is another committed prohibitionist who further sticks his nose into the medical issue, preventing FDA approved studies of medical marijuana, but this guy actually overruled the Justice Dept's own ruling to allow limited medical marijuana research in the past (before Obama nominated him).
Obama didn't even pretend to support repealing prohibition or victimless crimes at any time during his campaign with the sole exception that I know of being his indecipherable and inconsistent allusions to stopping medical marijuana raids of state-legal operations and of patients who have prescriptions. Of course this, then, revealed he didn't even know that marijuana isn't prescribed as it isn't FDA approved, and put forth the straw man argument that Bush was raiding patients for using marijuana, which he wasn't, and acting like his position is somehow different than McCain or Bush's on that point.
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw



Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,564
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 2 hours, 45 minutes
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: johnm214]
#13836270 - 01/23/11 11:00 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry I haven't replied in awhile, seems like all relevent points have been stated.
No one could identify what was used in those videos, prisoner 1 if you aren't going to take the time to find the 39 minute video thenaybe you shouldn't reply. From what it looked like to me there was no confirmation that the small arms fire came from that direction. I guess it was war and everyone was paranoid. Any way there is a good chance that 40 civilians were shot that day needlessly. I wasn't there and glad I wasn't. I think I want to be done speaking of this. Hope this shit ends one day.
--------------------
I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: imachavel]
#13836306 - 01/23/11 11:11 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
imachavel said: Sorry I haven't replied in awhile, seems like all relevent points have been stated.
No one could identify what was used in those videos, prisoner 1 if you aren't going to take the time to find the 39 minute video thenaybe you shouldn't reply. From what it looked like to me there was no confirmation that the small arms fire came from that direction. I guess it was war and everyone was paranoid. Any way there is a good chance that 40 civilians were shot that day needlessly. I wasn't there and glad I wasn't. I think I want to be done speaking of this. Hope this shit ends one day.
I saw the whole video. Let's examine it. A helicopter crew sees a group of men moving about the streets surreptitiously, carrying some long metal objects that don't look anything at all like any cameras I ever saw, and not trying to get inside in an area that is already involved in a firefight. Helicopter crew blows them up. Yay.
Fast forward a few months and some anti-American jackholes get hold of the tape and seize upon the nebulous quality of the video and somehow declare the whole group was a bunch of innocent little petunias out for a leisurely stroll just a few hundred yards from an active firefight.
You have to be either an idiot, an asshole or an enemy to accept the latter narrative as fact. I don't think it's even possible and if it was accurate they deserved their Darwin Award.
--------------------
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13837115 - 01/23/11 02:20 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Now this may shock you as well, but camera men do not use their tripods in areas of active fire, the use them in cases when they are conducting interviews. When some live fire crosses their way they like to keep a little more mobile. I suppose being a person who watches international news including pieces from conflict zones much more frequently than you. I have seen this sort of thing much more often, but I don't think that it should be necessary to explain why the camera man trying to film a gunfight isn't using a tripod.

Prisoner, the lens is not wider at the base. It's the camera. He's holding the entire thing around the corner, watch the video to see it clearly. The thing that is wide after the narrow end of a lenses is the body of the camera. 
But if you want more:
 Look at the end of this image, it's square. It's not round like the RPG you posted. It looks more like a lens with one of these on it.

Also, if it is an RPG he's doing it wrong. The technique that he is using of holding a camera around a corner works for video cameras because using them does not produce a knock-back. However for RPGs holding a camera like that would not work. Using an RPG like that would lead to an epic terrorist fail.
Here's the kicker though. At around 47 seconds into the video posted by the OP you can see the camera man points the camera at the helicopter. There is glare coming from the clearly circular lens of the camera. Go and check that out (:47). Unless your going to try to claim that they put a piece of glass on the end of the RPG to fool everyone, this proves it's a camera. (please don't, I don't think I could help myself I'd have to call you some sort of name)

Hey check this out, this camera looks even more like the rocket launcher you put up than the one in the video. Not related to the discussion I'm just pointing it out.

