4 Americans in Iraq crash shot in head

[helderheid]

By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 55 minutes ago



BAGHDAD, Iraq - Four of the five Americans killed when a U.S. security company's helicopter crashed in a dangerous Sunni neighborhood in central Baghdad were shot execution style in the back of the head, Iraqi and U.S. officials said Wednesday.


A senior Iraqi military official said a machine gunner downed the helicopter, but a U.S. military official in Washington said there were no indications that the aircraft, owned by Blackwater USA, had been shot out of the sky.

In Washington, a U.S. defense official said four of the five killed were shot in the back of the head but did not know whether they were still alive when they were shot. The U.S. official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record.

The Iraqi official, who also declined to be identified because details had not been made public, said the four were shot in the back of the head while they were on the ground.

It also was not clear whether gunfire actually brought the small helicopter down or caused the craft to drop toward the ground, where it became entangled in electrical wires, the U.S. official said. The helicopter was virtually destroyed and after investigating the site, U.S. forces had been planning to blow up it up to keep people from scavenging the parts, the official said.

More

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070124/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

[Mind_your_head]

1. Wha???

Did the 5th guy shoot the other four? Or were four of them shot after the crash? Why not all five? This is a weird story.

[catnhatnh]

3. Best Bet???

....1 decapitated in crash and other 4 get a "just to make sure"...

[jefferson_dem]

2. FUCK! Yet another tragic illustration of what that chimp-bastard has brought upon us!

:grr:

[DemSinceBirth]

4. If you listen to American "Military Officials" long enough, you would

have to believe that American aircraft cannot be downed by hostile fire... That's as far as it usually goes, but that would also mean (if true) that we must either have crappy aircraft or crappy pilots.

As to a Blackwater team being the ones dead? I am sorry for their families and that they died. However, they were mercenaries and they were paid multiples of what a serviceman is paid to take the risks so I am not going to get all that upset over their curious demise. Hired killers just aren't on my top ten list of favorite people.

[tabasco]

39. The Pentagon has lost all credibility under the neocon rat bastards.

I will never forget the one-star staff officer briefing the "fierce firefight, in and out" to "rescue" Jessica Lynch.

It saddens me as a former Army infantry officer to see the damage to an institution I hold dear. Yes-men with no moral courage have been appointed at the highest levels.

Yes, every chopper crash in this war has seen the same reluctance to admit what everybody knows. They were shot down. It happens in wars, but the propaganda masters don't want the people to know we're in a war.

[Philosoraptor]

5. Nevertheless, we need to win this game.

[donsu]

7. how about 'quit the game?' if it's just a 'game' . . . .

nt

[Unperson]

6. Looks like we are going to level that town like we did Fallujah.

A whole town destroyed because of four blood-thirsty greedy mercs.

[adigal]

8. These were not soldiers, right?? They were contractors

giving security for big bucks. I feel badly for their loss, but I will save my outrage for the soldiers killed in Iraq.

[helderheid]

13. From the article

In the aftermath of Tuesday's Blackwater helicopter crash, U.S. forces were planning to blow up the wreckage to prevent people from scavenging equipment, the Iraqi official said.

Blackwater USA confirmed that five Americans employed by the North Carolina-based company as security professionals were killed, but provided no identities or other details.

[havocmom]

18. Wondering if there is some 'frag Blackwater' sentiment among US troops

It would certainly be understandable. The high paid mercs are probably not making the troops' lives easier with their harsh treatment of people and death-squad tactics. Some of the troops have to be aware the whole mess is just a money making venture and their lives are being squandered by the fat cats and their minions.

[The Stranger]

20. MERCENARIES, I believe, is the correct term.

[Marie26]

41. Many mercs are former soldiers,

lured by the prospect of making many times their salary in the US military. Many are also police officers, security guards, etc. I guess we can fault them for joining, but they did not deserve to be murdered.

[Virginia Dare]

44. Yes, one of them was a resident of a VA suburb near DC...

I believe I heard on the news this morning that he was former military and national guard, I'm sure they all were.

edited:

I believe I had this incident confused with the military helicopter that went down, the identities of the Blackwater employees hasn't been disclosed, and maybe never will be?

[Marie26]

72. They probably were

So, we should support and praise veterans when they are in military, and condemn them and cheer their deaths if they later join a contractor? It's the same person. They still have a family, and they are still citizens of this country. I'd hate to imagine a family member stumbling onto this thread. (Sorry, this isn't directed at you, just in general).

[Virginia Dare]

75. We shouldn't judge others for their motives...

in this case. We all do things we aren't necessarily proud of, most of us don't pay for it with our lives. I agree with you.

[EdwardM]

9. Sick fucks!

These assholes feel the need to shoot soldiers who are seriously injured and needed help. These guys piss me off.

[CottonBear]

11. The men who were shot were Blackwater mercenaries, not soldiers. n/t

[EdwardM]

12. I did not know that.

But that doesn't change my position on men who could shoot 4 men in the back the head when they are seriously injured. May they rot in hell.

[Unperson]

16. Eternal damnation for defending their lives.

Wow, you really don't like Iraqis do you?

[EdwardM]

17. That wasn't defending their lives.

The contract workers would not have killed them. They were injured, they needed help. Anyone who could shoot someone execution style while a person is in critical condition is complete shit. I know if I were in their position, I would not shoot the Workers and I would try to save them. This isn't about "defending themselves." This was about terrorism, the person who shot the 4 workers is a terrorist piece of shit.

[Unperson]

22. You have the luxury of speculation from your cozy domicile.

Those people have been living like shit for ten fucking years because of sanctions imposed by a foreign government. Ten years go by and that government that has left dead children in the streets and bombs the shit out of your villages from high altitude finally makes an appearance and you get to see the personification of the TERRORISM that was imposed on you by the United States. You wouldn't be just a bit angry and out for revenge? If you say no then you are a liar.

[Marie26]

25. So are you

pro-shooting-US-crash-victims-in-the-head?

[Unperson]

36. If they are mercs, I don't really care.

They were Blackwater, they were probably taking pot shots at civilians from the air. Either way fuck em.

[Marie26]

37. Wow.

That's a new low.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EdwardM]

50. What the hell are you talking about?

what you jsut said is a bunch of crap. You can be against both the Bush administration and against the actions of the men who did this execution style shooting. First you say, fuck the guys who were murdered, now you are accusing people of this crap. I'm beginning to wonder what the hell your problem is?

[Unperson]

56. Damn, calm down.

How exactly is it "crap"? The four Blackwater mercenaries in Fallujah had been terrorizing the local population that is why their bodies were desecrated in such a way. You have seen the video of the British mercs firing from the back of their vehicle at innocent civilian motorists haven't you? I think they are all evil scum not worthy of my condolences.

[EdwardM]

63. You have no proof that those Blackwater employees were terrorising anyone.

That fact that you are saying this shit about dead guys here with no proof, is pissing me off, thats why I seem angry. Yes, some troops and private workers in Iraq have commited acts of terrorism. But not all. You have no proof that these guys were "taking pop shots at civilians." You don't know the facts. Neither do I, So I won't judge these Blackwater workers until the facts come out. Nick Berg didn't do this crap and he got executed. I've done research on him, and he seems to be a great guy. For all we know, the guys who were killed could be great guys also. The only thing we know is that they were shot execution style. And that is wrong. And the people who did it are pure shit.

[Richard Steele]

68. Now you're just getting silly. nm

[Marie26]

53. I am anti-murder

A radical position. It is murder when US soldiers killed an Iraqi prisoner at Abu Ghraib; it is murder when insurgents shoot injured US contractors execution-style. See, violence is always bad. Murder is always wrong. Would you seriously argue that it's also good to kill US soldiers? Aren't they also involved in this war? Well, maybe you would. You seem to be on that slippery scale that justifies violence & atrocities when it is done against a group you do not like, and that is a dangerous, scary slope. I'm sure Shiites & Sunni militias would both be able to justify their murders of the opposing sect based on the bad things that faction has done - and so both spin downward into cruelty and mass atrocities. Similarly, Bush can justify torturing Gitmo prisoners based on all the bad things he's sure they did - it's all the same, black-and-white thinking that seeks to justify the unjustifiable.

[helderheid]

55. Well said! Bravo!

:applause:

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marie26]

69. It is a just, humane world view

Yeah, international laws & human rights are "dainty". Sounds kinda like Bush. And going up against Jethro & a pit bull? Huh? People get real brave all of a sudden on an anonymous message board. You are in agreement w/the ideology of terrorists, all of whom, to a man, believe that they are using violence in the service of the oppressed. That is where moral relativism ends up, and that is where the justification of violence ends up. But whatever.

[Unperson]

71. Well, you support corporate elitists and mercenary death mongers.

How do you like them apples?

[Marie26]

74. .

:eyes: So the position is "You're with me, or you're with the Bush terrorists!" Maybe you could expend all this energy on Jethro & the pit bulls?

