EXCUSE ME...? Since when is an event that was filmed as it happened Slanted?
Ever heard of Michael Moore? He would take film of someone that was injured in Iraq talking about how great today's drugs are to alleviate the pain, and twist it so it made it look like the injured person hated Bush and didn't support the war in Iraq, when the exact opposite was true. Was the film of this marine slanted?-- No. Was the story that Moore made up afterward that has since been proven to be the exact opposite of reality slanted? Yep. And not only slanted, but totally false!
In this particular case, the film itself wasn't slanted, the reporting of it was--big difference. And films can easily be slanted. They are all the time. For instance, someone comes up and hits you, you defend yourself by hitting them back. If someone only showed your response to being hit (and not the initial attack), it would look like you were the aggressor. We have seen this time and time again by those claiming police brutality and such. A big hoopla is made about the initial film and the public is outraged, then later, the entire film or event is seen and a totally different opinion of the event forms. If the press had shown dozens of terrorists faking injuries or death and then killing our marines by this tactic, and then shown the clip in question, you would come away with a totally different view of those events. (and we all know how popular suicide bombings are in their culture) What kind of reporter doesn't ask the marine, "Why did you shoot him?", or "Did you think you or other marines were in danger?". What kind of reporter doesn't show the responses to these questions in the report of the event?
I am assuming you are lauding the reporter...Good for you there.
Nope, but I have nothing against him either--except for the fact that the clip made it onto
Arab TV before it made it here.--very suspicious considering who that reporter worked for! It is the media that convicted this soldier for doing his duty, when he knew that the person he was shooting was not only an enemy, but that the enemy used this tactic to kill our marines.---On a side note, wouldn't that have been a great media clip! The guy gets up, aims a gun at the reporter, and the marines say, sorry, "We can't shoot him until he shoots first!"----Or maybe a clip of the reporter screaming, "Shoot him, he's faking it!"
But the part about the Marine being shot in the face the day before? If the wound was serious at all, he would still be in hospital. They don't release soldiers with a serious face wound the next day.
This goes to show his state of mind, nothing else. He had friends killed the prior week by terrorists faking death, and he was injured. Any reasonable person in that state of mind would have shot the enemy regardless of whether he had been injured the previous day or not, and the fact that he was, gives him even more leeway in my opinion. And remember, this is a war. These are not police on the street in a nation under peace, this is soldiers fighting soldiers---we shold not equate the two like the liberal media is trying to do.
As to slanted....The wounded Iraqi was clearly uncovered when he was shot. If he had a bomb or grenade on him the bullets impact could have set it off....Dumb!!!!
That's not what I saw. I saw a group of marines in a room where a still man started moving just slightly, and a marine considering this a serious risk. As for the bullet causing a bomb to go off, possibly. But if he had one, he could have done a lot more damage by setting it off at the right time (when approached), and shooting him prevented this.
Further justification was lost when the Marine did not shoot the man next to the one killed-who witnesses said was under a blanket and moving suspiciously. This could also be clearly seen on the film.
Must have missed that one! I never saw this, or heard of any witnesses--other than the marines and the reporter.
Again I bring to mind the movie RED SUMMER. In it an American Partisan (the US in the movie had been invaded by Russia)lies dying. She places a grenade under her body which kills the Russian who finds her (dead)as he checks her to see if she's alive. In a recent Bruce Willis movie TEARS OF THE SUN a similar event occurs. Our liberal media who creates these films depicted both acts as heroic.
Historicly we have looked at men as heroes who have sacrificed themselves (through trickery) to take the enemy with them.
I have no problem with that position! (except that those films aren't particularly liberal in nature) The problem is, when someone tries to stop this tactic (which we know the enemy is using) by shooting the enemy when he perceives a threat, he should not be condemned for it! If someone is attacking you or if you believe they are, you don't just let them because their actions are considered heroic!
Yet if the enemy does the same thing....well their just nasty!
Again, you are missing the point. This is a war. And if the enemy resorts to using the trickery of feigning death, then shooting ones that are feigning death shouldn't be considered a crime, but doing ones duty. If the enemy resorts to trickery, then trying to protect yourself and your fellow soldiers is not a crime in a time of war.
That is the Hypocrisy!
What did the marine say on the tape? Oh yeah. He said "He's f*****g faking it." He didn't say, "He's alive, shoot him."--if this doesn't clearly tell you what he was thinking, I don't know what will.
Rodney