I almost feel like my IQ is being dragged down by even participating in this conversation. Suffice it to say, prisoner that your title there is quite fitting. But if you really want to engage the point why don't you try addressing the fact that Reuters actually demanded to know what happened to their journalists in this instance? I mean if the news agency asking what happened to their reporters isn't proof enough, what is?
Also Seuss, can you not understand that the gun in the photo does not match those guns which he claimed it was. I made it pretty visually obvious, did I not explain the angle of the clip issue clearly enough to you guys? Do I need to use simpler language or is it just your world-view of the US military and right-wing media that covers for it is always right no mater what evidence is presented that is preventing you from seeing that the so called gun is clearly not an AK-47?
Like I said I don't know if those guys are an armed escort or if they are support staff. I did show clearly that the gun prisoner was calling an AK-47 wasn't and the so called rocket launcher was in fact a camera.
Edit: also the long and short versions that were released by wikileaks were on the http://www.collateralmurder.com/ website I posted earlier.
Edit2: Oh and on the Obama issue, the DEA raids on medical facilities were a big issue for people in California and could have been a big issue in states that followed a similar path in subsequent years. Not that I think his drug policy was adequately liberal at all, or that I recall him making any other promises related to marijuana.
Edited by ScavengerType (01/23/11 02:37 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13837251 - 01/23/11 02:48 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You can tell that's square from a profile? Are you not well? Why is he hiding? In a free fire zone?
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: imachavel]
#13837552 - 01/23/11 03:45 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
imachavel said: From what it looked like to me there was no confirmation that the small arms fire came from that direction.
no one is claiming otherwise, the claim is that small arms were present
if you want me to see the 39 minute video the post the link somewhere other than in the title of a thread or PM, if it's in the body of that message it wont be truncated and it'll be easily clicked
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13837600 - 01/23/11 03:57 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ScavengerType said: Prisoner, the lens is not wider at the base. It's the camera. He's holding the entire thing around the corner, watch the video to see it clearly. The thing that is wide after the narrow end of a lenses is the body of the camera. 
But if you want more:
 Look at the end of this image, it's square. It's not round like the RPG you posted. It looks more like a lens with one of these on it.

I see no similarity, especially since he was using a cannon and you cant tell the shape of his supposed lense hood, certainl not when he's not using a video camera, if he were, where's the microphone... why are you comparing apples to oranges
anyway, where's the picture of the tripod with the 4 inch wide head actuator?
Quote:
Also, if it is an RPG he's doing it wrong
what ever do you mean
I see lots of things that could lead you to believe it's a camera
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13837768 - 01/23/11 04:29 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> Also Seuss, can you not understand that the gun in the photo does not match those guns which he claimed it was.
To me, the guns are irrelevant. Pretty much everybody that is anybody in Iraq owns a gun. RPGs are a different matter. They are used by terrorists, insurgents, and "evil doers" and are not common among other groups... certainly not among reporters and body guards. It is quite clear that at least one RPG was found in the rubble after the attack. Even Julian admits to this tidbit, though he tries to gloss it over. But getting back to your gun issue... what does it matter if it was a .308, a .223, an ak47, a Chinese knock off, etc... armed men, with at least one RPG, lurking around a war zone shouldn't be surprised if they get attacked. This is why war sucks. People die. It is pointless to point fingers and play the blame game. As the debate here demonstrates, from the vantage of the helicopters, it appears that the men were armed terrorists. Even if they were not, they appeared to be so from the distance that they were engaged. Again, war sucks because people die from it and sometimes they are innocent. If you want to vent, write Obama a letter letting him know how you feel about his escalating the war on terror rather than ending it as he promised in his campaign.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13837784 - 01/23/11 04:32 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I wasn't saying he was using that camera, just that the square lens hood or whatever it was you called it was clearly visible on the camera that he was holding. I didn't know that Reuters released information about the camera he was carrying. Is this what you are implying? I've seen no reference anywhere that the camera was a cannon and had no idea cannon made commercial quality video cameras.
Why don't you find a photo of someone holding an RPG like that. Nobody does, they all hold it like the person in your picture from your last post. The reason they don't do that is because it is real important to have a good aim and solid support of the weapon, particularly with walls near you. He clearly doesn't as he moves his camera from pointing across and down the street to just down the street in the video, right before looking up at the helicopter as it flew over the building revealing the glare on the lense at :47. All the while handling it suspiciously like a cameraman would. Damn these terrorists are clever!
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said: I see lots of things that could lead you to believe it's a camera
At least you've finally admitted that one of your ridiculous claims seem like they look possibly wrong. That's at least something sane from you in this thread.

