From: Jack (milveh@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Mon Nov 29 2004 - 22:23:57 PST
My appologies, but I have to say this:
Rob, with all due respect, it would be absolutely
irresponsible of you to repeat such a story unless you
know it to be the truth.
Were you aware the video in question doesn't show the
guy with his hands in plain view behind his back and
handcuffed? (That should have been your first clue)
Did you also know there were 3 terrorists lying there
and after this one was shot while faking being dead, a
3rd guy lying next to him suddenly outstretches his
hand to show he is alive and he is not faking it and
he was coincidentally NOT shot ... let me repeat, not
shot! Why? Because he outstreches his empty hand Rob
to show his intentions. A free, empty hand and a hand
not handcuffed. This much has been made public with
the video.
A fair question, if you still believe your version, is
why would one allegedly be cuffed up and the other
not?
Another good question is why didn't they shoot that
wounded guy too?
I look forward to getting these answers from the
official investigation, not from the tabloids. I
suspect you're a better person than to play into the
hands of Al Queda and that this was all a momentary
lapse of judgement.
--- Robdab in Toronto <robdab@look.ca> wrote:
> My understanding is that the insurgent that was shot
> had his hands cuffed
> behind his back and was lying face down on the floor
> with his hands in plain
> view. He had been wounded the day before and left in
> cuffs for over 24 hours
> without any medical attention before being murdered
> by being shot in the
> head.
>
> Hardly a threat to anyone.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:37:44 PDT