http://twitter.com/wikileakshttp://collateralmurder.com/"...Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.
The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement"..."
Lt. Col - 'Rules of Engagement Were Not Followed'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=452032&mesg_id=452032"Let me make it really clear, though. From your perspective, were the rules of engagement followed from what you see in this piece of videotape?"
SHAFFER: "Let me be clear... based on what I've seen only, and I'm making it on what I've seen: No, they were not. First rule is 'You may engage persons who commit hostile acts or show hostile intent by minimum force necessary.' Minimum force is the key here. If you see eight armed men, the first thing I would think as an intelligence officer: 'How can we take these guys and capture them?' We don't want to kill people arbitrarily. We want the intell take.
Now, most importantly, when you see that van show up to take away the wounded: 'Do not target or strike anyone who has surrendered or is out of combat due to sickness or wounds.' So the wound part of that, I find a bit disturbing by the fact that you have people down, clearly down; you have people on the way here..."