> 1. The FBI flew across the world to NZ. 2. They
> performed an assault on the Dotcom house with an
> armed chopper.
I find these statements disingenuous though. This makes it sound like the FBI led an FBI assault on the Dotcom property using FBI property. The reality is:
1. The FBI (+ other US government offices) convinced the NZ government to arrest Kim Dotcom.
2. It's unclear if the decision to make this arrest so over-the-top was made independently by the NZ officials or influenced by the US.
3. The FBI were there at the assault, but everything that I've read states that the assault team were NZ authorities. The reality is that the FBI were probably there as observers (seeing as this arrest was being made to extradite Kim Dotcom to the US).
It amounts to "Hey, can you arrest this guy for us and can we be there to watch the arrest?"
This may or may not be excusable depending on your persuasion, but attempting to say that the "US assaulted Kim Dotcom with an armed helicopter" is horribly misleading. It draws up images of some US cowboy operation where a bunch of FBI agents piled into an assault chopper, flew to NZ, and just started attacking the Dotcom compound out of nowhere (possibly unloading heavy machine guns and missiles on the compound... it is an 'assault helicopter' after all).
1. The FBI flew across the world to NZ. 2. They performed an assault on the Dotcom house with an armed chopper.
Not saying that you are wrong, but the posters sentence was textually correct.