EDIT: And I misspoke, I meant wounded. The title says shot.
And shooting journalists is a no no as well (Again I accept they probably couldn't tell)
Air strike. US Inquiry later found many more civilian casualties. Red X say 'dozens'". And you have no proof that 56 civilians weren't killed, and even the report makes it pretty clear they were. The titles aren't biased, the site isn't biased, you are.
What they believed it was doesn't change what it actually was. I can think i'm shooting Pol Pot (hey no Godwin) but that doesn't change the fact I shot a normal guy.
That says No Insurgents Killed. Logically, that would mean that the people killed were civilians, or at least not direct targets of the attack, which makes this outside the rules of engagement and arguably a war crime. This in no way contradicts the title, which for some reason you think is false.
Furthermore, you have no reason to believe the titles are false besides your imagined bias from an organization you know nothing of, except for the fact they disagree with you.
EDIT: And even if they are biased, that doesn't mean they fucking lie outright. It's a paper that's been around since 1821, they have some integrity.
What about this bit
"Killed None(None) Insurgent"
jesus Ragy, you're ridiculous.
I've disproved both of your story's of war crimes, more than I said I would. I'm out.
-ah fuck it all, not the best example. I'm bad at picking these out, i'm sure there's better if someone wants to try-
I've said this time and time again. I support Wikileaks, but what they did now...this shit right here...is a dick move of epic proportions.
But any respect I had for wikileaks is gone now. I supported them before but this is just getting ridiculous now. Assange needs to pull his head out of his ass.