653 Comments

• Digg
• Bury

The accountability of wikileaks should be the least of your worries nowadays.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Not sure who dugg you down but thanks for the information. It is a sad day.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

There's no such thing as "unbiased" news, or "unbiased" people for that matter. We all see the world through our own relatively limited viewpoints, including journalists and news anchors. The question is a matter of truth, and in its short history Wikileaks has consistently been a force for unearthing truth.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

>>Wikileaks didn't make that video dude.<<Actually they did, dude. It's edits out the firefight that happened beforehand (why the Apache was there in the first place); goes to great lengths to highlight where the journalists are in the group (something the Apache pilots couldn't possibly know at the time, they weren't wearing the vests that identified them as such); doesn't highlight the numerous assault rifles and what appear to be an RPG being set up twice (but is quick to highlight what it thinks is a camera); and misinterprets the dialogue in the subtitles in several places, to make the pilot and gunner appear craven.In reality, nothing in the video is inconsistent with the military's official report. The gunner receives authorization to fire in both instances.Are you suggesting there was some kind of impropriety that I didn't see?>>Or can your mind just not wrap itself around a point of view where the U.S. isn't always the good guys? I'm an American, and I'm ashamed by what I saw in that video.<<Of course the US isn't always the 'good guy' - but this isn't an example of it. If they had been strafing a public market full of innocents intentionally, I'd have no problem with condemning them, hell give me the gun, I'd execute them happily.>> I'm an American, and I'm ashamed by what I saw in that video.<<Yes, it's people like you that are the intended audience of the video - in hopes the shock value alone, that people die in war - will outweigh a rational understanding of the material. In essence, stupid people, who value emotion over reason.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Way to be a patriot, Angela. I'm sure your tax dollars are giving the troops everything they need. Now they have enough body armor, humvee armor, access to phones to call home, care packages, reinforcements, and other supplies they desperately need. You should be commended. Don't forget to give more of your money to Wikileaks, too. This way, the armed forces can be undermined and exposed for every perceived wrongdoing. If only we had patriots like you and Wikileaks during WWII, the Germans would have a lot more lamp shades and soap to choose from. Well done!

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

@wargala it started long before 9/11.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

must have glitched or something

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

I understand them very well things go boom, new bombs are made jobs are created!

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Every time you hear a news report saying "## insurgents have been killed in Iraq/Afghanistan", remember this video.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

@lamadingdongtbh, it's not clear as to whether or not this investigation later on was simply analyzing the video footage, or actually had the evidence on hand. I'm still inclined to believe the people on the ground, who have no motive to lie.And yeah, the wikileaks edited version of the video is blatantly biased. Anyone commenting on this issue without having watched the full version is a fool.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

how do you claim moral superiority over terrorists? here are some new words for you: "American terrorism" - "American extremism"

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

what if 9/11 attackers say that they were attacking American terrorists inside the WTC and the innocent civilians killed were "civilian causalities" and "collateral damage" which was unavoidable to get the "terrorists" who were hiding inside the building?am i insane or are you blind? wars do not have to go on. but we'll have to meet each other half way...and not claim that one side is filled with "terrorists" while the other is full of pious angels. the only difference is, those terrorists in afghanistan do not have the consent of the majority of their population to carry out these acts, while the terrorists in america do have that consent of the majority of their population.i wish america would wake up. why are u guys so stupid?

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

no , u started it when you put millions of random people into the homes of palestinians who drove the palestinians out of their own homes and started, f**king killing them. imagine refugees from afghanistan are settled into boston by UK and the afghan refugees drive the americans out of there. thats practically what happened in palestine. u give weapons to israel including nuclear weapons, and theyve killed thousands of innocent peopleread some history.then youve done a load of other s**t: nicaragua, cuba, afghanistan in the 80's, killing irans's democracy long before u were born, among other s**t.please start reading books......you ignorant retard.

• Reply