Probably the best thing to do is to continue attempting to expose these goons as cold-blooded 1st-degree serial murderers who actually target civilians — and reporters: a dangerous, double-edged strategy.

So there’s no getting around this problem as long there is no front — and no accountability.

A US spokesman has regurgitated the same old bullshit. Namely, the actions of US troops was in line with the rules of engagement, yada yada.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-iraq-reuters.html

Some points seem to contradict each other here, only don’t count on the NYT to point them out. They claim that the car “approached at a high rate of speed and then conducted activity that in itself was suspicious.” For example? “There were individuals hanging outside with what looked to be a weapon.”

There were only two people in the car, one being the driver, so “individuals” hanging outside the vehicle would be quite a feat. But the NYT can’t worry their pretty little heads with that. You can almost see them nodding reverently as they jot in their pads.

OK, so the car is rushing forward with (a) jihadist(s) hanging out the window(s) brandishing a rocket launcher, see? Next:

The car “stopped and immediately put itself in reverse” thus constituting more “suspicious activity”. The spokesman goes on to say that US troops “used established rules of engagement and all the training received … (and) decided that it was appropriate to engage that particular car.”

US training indicates that a car backing AWAY towards whence it came constitutes a threat that needs to be engaged, got it? So that’s why they held their fire as the car was approaching but then opened fire as it reversed.

I mean, the fact that the car was old and filled with “local nationals” would make any rational human being think “suicide bomber” but still, maybe there are some ne’er-do-wells that would question some parts of this story…?

Fortunately the military conducted an investigation and concluded that the actions were indeed appropriate. Whew! Here we were worrying that something fishy might be happening! Can we see that report, btw? “But a spokesman for the division said the report had not yet been formally completed and was not yet available.” OK. We’ll just wait then…

It’s a great indication as to how low the “liberal” press has sunk when bullshit like this gets by without even a peep. They don’t even try to make the shit sound good anymore.

Americans watched on live television U.S. Marines & 101st Airborne fight NLF commandos inside the Embassy compound. CBS’ Walter Cronkite, America’s best-known news anchor, donned a helmet in Saigon with gunfire in the background and declared the war lost. Afterwards, Lyndon Johnson’s popularity was at 30% and his handling of the war was at 20%. This suggests that both Wall Street and Main Street had had enough, although that ghoul Dick Nixon prolonged the war another 5 years or so to get reelected.

The military quickly learned the lesson of bad PR, i.e. if a tree falls in the forest but no one hears it?! If I’m not mistaken, the first Gulf War was the first time on a large-scale the U.S. military started doing embedded journalists with military units. Non-embedded journalists were not granted passes by the DOD.