[pampango]

78. I am for the oppressed, too, but if that justifies an armed

response, all Bush has to do is convince us that Saddam was oppressing his people and we are justified in military action against the oppressor. Or can we only take the side of the oppressed if the oppressor is from a different country? Or a different religious sect (Sunni vs. Shia)? If minority Sunnis were oppressing majority Shia, should we have rooted for and helped the oppressed?

No one is questioning your bravery.

[Old and In the Way]

26. Welcome aboard Unperson!

I agree whole-heartedly with your sentiments.

[EdwardM]

27. If you shoot 4 men who are critically injured from a helicopter crash, you are a terrorist.

Yes, they have a right to be angry. We have shitted all over Iraq for years now. But I consider myself a pacifist. I also agree that our bombing campaigns with lame names like "shock and awe" are immoral. I generally don't support war unless it is absolutely necessary (aka almost never) and I don't support the death penalty. If someone killed me, I wouldn't support the death penalty for them. They have a right to be angry, but there is no excuse for this. Just like "Shock and Awe" was wrong, so is this. Barbaric acts like this are never right, no matter who does them. Do you support their actions? Do you support the actions of the guys who decapitated Nick Berg?

[Unperson]

38. Would you also agree that the United States is a terrorist state?

[EdwardM]

40. Yes, I would.

We have committed many acts of terrorism.

[pampango]

32. Can't speak for EdwardM (and at the risk of being called a liar)

I would bet that 99% of the people in that neighborhood are peaceful people trying to live their lives in the middle of chaos (going to school, looking for or going to work, taking care of their family, etc.) The 1% (perhaps 2% or 3%, it that makes you happier) are violent thugs. Every city has them. Baghdad more than most due to their recent history and sectarian civil war. They are armed and out for blood and they got an opportunity to kill someone.

"You wouldn't be just a bit angry and out for revenge?" Yes, but my domicile is much too comfortable, too, for me to go around shooting people in the back of the head. If you can rationalize that type of behavior you have a perspective on humanity and the rule of revenge, that I do not envy. I suppose that one could rationalize Abu Ghraib was an angry reaction and revenge for frustrations encountered during combat, but I choose not to let them off the hook that easily.

[maveric]

19. Its a war dude.

Isnt that what the administration would say.
Arent we doing the same thing?

[Old and In the Way]

24. Well, you really don't know the shooter's motivation, do you?

Perhaps he/she saw their entire family wiped out in a helicopter attack. Who knows? War makes people do crazy things. Were the situation reversed and the Iraqi's had done to the US what we've done there over the past few years, I could see myself pulling a trigger against these occupiers...particularly if I had suffered directly and personally by their actions.

[MadHound]

70. There are way too many unanswered questions about this incident

First off, we don't know when these people were shot, before or after the crash, while the men were alive or after they were dead. We have no clue as to who shot them either. And finally we have no idea what the shooter's motivation was. All of these details make a difference.

However I do have my suspitions about this incident. I'm thinking the helicopter crashed, these men were wounded, and a person on the ground shot them, yes, execution style. And the motivation? Revenge quite frankly. Some poor soul has watched US forces kill his family, destroy his house, rape his country, loot and steal, all while he is essentially powerless to do anything about it.

Put yourself into this person's shoes. Ever since '91 you have had a foreign country controlling your skys, killing innocent people either directly or indirectly by starvation. Perhaps a few family members perished during this time. Four years ago this self-same country invaded your land, destroyed your house, killed your child, raped and killed your wife, and now here, HERE, are four of the bastards, dropped from the sky into your lap, dazed, confused and bleeding. Four of the rat bastard SOBs who have ruined your life, with their fate dependent on you. What would you do in that situation?

If I were in that situation, if that person were me, yeah, sure, I'd probably bust a cap in each of their heads, and would think less of killing them than killing a dog. In fact quite frankly, if I were in that situation, I would probably rip the guys balls off, stuff them down his throat and then kill the bastard. And smile all the while.

Yeah, war is an ugly, ugly thing. It puts people in situations that no human should have to deal with. It cheapens life, and the rules of law and civilation fly out the window. It becomes an eye for an eye existence in a war zone, and when you are seething with anger and thirst for revenge, well it becomes easy, moral and justified to take out your vengance on any and every one of the enemy that you can get your hands on.

Does this make it right? No, but the whole concept of war is never right. It changes people, turns them into monsters, and I imagine that is what happened here. Does this mean I condone this action? No, but I do understand the context within which it took place, and I refuse to pass judgement until more is known.

[OregonBlue]

10. Mercenaries! They should not be there in the first place. We, the taxpayers

should demand that they ALL be withdrawn.

