So, New York times Photographer Michele McNally was in the room with members of the Muqtada al-Sadr's "Mahdi Army" when they tried to kill America troops. Also, props to Joao Silva of the New York Time's for supporting this crap
Link on the New York Times Web Site (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2006/07/12/nyregion/20060712_ASK_SLIDESHOW_21.html)

This idiot from the New York Liberal Times should be charged with Treason!

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/12/nyregion/12ask.slide21.jpg

Well now at least we know the face behind the sniper...good job to the NY Times.

The Photographer is a free lancer.

Yea..

Great plan.. problems though.
JAOA SILVA is Portugese South African. You cant actually charge someone who isnt a US Citizen with treason.

Yea..

Great plan.. problems though.
JAOA SILVA is Portugese South African. You cant actually charge someone who isnt a US Citizen with treason.

In Bush World you can!

Well now at least we know the face behind the sniper...good job to the NY Times.

The Photographer is a free lancer.


WRONG!!

The Photographer works for the New York Times and I imagine she lives in the U.S.
New York Time's Photographer Michele McNally (http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2004/04/mcnally_named_nyt_dop.html)

Axxa, get your facts straight.

McNally is one of NYTimes editors.. she didn't take the pic, Silva did.

However, her "tremendous courage" applause for this asshole Silva deserves spotlight, scorn, and dismissal. But hey, she has First Amendment rights!

As someone else said, 'courage' would have entailed beating this guy with a telephoto lens and then reporting his location to our troops... not getting a book deal out of it.

Michelle was commenting (as she does on all subsequent photos). She is not the photographer:


This is the Photographer, taken from right under the photo:
Joao Silva for The New York Times



She was saying how courageous it was for Joao to be there taking that picture.

Come on...pay a little attention before you spout off your drivel.

The photographer did show courage. No matter if you agree with his profession or not, thats what they do. They document, they dont participate.

Silva was commenting on the photographer, not the shooter.

Look at the pipes on that facker. That scope looks messed up too, can't imagine hes too accurate.

WRONG!!

The Photographer works for the New York Times and I imagine she lives in the U.S.
New York Time's Photographer Michele McNally (http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2004/04/mcnally_named_nyt_dop.html)

WRONG!!!!!

Yeah Ibudin...

I find it more likely this was a staged shot... though he appears to be a lefty, and he's squinting with the correct eye.. but whats up with scope extension... dunno.

Thought just popped into my head....though admittedly I know nothing about snipers that I didn't learn from the movie of the same name....could it be that extention let's him stay back a bit further from the window lessening his chances of being seen?



In any case, I hope a 125mm shells hit the room, with him in it, a few moments later (after the photographer left of course).

Is that fucker wearing body armor?

could it be that extention let's him stay back a bit further from the window lessening his chances of being seen? I've read a few books too, but I don't remember anyone using something like that... but I think Ib was pointing out how it's not parrallel to the scope... kinda cockeyed.. maybe he was adjusting it or something.

Anyone know what make/model rifle that is ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by axxa
WRONG!!

The Photographer works for the New York Times and I imagine she lives in the U.S.
New York Time's Photographer Michele McNally


WRONG!!!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v510/fireslayer1672/bruceleeanimatedgif.gif

I've read a few books too, but I don't remember anyone using something like that... but I think Ib was pointing out how it's not parrallel to the scope... kinda cockeyed.. maybe he was adjusting it or something.

Anyone know what make/model rifle that is ?

Its a Russian SVD Dragunov 7.62x39 Semi automatic. The scope is probably a Czek scope the extension is a rubber eye cup.

That guy was a head shot waiting to happen, either he was extremely inexperienced or he was posing in the photo.

Boom Headshot!

7.62 is the same caliber as the military M-14, used as the primary wep prior to Viet Nam, when the M-16 (5.56) became the norm.

