Wednesday, June 28, 2006
# Posted 11:03 PM by Ariel David Adesnik
Barnes' makes certain points that I certainly hadn't come across before (although my knowledge of the subject is sparse). For example, the supposedly damning video of the local residents' bodies was provided not by a journalism student, but rather by a Sunni "human rights activist" with questionable credentials.
There are two points, however, that Barnes doesn't address that I would very much like to know more about. First of all, the alleged cover-up. As I understand it, the original report provided by the Marines described all of the casualties as the result of an explosion, not gunfire, which turned out to be false.
If certain Marines consciously lied about what happened in Haditha, then it's not hard to understand why so many observers have such strong suspicions about war crimes.
Second of all, Barnes doesn't talk about the fact that the residents seem to have died as a result of gunfire at close range. My memory of this is a bit foggy, so clarifications (and links) would be appreciated below.
On the one hand, gunshot wounds are consistent with the Marines' revised account of close-quarters combat. But I also have vague recollections of hearing that the wounds were closer to being the result of execution-style gunfire, rather than armed combat.
I guess the real moral of this story is that I should pay closer attention to what I read. But that's what so great about blogging -- you can admit what you don't know and pool the knowledge of others instead. (4) opinions -- Add your opinion
It is my understanding that the initial report was wrong and the result of the platoons Lt. who, not at thescene, wrote up the account incorrectly.
Not only was the video provided by a non student (43 years of age) he had been locked up.
The doctor who wrote the medical report had also been locked up until before the alleged incident.
There are also reports of military and civilians conducting normal meetings with Haditha's civilian infrastructure on an ongoing basis after the alleged incident. You have to ask yourself, why in a town which is supposed to be a hotbed of terrorist activity, there would be no outcry until a while after the actual incident.
There may well have been a case of the military executing civilians.
At this stage all the media outcry is based upon one sided reporting and a rush to judgement. The villification of our military without proof is becoming the norm with the MSM and some US pols.
I would suggest that it would be prudent to wait until the full military report comes out.
The marines at the location say that they did not report that the civilians were killed by the IED. That got garbled up above.
The report of execution style killings apparently came from a photo circulated as being of the victims--yurned out it was a picture in another place, different time, of people terrorists executed.
Think a re-creation of My-Lia and work backwards. Check the source (mapes ish) etc...
also check U.K./coalition military comments, the first time I read about this was in Jan. from a "tommy" on an egytian website.
It smells like a very amateurish frame-up by the terrorists, abetted by their allies in the liberal media. The fake photo seems to make it a good bet the enemy planned the whole thing. Likewise the fact the matter was dropped off the radar screen like a hot potato--when they discover they have helped the enemy, our media never apologizes but just drops the subject. We shouldn't forget that Haditha worked from the terrorists' point of view, because millions of Americans heard the allegation and not the correction. Our seditious media really should be prosecuted for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.Post a Comment