a Marine of an apparently injured and unarmed Iraqi by a U.S. Marine
inside a Fallujah (search) mosque has written on his Web site that the wounded man made no sudden movements before the Marine opened fire on him.
Posted on 11/22/2004 6:28:13 AM PST by crushelits
BAGHDAD, Iraq — The NBC correspondent who filmed the fatal shooting by
a Marine of an apparently injured and unarmed Iraqi by a U.S. Marine inside
a Fallujah (search) mosque has written on his Web site that the wounded man made no sudden movements before the Marine opened fire on him.
Before the opening of the Nov. 8 assault on the rebel-held city, Marine commanders told infantrymen that the rules of engagement allowed for use of deadly force against men of military age deemed holding hostile intent, even if the enemy didn't fire on the Marines first.
In a posting on his Web blog dated Sunday, Kevin Sites (search), a freelancer on assignment for NBC, wrote that he didn't see the wounded Iraqi make any movement before the Marine shot him — but that only the Marine can explain his mental state before the shooting.
"Through my viewfinder I can see him (Marine) raise the muzzle of his rifle in the direction of the wounded Iraqi. There are no sudden movements, no reaching or lunging," Sites writes.
"However, the Marine could legitimately believe the man poses some kind of danger. Maybe he's going to cover him while another Marine searches for weapons. Instead, he pulls the trigger. There is a small splatter against the back wall and the man's leg slumps down," Sites writes.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
WHY are you posting anything by this anti-war shill hired by the MSM to attack our troops.
These idiots, so called journalists should be banned from the front.
Agreed!
So?
I still say that the Marine shot the wrong guy.
Ok...and what's your point?......He killed a terrorist...Let's all move along now folks....nothing to see here anymore.....
Looks like Sites is stiil trying to keep himself in the news for his fifteen minutes of fame. At the expense , of course, of the Marines and Soldiers in combat.
Also, detonating explosives requires but a small hand movement, releasing or pressing a switch. Further, and most importantly, by the time the Marine sees the movement, it is way too late.
This sort of thing happens in all wars.
It happened in the Akkad/Sumer wars whan Sargon I became history's first empire builder, it happened it in the Punic Wars, the War of Spanish Succession, the War of Jenkin's Ear, The Napoleonic Wars, The Revolution, the Spanish American War, World War I, World War II and now the war to liberate Iraq.
No news here.
If he never ever moved, how does he know he was alive?
With the wearing of C4 having become almost a fission statement it's a wonder more insurgents haven't been killed on the spot.
No lunging, perhaps...but there was movement. He needs to watch his film...
And watch some westerns from the 50's and 60's...the bad guy fakers moved slowly, sneaking their gun up, no "lunging"....
I mean, come on...there has to be "lunging"? Guess thats why he's running a camera instead of a rifle.
:)
How could the Marine have known he was alive if the terrorist didn't move?
Position a trash can close by in case of stomach churn.
Beat me by :59!
The NBC correspondent who filmed the fatal shooting by a Marine of an apparently injured and unarmed Iraqi by a U.S. Marine inside a Fallujah mosque has written on his Web site that the wounded man made no sudden movements before the Marine opened fire on him.
In a posting on his Web blog dated Sunday, Kevin Sites (search), a freelancer on assignment for NBC, wrote that he didn't see the wounded Iraqi make any movement before the Marine shot him
These two statements are not the same at all.
I didn't have anyone volunteer to take my place when I went to Viet Nam in 1969 and anyone who thinks they can do a better job than this Marine did in Falluja and wants to volunteer I will be more than happy to take them down to the Marine Corps recruiter myself.
Bottom line: all of these morons who are criticizing this Marine have never laced up a pair of combat boots in their life. Thus, they have less crediblity than a screen door on a submarine. Hence, they can take their opinions and shove them where the sun don't shine.
Maybe this "reporter" would have felt better if this Marine had turned over the body of this enemy and found a detonated explosive which would have killed the Marine and the "reporter." The MSM would have had a field day with that one now wouldn't they.
Semper Fi,
Kelly
PS And yes, I killed them before they could kill me.
That's why I am here today and they aren't.
Correspondent: Shot Prisoner Didn't Move.
So was he dead or not?
Was he a prisoner or not?
Was he just laying there?
Was he Iraqi, or a foreigner?
Too many questions still unanswerd by the stupid media maggots.
Well, they wouldn't want a little thing like the truth to interfere with their agenda, which is anti-American.
Sites, you can't have it both ways. You released the tape and everyone's seen it. Either the guy moved or he didn't. You can't have it five ways, the same thing John Kerry tried to have.
I agree. I've talked to many WWII vets and was amazed at some of their stories. They admitted to shooting wrong people in tense situations, but that is war. Especially when you are young, scared and your adrenalin is maxed out. The craziest story I heard was from a Canadian soldier who was in France. He admitted that when you are thousands of miles away from home trying not to get your head blown off, " the anything goes" rules apply.
These do gooder pansy reporters need to go back home and play in their playpens.
God bless our troops wherever they may be.
