Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Reuters Reporters Killed in Iraq - Video

  1. Apr 6, 2010 #1


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Made my stomach queezy first time I've seen this.

    Explicit VIDEO from Iraqi War shows the death of 12 people including two Reuters news staff

    [link and quote deleted]

    I'm not sure if its because those enlisted Army guys become pilots or its so hot in Iraq that you cant think clearly, but whatever happened to rules of engagement? They were not shot at, how did they just slaughter 12 people and what we would call an ambulance state-side that responded to the incident. I could even forgive all that, but what really pisses me off is how they laughed it off, cursed over the airways, knowing this was a recorded video. I mean, how did these rednecks get access to advanced weaponry?
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 6, 2010
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 6, 2010 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Collateral Murder

    This story has been picked-up on CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/04/05/iraq.photographers.killed/index.html?hpt=T2
    The original source and original video from "wikileaks" does not meet the PF quality guidelines. The CNN article is much better. Reuters also has an article with a much different tone from the wikileaks article/video: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6344FW20100406

    Heck, the tone/bias of all of these sources is plainly evident from the titles of the articles alone. I encourage everyone to apply some critical thinking to the issue rather than relying on the heavily biased reporting of wikileaks. Also consider the clarity of hindsight vs fog of war. The critical fact, glossed over by wikileaks is this: Reuters and CNN seem to confirm that the journalists were mingling with insurgents, who had weapons in clear view, at the scene of a battle earlier that day.

    The moderators will discuss this issue internally and decide if this thread should be re-opened. If it is, though, consider this a pre-emptive warning against intentionally inflammatory rhetoric (trolling) and poor quality sources.
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2010
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook