US troops kill Italian negotiator, wound freed hostage
 

at a US checkpoint.

Freed Italian Hostage 'Wounded', Negotiator Killed, by US Fire

ROME - Freed Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena was wounded when US troops opened fire on a convoy carrying her to safety, and an Italian negotiator who helped secure her release was killed, according to Italian media.

Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi confirmed that Sgrena had been wounded and an Italian secret service agent killed by US troops at a coalition checkpoint in Iraq.

U.S. forces fired at a car carrying Italian reporter Giuliana Sgrena shortly after her liberation, wounding some of the passengers, the journalist's newspaper said March 4, 2005. Sgrena, who was kidnapped in Baghdad, February 4, 2005 as she conducted interviews on the street, is seen in this undated handout photo. (Reuters - Handout)

The journalist was taken to a US-run hospital for treatment for wounds to her shoulder after her vehicle was fired on by US troops at a coalition checkpoint, her newspaper said, adding that the 54-year-old journalist's life was not in danger.

The negotiator, an Italian secret service agent, was shot dead in the incident as he tried to protect Sgrena, the paper said.

rest of the article here...if anyone cares....
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0304-08.htm

Will this article even make it to the US media?

Makes you wonder how many Iraqi Citizens are killed at US checkpoints daily.

Pretty fucked up. I think I heard about it on CNN or MSNBC this morning.

spreading freedom... the cowboy way.

Its the lead story on cnn.com at the moment.

Good to know....seriously, I was curious...

thanks

~r.

That's so messed up. Poor negotiator got killed himself.

That negotiator was obviously a brave man. RIP

CNNs report is a bit different. It states her body guard was killed.

They also state that the vehicle was coming to a check point at a high rate of speed and ignored hand signals to stop.

I imagine the truth is somewhere in between.

US Troops do not open up on a car without a reason. It's simple. These people are in an place that can become a fire fight at any moment. They see something wrong - such as a car coming to a check point at a high rate of speed - they stop it: with force.

Tell that to the antis when they get wind of this thread.

The car obviously posed some sort of threat. No one shoots at a car just to kill. Good job trying to spin the story to make the US look bad again though. :2 cents:

The occupying forces are doing a pretty good job of that themselves.

remember a few years ago when US troops killed 4 Canadian soldiers?
THINK

There is no need to spin this to make it sound bad.

A U.S. patrol "attempted to warn the driver to stop by hand and arm signals, flashing white lights, and firing warning shots in front of the car," the military said in a statement. "When the driver didn't stop, the soldiers shot into the engine block which stopped the vehicle, killing one and wounding two others."

Seems to me the US was trying to make the damn car stop and they refused. Thus, they open fire.

And you believe that rubish ?????

Think a bit, why wouldn't they stop????

Another article based on US spokesman claims that " multi-national forces" fired, then another spokeman, in another article, says it was an " armored vehicule ( tank)" that shot the car... Since when US tanks are operated by foreigners... Outsourcing has even reached Iraq ???

They are dead. Simple. Shot. Simple. By American troops. Case closed.

That's sad... fucking idiots.

The car wasn't shot for no reason.

How is your version of the story any more reliable then his?

Simple logic.

They were driving to the airport, the most dangerous road of all Baghdad ( according to CNN). So , yes they drive fast; no time to pick flowers or take a leak ....
It is near 9:00 PM . So dark. It seems that that checkpoint, according again to CNN, was not a "fixed" one, but an improvised one... so not on the map ...

That " check point" could have been one of " insurgents - freedom fighters ".... The bullets shot also could have been not friendly ... They don't have the US flag on them and dont sing " Freedom" on their way to the target ....

It is not the first time that US trops kills either civilians or journalists or , In Afghanistan, Canadian soldiers ...

So think a bit.

soldiers kill, thats what they do.

you think anyone with right mind accepts the chickenshit change they are paid?

they LOVE to kill, thats why they go into milityary

If you were stationed at a military checkpoint under these same circumstances what would you do?

Knowing full well of the potential danger of a suicide car bomb attack. You signal and fire warning shots with no prevail of the vehicle stopping. What is your simple logic for that scenario? What would you do?

You can't just race your car to a military check point in a land were cars are used for suicide attacks on a routine bases. Its a awful mistake but the people in that car should of known better.

It was not intentional and you will have a hard time trying to convince any reasonable person otherwise.

Nobody said it was " intentional" , but when you put gung-ho " I'll nuke them" uneducated kids with weapons , it does happen:

What would have been the US reaction if it would have been a reversed situation : the car fires on the soldiers and kill one ??? I have a hell of a good idea.

They were US Rangers. A Ranger is extremely well trained. I don't think the gung-ho uneducated type would even make it past the Ranger assessment phase. They are almost the same caliber as a Special Forces unit.

Which is exactly why you shoot cars that are speeding towards you in Iraq :winkwink:

OK, the Italians deserved it! They should have all been executed. Fuck the Italians. Rangers rules ....

what i think is funny how people believe they 'negotiated' her release....

HELLO ITALY IS THE ONLY COUNTRY WHERE THEY LET HOSTAGES OF THEIRS GO!!!! ITALY IS PAYING THEM RANDSOM

if you think anything else, you're a brainless lemming.

that's sad..
shit happens in war

I didn't say that.. it's a awful thing to have happened

However, the Rangers did what they were suppose to.

Provided the exact same circumstances you proabably would do the same.

All E-grade military personell have at the least a high school diploma...many have some college...a percentage have associate degrees...a lesser percentage have full degrees...Senior NCO's almost always have...at a minimum an associate degree. All O-grade military have full degrees.

SOP's and Rules of Engagement are provided to all combatants...and yes hopefully all military personell are "gung-ho"...and abide by SOP and Rules of Engagement.

They are the same "caliber" as Special Forces...but are trained for a different mission.

obviously they did something wrong to get shot at, they dont just open fire on random cars (even though if i was a troop i would be blasting at non stop towel heads)

dont forget troops are still men, and wouldnt mind staying alive.

Any...and all news that is deemed news worthy by the hundreds of news outlets in the US is presented in the US...by...at the least several of the outlets. Nothing is hidden by the US media...ever.

Why does everybody forget the W grade guys? :winkwink:

What grade are Rangers and Special Forces anyway? Since you seem to know this stuff.

Good point. And all W grades have college degrees as well.

Well...the Rangers and Special Forces all have E- grades (Enlisted Ranks) and 0-grades (Officer Ranks) and...lest I forget again...W-grades (Warrant Officer Ranks).

Now that Im thinking about it..

How come a Lieutenant General outranks a Major General? That seems just backwards being that a Major outranks a Lieutenant. :upsidedow

Don't know, but I do know why a Navy Lieutenant outranks an Army Lieutenant.

I always thought that there was some designated rank.

Like a E-5 is a Sergeant. I just can't grasp how a infantry sergant can be the same grade as a Ranger sergant, etc.

A military friend of mine was explaining how this works before I still find the entire thing a bit confusing.

Beacuse the Navy has that extra officer rank "Ensign".

I think it has to do with a play on the definition of the words...Brigadier...Major...and Lieutenant.

E...O...W...ranks are pay grades. A higher pay grade outranks a lower pay grade. All branches of the US military have the same pay grades. No branch outranks another of branch when they have the same pay grade. In other words an E-5 pay grade/E-5 Sergeant...is of equal rank in all branches of the service.

A Lieutenant in the Navy is an 0-3 and a Captain in the Army is an 0-3...same pay grade...same rank...but with different designations.