Do you think he would be safe if he went out with the Marines again?
A Marine shot a terrorist.
In a war. On terrorism.
Why on earth are the liberals trying to make an issue of this???
Earlier in the footage, as the Marine unit that Sites was accompanying approached the mosque, gunfire can be heard from inside.
Let me also add this because it goes to the heart of the issue:
INSURGENTS FAKING DEAD FIRES ON MARINES
FALLUJAH, Iraq -- Marines from the 1st Marine Division shot and killed an insurgent, who while faking dead, opened fire on the Marines that were conducting a security and clearing patrol through the streets here at approximately 3:45 p.m. on 21 November.
For more information, please contact Capt Bradley Gordon, public affairs officer, 1st Marine Division, gordonbv@1mardivdm.usmc.mil
Agree. And don't we have tape of both President Bush and John Kerry saying something like ... "To the terrorists - we will hunt you down and we will kill you."
So what's the problem.
This is the phone number to use concerning supporting the marine:
Marine Public Affairs: (703) 614-1492
They are fielding calls on this incident, so show your support for this brave marine!!
bump
If the guy did not move how do we know he was alive? How do you kill a dead person? If 'dead' people were shooting at me I would kill them until they stop.
I have, but my question is why is this Anti-War guy, who has a website to promote his views, working as an embed and his swill being posted here.
I agree, and I'm still waiting for the DOD to give me an answer. (when hell freezes over)
This "injured and unarmed Iraqi" was in FALLUJAH.
How many months did "innocent Iraqis" have to get out of Fallujah?
If we had done this right, we would have leveled the city with artillery and airpower instead of sending in our troops to do house-to-house-fighting.
This "innocent Iraqi" should not have been alive the day he was shot.
How many coalition troops did this "innocent Iraqi" kill before our Marine served justice upon him?
So the terrorist may have already been dead when he was shot. In any case I don't see that it makes much difference. Of course the Marine could be guilty of wasting ammunition.
But that is complete nonsense. The Marine's observation that the targeted insurgent was "faking" death implies that the Marine believed the insurgent was attempting to deliberately deceive the Marine. And to what end? To lull the Marine into a false sense of security so he, the insurgent, could kill the Marine. The apparent deception itself could be seen as a hostile act. The more obviously wounded and moving insurgents would not be seen as threats unless their movements were hostile.
Any reasonable person in the Marine's boots, having experienced what the Marine had already experienced in fighting the insurgents, could be expected to respond in the same manner.
Let's all contact all the media outlets and let them know that we are all writing to our congress critters to get the embed policy cancelled as a result of this man's irresponsible reporting and the fact that various news agencies have continued to carry HIS water at the expense of our troops.
Precisely. The Marine might have read the body language and facial expressions of the guy who was moving and made the judgement -- based in part on the likelihood that if this guy was going to do something he would have done it already -- and saw him as no threat. The other guy could have been moving in such a way that Sites -- 15 feet away by his own admission -- might not have seen.
Was Sites' camera focused on this one Marine the whole time somehow in anticipation of something happening (unlikely to say the least) or did he far more likely look and then turn his camera only after the Marine started shouting that "he's faking it"?
" Through my viewfinder I can see him (Marine) raise the muzzle of his rifle in the direction of the wounded Iraqi. There are no sudden movements, no reaching or lunging," Sites writes."
Cockroach Sites thinks that only gross and exaggerated arm movements indicate a potential suicide bomber.
A subtle, slow movement under a blanket or jacket by a wounded terrorist, is a red flag to anyone in a combat situation.
And how does The Cockroach focus simultaneously on a rifle muzzle and the terrorist's arms and hands ?
CBS radio news reported last week that the Marine involved had " been arrested " and the remaining bodies flown to Dover for autopsies.
With Site's history- he never should have been allowed anywhere near the troops- the embed vetting process failed miserably.
This isn't what Bill O'reilly said:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/story/255091p-218406c.html
But the tape of the incident actually helps the Marine, because you can clearly hear him yell to his squad: "He's [blanking] faking he's dead!" Then the soldier shoots. On the tape, you can see the insurgent move before the Marine pulls the trigger.
Yes, but only because the Marines are professionals. However, I am not a professional, and if the Marine in question was my son or grandson, Mr. Sikes would get to know an Old Cracker.
Why is this even a story at all? This is war and the reporter should have been dumped on the streets for the insurgents to find - he's a Piece of crap and doesn't deserve to hang with the Marines. Shoot the lot of them.
For me anything O'Reilly says is immediately tossed on the ash heap. He lost all credibility when he trashed John O'Neill and the Swifties. O'Reilly is no friend of conservatives.
I was just wondering - does Kevin Sites want to become
the Dan Rather of NBC? I really don't know anything
about him but the fact he started a tempest in a teapot!
Do a google search. This guy is part of an anti-war group. How he got embed credentials is beyond me.
There was a report yesterday that in the aftermath of the incident Sites was seen eating all by his lonesome at the Marine mess. Marines, justifiably, are shunning him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.