Banker
LE

Some internet mouthpiece declares '' Its a murder ''
I'm told the Blackhawk crew had something to say about it too........
Some internet mouthpiece declares '' Its a murder ''
You seem incapable of drawing a distinction between the process of obtaining convictions against individuals through the courts,
The shooting is clearly a murder of an unarmed and motionless individual.
Are CDF and the IGADF keyboard commandos? Because they've concluded that there's sufficient evidence to warrant an institutional response.
You seem incapable of drawing a distinction between the process of obtaining convictions against individuals through the courts,
The shooting is clearly a murder of an unarmed and motionless individual.
I think your motivations here are fascinating. Why are you fighting tooth and nail to defend war crimes on a technicality?
I'm told the Blackhawk crew had something to say about it too........
They may well have done.
Were you told if they spoke up at the time ?
If not why not. If they did, why wasn't anything done at the time ?
Perhaps Patrol Leaders could also influence Blackhawk crews as well as the CoC. Sounds like these guys had the whole Military based in Afghan under their thumbs![]()
![]()
You appear to do "fuckwit" with little to no effort, I tip my hat to your Higgsian levels of extrapolation and ridiculous inference.
I'm told the Blackhawk crew had something to say about it too........
Were you told if they spoke up at the time ?
If not, why not. If they did, why wasn't anything done at the time ?
He dealt pretty promptly with the incident when one of his patrol corporals cut off the hand of a dead taliban for identifcation purposes, informed the COC and got the incident fully investigated which turned out that he had carried out SOP's a bit too literally. In Chris Masters book 'No Front Line' it states:Does anyone buy that shy, timid shit? It’s not as if SASR platoon commanders are fresh faced subies straight out of Duntroon.
Why did you bring the Nazis into the thread anyway? It's toatally irrelevant to the thread. It was a classic case of Godwin's law and virtue signalling. Mass murder is mass murder whether you are killing your own people or another race. However how does that relate to 39 allegations of murder by 19 suspects over a 7 year period.I've made it perfectly clear that mass murder is disgusting and unjustifiable, wherever and whatever. I'm merely pointing out that the Nazis were the first to make it an active and deliberate part of foreign, rather than just domestic, policy in the modern era. Anyway, Mao was probably responsible for more deaths than either Stalin or Hitler.
I'm trying to figure out your motivation here:
- Are you trying to defend the Nazis, because "the Soviets were worse" / "the Germans were forced into being racist genocidal maniacs"?
- Are you trying to defend Australian war criminals, because "it's always been that way" / "they haven't been convicted in a court of law, so you can't say they're guilty"?
I used to think the same, but I too was very much mistaken. It got to the point where he was one of the very few people I have put on ignore as he seems to add very little to the conversation.I used to think that you were much better than that. Obviously I was very much mistaken.
Australia has issued termination notices to at least 10 special forces soldiers after the release of a report that found credible evidence of unlawful killings in Afghanistan, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) said on Thursday.
The broadcaster did not identify any of the 10 but said all of them were witnesses or accessories and therefore not among the 19 referred for possible criminal charges.
I'll just leave this here
Note the wording - No mention of murder, strange that one, eh @Caecilius
None of the above are part of the 19 referred by the Brereton report.
So what of the 19 Referred ?
![]()
Australia to dismiss at least 10 soldiers over Afghan killings: ABC
Australia has issued termination notices to at least 10 special forces soldiers after the release of a report that found credible evidence of unlawful killings in Afghanistan, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) said on Thursday.www.reuters.com
You see those words @Caecilius
Possible criminal charges.
Makes you a bit of a muppet shouting about murder.
- No criminal investigation yet
- No charges brought yet
- No Court cases yet
- No-one found guilty of anything yet.
then you're either being incredibly disingenuous, or you're too thick to understand what's happening. You don't seem daft so that leaves us with the first option. Either way, if you aren't going to engage with reality then there's little point in carrying on a discussion.Who has been convicted of anything, let alone war crimes ?
What a belter
The insult.
The last bastion of those that do not have a reply and are stumped.
I think we're probably done here.
I used the term murder as it is used in common parlance
He has not.Sure - If you have been living under a rock for the last 20 years or so.
He has not.
Agree. Let's wait and see if and how the Trooper explains the shooting if it goes to trial.We are indeed.
There is no point in continuing anything with someone who does not understand the difference between an Inquiry and a Criminal Investigation.
An inquiry has found evidence of wrongdoing. ( Taken from the report )
A Criminal investigation will establish the facts of the wrong doing.
Sure - If you have been living under a rock for the last 20 years or so.
OK, so you haven't looked at the report. Actually the word "murder" appears in the IGADF report 184 times. Its use is not always directly related to alleged events in Afghanistan, but carefully-chosen phrases such as "credible information of murder" do occur. That is obviously not a finding of criminal guilt. If criminal prosecutions do ensue, it will be for the defence to argue, if they think fit, that publication of the redacted report has been prejudicial.Do you know him ?
Could you put your heads together and examine Brereton's report and repost any part that mentions murder ?
There is a very good reason why it is not used.
The same reason that the older Op Banner guys will remember the official definitions of terrorists weapons being reclassified as long and short barrel weapons.
He doesn't have to. The prosecution have to produce a case that does.Agree. Let's wait and see if and how the Trooper explains the shooting if it goes to trial.
It’s plainly obvious that he hasn’t read the report.OK, so you haven't looked at the report. Actually the word "murder" appears in the IGADF report 184 times. Its use is not always directly related to alleged events in Afghanistan, but carefully-chosen phrases such as "credible information of murder" do occur. That is obviously not a finding of criminal guilt. If criminal prosecutions do ensue, it will be for the defence to argue, if they think fit, that publication of the redacted report has been prejudicial.
Yes, but it would help to solve this thread if we hear from the guy himself what mitigation/intelligence/reasons led to the shooting.He doesn't have to. The prosecution have to produce a case that does.
You're taking the piss. HTHWithout having seen the video that you mention, I could not possibly comment on it.
There was also pictures of Iraqi's being abused splashed all over the UK MSM.
Which turned out to have been taken in a TA Centre somewhere in England.
No Iraqi's were present / harmed at the taking of the photo's
Its use is not always directly related to alleged events in Afghanistan, but carefully-chosen phrases such as "credible information of murder" do occur.
Note the wording '' Unlawfully killed - Anybody talking about murder charges at this stage is a f***ing clown and that includes the CDF.