This is not good.OXFORD, England (AP) - A coroner ruled Friday that U.S. forces in Iraq unlawfully killed a British television journalist by shooting him in the head as he lay in the back of a makeshift ambulance during the opening days of the war.
The widow of reporter Terry Lloyd called for the perpetrators to be prosecuted for the "despicable, deliberate, vengeful act." And Deputy Coroner Andrew Walker said he would ask the attorney general to take steps to bring to justice those responsible for the death.
But prosecution of U.S. service members seemed unlikely.
Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros, a Pentagon spokesman, said an investigation into the killing of Lloyd, 50, a veteran reporter for the British TV network ITN was completed in May 2003 and "determined that U.S. forces followed the applicable rules of engagement."
Why do I smell something fishy?
poor guy, shit happens.
ReplyDeleteOK, so this happens at the opening of the war ..so lets say 1936-199X, or whatever.
ReplyDeleteSo who stirred the pot? Who represents this guy in the UK Parliment? A muzzie, a socialist?, just G-d knows who.
So they get to the coroner, the wife (hey babes money), they accelerate the Brit Generals calls to get out now before they take Dorchester Heights...run,mate,run...
Was the guy pro/anti American?
Did he ever live in a warm house? Not likely in England.
Is the crime scene still secured?
Does this guy like boys?
Is he a friend of George Galloway?
Why was he carrying an AK-47 and dressed as a Detroit Piston?
So much we don't know, but as DR said above, shit happens.
Am I misinformed? It is not known whether the man was killed from forces on the ground or in the air?
ReplyDeleteThey do not know if the round was fired from an aircraft or ground forces.
ReplyDeleteIf by ground force, it's a war crime, by aircraft, an accident of war.
The US Army decided it could not tell where the bullet came from, case dismissed.
Meanwhile
Two opportunities exist over the next few months for creative diplomacy that could begin a process of orderly American withdrawal. The first is a December deadline for renewal of the U.N. legal mandate for coalition forces in Iraq. Maliki has been dragging his feet in seeking parliamentary or other formal Iraqi approval for continued occupation, knowing that in the current environment it would be explosive. But paradoxically, this issue provides a useful chance for U.S.-Iraqi negotiation of a phased timetable for reducing American forces and closing some U.S. bases. That discussion is in everyone's interest.
The second opportunity is the quasi-official mission of former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, who co-chairs the Iraq Study Group launched by the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Where have I read about that December agreement before? Yep, gotta get the Iraqi's permission to occuppy Iraq for another year.
It'll be anEXPLOSIVE issue.
Oh, that quote, from the deacon of the "main stream",David Ignatius
ReplyDeleteThe Terms of the next occuppation agreement will start being discussed, publicly.
I think we should start out negotiations by informing the Iraqi government that our mandate is up, and we're ready to go. Good luck.
ReplyDeleteThe negotiations should be "what can you do to make us want to stay?"