If you read the personal account of this incident by Gaith Abdul-Ahad, you will see clearly why I am not letting go of this story. This is a perfect example of the kind of story the US news media should be following vigilantly. It is our job to follow through on these stories. Some US outlets provided halfway decent coverage, including Reuters, for whom videographer Seif Faoud, who was also wounded in the incident, works as a stringer. They were clear about what Faoud's footage showed -- no fire originating from the ground, and direct fire from the helicopters into the crowd.
I guess we will see if anything comes of the military's "investigation." This reminds me very much of the "wedding massacre," which seems to have faded away. As I wrote in the article, though, the main difference is that there were lots of reporters and at least one video camera at the scene of Sunday's massacre. Will the American public learn about, let alone accept, the real story of this incident?
Also, we will probably take some flak for using the term "massacre" in the title. To many American readers, "atrocities" and "massacres" are acts committed by "them" against "us" -- but, really, "massacre" is the only word that makes sense. It means killing many civilians on purpose. At least a significant number of those wounded were noncombatants, and frankly it is hard to understand how that could not have been plainly obvious to the helicopter crews who opened fire on them.