Why do you ignore the rest of my points like the one I had consistently been making in the thread that Reuters had pestered the US about the death of it's journalists in this instance to the point that they had to do an internal investigation? Which I may add you've been ignoring since it was initially brought up. Let me guess Fox News and the right-wing blogosphere didn't cover that angle of the incident? They just pointed at the pictures and said "thems there is gunz!!!1!" and you believed them without asking those sort of questions right?
-------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Seuss]
#13837808 - 01/23/11 04:35 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: It is quite clear that at least one RPG was found in the rubble after the attack.
source?
-------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13837852 - 01/23/11 04:43 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Will you please explain to us all how the side view of a square is different from the side view of a circle.
--------------------
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13838208 - 01/23/11 05:50 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> source?
Julian Assange:
Quote:
"it's likely some of the individuals seen in the video were carrying weapons"
...
"based upon visual evidence I suspect there probably were AKs and an RPG"
Along with the military report from Bravo Company which claims to have found "two RPGs and an AK-47 or AKM" along with "two Canon EOS digital cameras with telephoto lenses" it would seem a pretty valid claim.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: ScavengerType]
#13839230 - 01/23/11 09:01 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ScavengerType said: I wasn't saying he was using that camera, just that the square lens hood or whatever it was you called it was clearly visible on the camera that he was holding.
he was shooting with a canon SLR camera, can you show us a picture of a canon lens with a square hood?
Quote:
I didn't know that Reuters released information about the camera he was carrying. Is this what you are implying? I've seen no reference anywhere that the camera was a cannon and had no idea cannon made commercial quality video cameras.
he did still photography, wasnt a videographer
I see no square lens hood here http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/resources.html

Quote:
Why don't you find a photo of someone holding an RPG like that. Nobody does,
I'm still waiting on you to show us something conclusive about a real oddball tripod and a strange lens hood on an SLR camera
Quote:
they all hold it like the person in your picture from your last post. The reason they don't do that is because it is real important to have a good aim and solid support of the weapon
no one said he was firing it from that position, it's not uncommon to take cover and wait for a target, I guess you wouldnt know that since you're desperately grasping at straws... which support is solid? I know one looks like a crouching position that our anti tank weapon guy was in, he just didnt get the chance to shoulder the weapon and take aim at a target, he got his ass shot off



Quote:
particularly with walls near you. He clearly doesn't as he moves his camera from pointing across and down the street to just down the street in the video, right before looking up at the helicopter as it flew over the building revealing the glare on the lense at :47.
you mean the helicopter that was 2 miles away...
what's the proximity of the wall have to do with anything, it's not like his back was to a wall, he was poking his head around a corner
Quote:
All the while handling it suspiciously like a cameraman would. Damn these terrorists are clever!
or an insurgent




it's so very unlike an insurgent to squat to take a shot with a shoulder fired rocket, they always stand straight and tall like in that picture I posted, making themselves a larger target and providing a less steady platform

Quote:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said: I see lots of things that could lead you to believe it's a camera
At least you've finally admitted that one of your ridiculous claims seem like they look possibly wrong. That's at least something sane from you in this thread.
lol

Quote:
Why do you ignore the rest of my points
why dont you simply post up a picture of Nadir with his camera that looks like an RPG, post a picture of a tripod that looks like an AK
I bet no one would ever hold an RPG or other anti tank weapon like in that picture, you know, pointing toward the ground, in close proximity to a wall
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13839302 - 01/23/11 09:15 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Well that should take care of this particular round of bullshit. Note that I said "should".
--------------------
|
Shr00m0fD00m
Ancient Astronaut



Registered: 12/23/10
Posts: 521
Loc: The intergalactic, transd...
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13839340 - 01/23/11 09:22 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
No matter what the "insurgent" was holding, the senseless killing over there has to stop.
Can we not agree on that?
These people are joining terrorist cells because they see an outside force dominating their land and diluting their culture. They live every fucking day in a war torn country with just enough water and just enough food to survive. We fail to understand this most basic aspect of the War on Terror; these aren't all psychotic mass murderers, they're desperate people in a desperate situation.
Their religious leaders on the other hand, in the pockets of the western corporations and governments no less, stand the most to gain from open market bombings and IEDs going off every day because it pushes the population closer to fundamentalism, which in turn, provides said religious leaders with immense power, influence and plenty of concubines.
"Al Qaeda", as our government describes it, is spread of 90 countries. How long can we keep this charade going? Because, I'm telling you now, they're not just going to drop their weapons if they think they're fighting for God.
That applies to both sides......
We're fucked if this continues to spread.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: zappaisgod]
#13839343 - 01/23/11 09:22 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
it's ScavengerType you're talking about... in case you forgot
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13841066 - 01/24/11 08:42 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I know, I know. :weary sigh:
--------------------
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: this is what bush spent money on [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13842692 - 01/24/11 03:13 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Are you Kidding me? Your claim is that:
 doesn't look like this
 It's about 1 and a half length of the dudes forearm the same as the camera in the video (That RPG you posted is over an entire arms length, probibly 1 1/4). I can't believe you knew this was the camera used and still maintained your nonsense! I suppose it is partly my fault for not properly investigating the source claims or I could have snuffed this out earlier instead of engaging you in your speculative nonsense. I assumed video camera because I did not think that you could do the same technique with a photo-camera and the video specifies that it was a shoulder mounted camera. However clearly they meant it has a shoulder strap.
Also, you seem to have missed the point. Prisoner, yes people fire RPGs when crouched down, but they always do it holding them over their shoddier never holding it near the ground. The person in this video doesn't put the thing anywhere near his shoulder except until the part where he points it at the helicopter and you can see the glare on the lens.
===== Seuss, I meant source for the allegation that an RPG was found. It is possible that it was an RPG that the guy in the back with the guy accused of holding an AK-47 (which it was definitely not, though it may have been a gun) was holding one. It also could have been some other equipment. However given the fact that this was a photojournalist and not a video-journalist I speculate that it was probibly a weapon like an RPG (the only equipment I can think of that would look like that is a microphone). Though it is possible it was a fully extended, but unopened tripod. Neither of these people were pointing their alleged weapons at anything and looked much like they were acting in an escort capacity. Are you saying that journalists should be made to walk around dangerous areas unprotected with cameras worth more than most civilian automobiles in the country, in a place where journalist kidnaps and killings are rampant? In a country where the US refuses to protect the citizens from extremists it is unreasonable to expect that everyone with arms is one.
I don't think that having a security detail with an RPG proves that these people are "up to no good" any more than most of the US ordinance proves the same thing. Given the fact that there are only two of them who are possibly armed, it is likely that an RPG would have been the only deterrent/effective counter to a kidnapping type scenario. These people have these alleged weapons mostly pointing at the ground (which is more than you can say for a lot of the american forces and contractors) and are not threatening or menacing anyone, they mostly seem to be watching the road that they are standing on at a distance from the camera man. Hell, as others have pointed out these could just be people in the neighborhood who came by to see what was going on with the nearby gunshots which the reporter was trying to photo about. Either way these people fired without any context as to what was going on.
Why is there no obligation on the part of the US to not fire on civilians or to even inquire if the person is an enemy or a civilian? This is the problem not just with this incident but is endemic to most all civilian deaths at the hands of US forces, which I may add are all too common.
It is also notable that the pilot lied to command in seeking permission to engage.
Quote:
Crazyhorse: "Have five to six individuals with AK47s. Request permission to engage."
There was clearly not 5-6 people holding alleged guns of any variety even if you include the camera in this video. At max 3. Only one even looked remotely like a gun. It is possible a more accurate description may not have prompted permission to engage. Was this intentional on the part of the helicopter crew? However, for some reason this lie did not elicit any response from the military when an investigation was done.
-------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
|
|