Pentagon's rebuttal:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1978017,00.html
Several hours after WikiLeaks posted the video, the Pentagon fired back with large pieces of its own 2007 investigations into the attack. It concluded that the Reuters employees had joined up with several armed insurgents on a day that had been filled with attacks on U.S. troops in the vicinity. One knelt to take a photograph, without wearing any vest or other apparel indicating he was a reporter. From the Apache, the camera was mistaken for an RPG launcher. The Apache crews had "neither reason nor probability to assume that neutral media personnel were embedded with enemy forces," a probe concluded.
Reuters, in a statement, didn't criticize the Pentagon, instead saying that its employees' deaths "were tragic and emblematic of the extreme dangers that exist in covering war zones." But Assange said the attack was unjustified. "If those killings were lawful under the rules of engagement," he told reporters at the National Press Club in Washington, "then the rules of engagement are wrong."
The rebuttal sounds like a load of bullshxt to me. With a close-up like that, if a solider still can't tell an RPG launcher from a camera, then perhaps he shouldn't be a solider in the first place.
-Lik |
發表於 2010-4-5 18:37
| 
