Posts by Whoops
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Keith;
Worth a read
http://gawker.com/5512623/reuters-chief-shoots-down-story-on-killing-of-his-own-staffers-in-baghdadhuman rights lawyers and other experts who have viewed the footage say they have many concerns about how the pilots operated, particularly when it came to firing on the van, which was also carrying two children who were wounded in the attack.
"I don't think there's any question that this is a violation of the Geneva Conventions," said Clive Stafford-Smith, a U.S.-British human rights lawyer who runs the charity Reprieve,referring to the body of laws that governs armed conflict.
"There are two aspects to it — firstly it was clear that these people were unarmed or not fighting, and then there's the shooting of the wounded man as he was trying to crawl away and people were coming to help him," he told Reuters.
The Geneva Conventions state that protection must be given to those who "collect and care" for the wounded in a conflict"whether friend or foe", but lawyers said that principle appeared to have been abandoned in this case.
DESENSITISED KILLING
Chris Cobb-Smith, a former British army officer who has conducted investigations in war zones, said knowing exactly what rules of engagement the pilots were operating under was critical to understanding whether they had acted appropriately.But even then, he said, the decision to fire on the van as unarmed men came to help one of the wounded appeared to be a clear breach of the laws governing military conduct in war.
"Engaging the people picking up the wounded is outrageous,"he said. "That is the element that is blatant. That is against all humanitarian law and the rules of conflict — most definitely and without a doubt," he told Reuters.
-
@blake
After watching the video, I am starting to feel uneasy that some in the military may think they are playing a video game.
There's a post here (with LOTS of comments) you might like to read;
-
Keith, with respect, and with a great deal of measurement in my judgement... bullshit.
You're either deliberately trying to be provocative, or that's the worst call I've ever seen/read you make.
-
"I guess you'll just have to trust me to do it right."
Sure... fair and balanced and all that... but is a one on one interview, followed by a whole show on the topic (him) proportionate to his importance?
The issue is important, but aren't you just giving _him_ more air time than he deserves?
Anyway, your show, your blog... and I know you'll have considered it fully.
Cheers.
-
[H]ow McVicar has achieved his go-to status with the news media[?]
"... our guest on Media7 this week...""... I'll be interviewing McVicar one-on-one..."
Your show, your blog, so I'll be polite. WTF?
-
Quirky?
-
But would the tin feel heavy?
but you just 'observed' it (by feeling for the weight) so you've changed the state.
what state it changed to would maybe depend on how hungry you were - if you wanted cake it would be there. perhaps that's how the cornucopia of old worked?
Physics in mythology!
-
/threadjack that's sort of related...
my Alzheimer's has set in early today - I recently read a post or comment - I think here on PA that outlined the way scientists interact and comment on each other's work.... but can't for the life of me find it. I want to send it to someone - can any one help me out by pointing to it?
Thanks
-
-
"A chicken with its neck wrung is different from a chicken with its head cut off, but does that really matter to the chicken?"
or; 'the end justifies the means'?
Lot's of people trying hard to chose the right means, a few people aiming for the (ideological) end.