The 7.62 was a common round which was compatible with the Russian made weps, commonly used by the Vietnamese insurgents. The larger round is good for a sniper weapon due to the stopping power; the smaller 5.56 used now in the current weapons has a tumbling effect that causes more damage when it hits bone and deflects.


For a really good sniper rifle tho', you can't beat Mack Bolan's Webley. :cool:

Isnt the 7.62 a shitload less accurate as well? Less velocity and no real chance to hit the broadside of anything after 300 yards and no chance of going through Kelvar from any kind of distance that a sniper would use.

From what I understand of the Dragunov is that it isnt a good sniper weapon, More of a weapon to be used in the context of a squad to extend its range beyond the utterly craptastic range of the AK47s.


Fuckers are taking pot shots from 600 yards and if they hit its blind luck and if they wound its a lottery shot.

The russian 7.62 is different than the NATO 7.62, the russian round is shorter.

The NATO 7.62 is also known as the .308 its very accurate with a fairly flat trajectory, you can hit fairly accurate out to around 1000 meters if needed but mostly we shot in the 600 meter or so range.
The M-16 is the 5.56 or .223 which is a hyper speed 22 round. The killing power of the 5.56 is done mostly due to the shocking power of the round.

You can basically hit pretty accurate with an M-16 out to around 500 meters (Marines), but mostly its an ok round up to 300 meters (Army) or so. The parenthesis are my inter-service rivalry coming through.

I'm clueless as to what is used now by US military snipers but back in the day the Marines used the M-40 which was pretty much a modified Remington Model 700 and the Army used a modified M-14 which was called an M-21.

7.62 is the same caliber as the military M-14, used as the primary wep prior to Viet Nam, when the M-16 (5.56) became the norm.

The 7.62 was a common round which was compatible with the Russian made weps, commonly used by the Vietnamese insurgents. The larger round is good for a sniper weapon due to the stopping power; the smaller 5.56 used now in the current weapons has a tumbling effect that causes more damage when it hits bone and deflects.


For a really good sniper rifle tho', you can't beat Mack Bolan's Webley. :cool:

I dunno I think I'd rather use one of these http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles.htm :D

I dunno I think I'd rather use one of these http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles.htm :D

If Mack Bolan had had access to the 50 caliber, the "Executioner" series would not have been as many books, tho'.:p

I used to read Mac Bolan back in grade school. Good stuff.

Its kinda funny how people will camp a thread when they are "sure" they are right, but then later Axxa's been back to the after being proven wrong and hasn't said anything.

Well, I will say it was brave of the photographer to be in the room where he had a chance of getting his head blown off by American Troops.

Put a turbin on his head, and I'd shoot at him too.


http://picturenet.co.za/photographers/js/js.gif

Sorry about the child porn there, but I couldn't find another pic of him....

Here ya go.

http://picturenet.co.za/jsilva/web2.swf

I was thinking that 50 cal has got a bit of kick to it, I hope the recoil system is a damn good one.

that's the beauty of that weapon Rev, very very minimal kick and you can reel off 10 rounds in under 10 seconds. And it has a range of over a mile.



The classic high-powered sniper rifle used by the U.S. military, the M107 rifle (formerly the M82) was first used by American forces in Operation Desert Storm. The M107 fires the hugely powerful .50 caliber ammunition that has long been used as the standard round for heavy machine guns.

With an effective range of over 1,500 meters (approximately 5,000 feet) and incredible knockdown power, the rifle has proved effective against many types of targets, including enemy personnel, vehicles and parked aircraft. The standard-issue M107 comes with a 10X telescopic sight and bipod, which together greatly enhance accurate fire. The gun's superb design minimizes recoil, while its 10-round semi-automatic action lets the shooter lock in on a target through multiple trigger pulls.



/sigh give me one with armor piercing rounds pls.


Ha while trolling I found this.

http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/future_weapons/gallery/cornershot/index.shtml

neat. That's a pretty neat show too, I catch it when I can :D

Adopt a Sniper ... http://americansnipers.org/