[helderheid]

14. Only MORE will go in if it's up to * with the new "Volunteer Army Corp"

[pampango]

15. Agree with both you and EdwardM.

They shouldn't be there and nothing justifies shooting someone in the back of the head.

[EdwardM]

21. Yeah, I don't get this hate for someone who has been killed.

I don't like how our military is currently doing massive outsourcing right now. That is a debate we can have, but we can do it without pissing on the grave of these four men. There is not a god damn thing in the world that could make me support what those guys who killed these workers did. I can't believe someone told me they were "defending themselves". Bullshit. Next, someone will say Nick Berg was killed in self defense. I want everyone to be safe there, regardless of if they are a soldier or a outsourced worker. Nick Berg was an outsourced worker, but I still felt incredibly sad when he died.

[Robbien]

28. We have no idea who shot these guys

It could be Iraqis, it could be Negroponte's death squads, or it could be just about anyone. The article states no one even knows if they where alive when shot.

Yet you cry big tears for their loss. Bet you endorsed bombing Fallujah back to the stone age when the other four mercs were killed. Kill an Iraqi city of about 300,000 in return for the deaths of four highly paid mercs. Probably sounds even in your eyes.

[EdwardM]

29. No I never support bombing campaigns

But thank you for assuming shit about me. I am against violence, no matter who starts it. I've been against the Iraq war sense the beginning, and I think we should pull out.

[Robbien]

31. Then why all the nasty words about Iraqis

You accuse Iraqis of being animals who killed the poor hurt and disabled mercs. You try to inflame the situation against Iraq.

A helicopter went down and five mercs are dead, four were shot in the head. That is all we know. We don't know who did it or why.

Why try to inflame the situation against Iraqis?

[EdwardM]

33. I am not insulting Iraqis.

I am insulting the people responsible for this terrorist attack. I am not trying to "inflame" the situtation in Iraq. I'm pretty certain they don't read Democratic Underground. And in this country, we have the first amendment, so I have the right to insult a terrorist scumbag if I want to. If they needed ignorant statements about Iraqis to anger them, I'm sure they could find plenty at Free Republic.

[Robbien]

34. This is not a terrorist attack. These people are at war over there.

The downing of a copter is a justifiable action in the course of war.

Your inflammatory words do make a difference. Trying to paint these mercs as innocents who happened into an attack by terrorists. They did not. They are being paid big bucks to provide service in a war zone. They were attacked by their opponents in this war. No innocents, no terrorists. Just players on two different sides.

[EdwardM]

35. They were shot execution style.

That is not a "justifable war act" That was wrong, plain and simple, and the action of a terrorist. And I don't care how much money they were paid. They are dead now, so it doesn't mean anything. Just because they make more money than a general soldier does, doesn't mean they deserve to be shot execution style.

[Robbien]

42. We do not know that

We do not know if the bullets or the crash killed them.

There are 650,000 Iraqis dead from this war/invasion. Do you call each and every one of them a "justifable war act"? The babies? The children?

Nasty things happen when unjustifable wars occur.

I will not cry any harder for these men than I do for any other individual who had lost their life in this BushCo stupidity.

[EdwardM]

47. There are bullets in the back of four of their heads

That means they were shot execution style, unless the world's greatest shooter just happened to be there that day and they were killed in a shootout (extremely unlikely). No I don't call anything we done in Iraq justifiable. I think we should pull out immediately.

[Robbien]

52. Prove to me that those guys were alive when they were shot. Prove it

I have said over and over, you and I don't know that they were alive when shot. You keep repeating that you know for sure these mercs were alive and these were executions. I say, Prove it.

[Marie26]

54. If they were dead,

why would they shoot them?

[Robbien]

60. Many reasons

In anger for a lost loved one
As proof to get paid for a kill
To make darn sure they were dead

and so on.

[EdwardM]

57. If they were dead when they did that,

They are still terrorist pieces of shit. No I can't prove that they were alive when it happened because the report says its uncertain. But that doesn't change who did this is a terrorist sick piece of shit.

[Robbien]

61. Terrorist this and terrrorist that.

The terrorist word has blinded you. You are brainwashed.

[Virginia Dare]

46. I agree with you that no human deserves to die that way...

but I also agree with an earlier post that we need not rush to judgment about this even or its perpetrators, as we have no idea how or why this happened, and we probably never will.

[pampango]

45. Shooting down a helicopter is justifiable in a war. Shooting the

survivors in the back of the head is not justifiable, even in wartime. Has this ever happened before. Sure, but I don't believe that something is morally justifiable just because someone has done the same thing before. Since practically every nasty thing has been done by someone at sometime, I would be morally bankrupt if I failed to judge such behavior harshly.

As I posted earlier, I bet 99% of Iraqis are peaceful people going about their lives like you and me (only they have to do it in the middle of chaos.) The thugs in their society (and all societies have them) are able to promote chaos (with our help) and use the chaos to promote their own ends.

[Robbien]

49. But you automatically assume nasty ol' Iraqis shot them

I do not.

Too many factions are over there and all of them with alot of firepower.

All we know is a copter when down and five mercs are dead, four with bullet wounds. That is all we know for sure. We don't know if the crash or the bullets killed the four mercs. We don't know if Iraqis where responsible for the crash or bullets.

Someone shot down the copter and someone put bullets into either the live or dead bodies of four of the mercs. That is all we know for sure.

[EdwardM]

51. Ok, you got me.

If that was a terrorist from another country who did that, well fuck him also. There's your correction, but it doesn't change anything.

[Robbien]

58. No, I do not

You keep saying terrorists. In a war zone there are only combatants. Combatants kill each other, that is what war is.

[EdwardM]

59. Shooting someone execution style is an act of terror.

It's what the Nazis used to do to the jews. It is meant to terrorise a group of people, so it is terrorism, by any definition.

[Robbien]

64. Terrorism, terrorist

any more Bushspeak you want to throw around?

I give up. Go spread your terrorism, terrorist, terror, terror, terror somewhere else.

[EdwardM]

66. Ok how's this for "Bushspeak."

Bush is a terrorist. Got anymore assumptions you want to say about me?

[High Plains]

67. Well, if it terrorizes American mercenaries...

...then maybe they'll get the hell out of there. You know, these are guys who are paid big bucks to be professional killers. Tough luck to 'em.

[Marie26]

65. Ugh

War zones have TONS of terrorist actions - the IRA bombing the British, the Contras killing the Catholic nuns, Hezbollah bombing the Marine barracks in Lebanon. And every single one would argue that they are only killing "combatants" in a war zone. The bombing of the Golden Mosque wasn't terrorism? Killing 100 Iraqis at a food market isn't terrorism? Is it your position that all of these actions were valid because they were committed in a "war zone?"

[pampango]

76. You are right, we don't know who shot down the helicopter or

killed the passengers (mercs, soldiers, peace activists, whoever) and probably never will unless it shows up on some amateur video in the future. Is it possible that our military or the Iraqi military shot it down in order to foment more chaos which benefits us how?

It is certainly possible that the ones shooting it down are from some another country (SA, Syria, Iran, Pakistan who knows), but I believe that most of the resistance is domestic. I will withdraw any implication that it was done by an Iraqi. Bodies with bullets in the head turn up in large numbers every day in Baghdad, so that is a pretty common method of execution is some circles there.

Can I prove that they were alive after the crash and were executed? Of course not, but that is what I believe is most likely and I consider whoever did it to be war criminal. You are entitled to your own conclusions.

[pampango]

77. You are right, we don't know who shot down the helicopter or

killed the passengers (mercs, soldiers, peace activists, whoever) and probably never will unless it shows up on some amateur video in the future. Is it possible that our military or the Iraqi military shot it down in order to foment more chaos which benefits us how?

It is certainly possible that the ones shooting it down are from some another country (SA, Syria, Iran, Pakistan who knows), but I believe that most of the resistance is domestic. I will withdraw any implication that it was done by an Iraqi. Bodies with bullets in the head turn up in large numbers every day in Baghdad, so that is a pretty common method of execution is some circles there.

Can I prove that they were alive after the crash and were executed? Of course not, but that is what I believe is most likely and I consider whoever did it to be war criminal. You are entitled to your own conclusions.

[Tesha]

23. We swore off the Geneva Conventions so why would *THEY* treat...

We swore off the Geneva Conventions so why would we expect
the enemy to treat captured enemy combatants ac-
cording to the conventions we ourselves disclaim?

"No one could have envisioned this."

Tesha

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

30. Not to mention Blackwater mercs are not uniformed soldiers of the United States.

They don't operate under Geneva.

The U.S. under Bush has taken the position that "well if they don't wear a uniform they aren't protected by Geneva" etc. and the flipside would certainly be true.

[bdamomma]

43. whether they were contractors are not we need to get out!!!

these people want to us leave is there anything else left to say.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

73. Wow! A mystery of Angela Lansbury proportions!

Now... who would want to shoot mercenaries in the back of the head? Hmmmm.