Posted on 03/11/2005 6:44:41 AM PST by saquin
ROME - U.S. forces in Iraq were only partially informed about last week's Italian intelligence mission to release a hostage, which ended with a shooting on the road to Baghdad airport and the death of secret service agent Nicola Calipari, Italian newspapers said Friday.
While U.S authorities were informed of the presence of Calipari and a colleague, they did not know that the mission was aimed at freeing Giuliana Sgrena, a journalist who had been kidnapped in Baghdad on Feb. 4, Italian dailies La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera reported.
Calipari's killing by American forces on March 4 shocked Italy and prompted Premier Silvio Berlusconi and other top officials to demand a full explanation from Washington.
A candlelit march was to be held later Friday at Rome's Capitoline Hill in memory of Calipari.
Both newspapers cited a report by Gen. Mario Marioli, an Italian who is the coalition forces' second-in-command. The report has been given to Rome prosecutors investigating the killing.
According to the newspapers, Marioli informed U.S. officials that Calipari and the other Italian officer were there, but not that the mission was aimed at releasing Sgrena.
The papers had conflicting versions over how much Marioli knew: Corriere said he knew the Calipari was working to have the hostage released, La Repubblica said he didn't.
Calipari was killed when U.S. troops opened fire on a vehicle carrying him, the other intelligence officer and Sgrena, who had just been released after being held hostage for a month. Sgrena and the other man were both injured.
Italy — which is one of the largest contributors to the U.S.-led coalition with 3,000 troops in Iraq — has said the shooting was an "accident," but has also disputed some elements of the account given by the Americans.
Berlusconi told the Senate this week that Calipari had informed the proper authorities that he was heading to the airport with the freed hostage. He said the car was traveling slowly and stopped immediately when a light was flashed at a checkpoint, before U.S. troops fired on the car.
In a statement released after the shooting, the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which controls Baghdad, said the vehicle was speeding and refused to stop. The statement also said a U.S. patrol tried to warn a driver with hand and arm signals, by flashing white lights and firing shots in front of the car into the engine block.
In interviews published Friday, Sgrena said that no light was flashed at the vehicle and that the shots were not fired in front of the car.
"It's not true that they shot into the engine," she told Corriere della Sera, adding that the shooting came "from the right and from behind."
In a parliament speech earlier this week, Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini said photos of the vehicle, which is still in Iraq, show that the fire "hit the right side of the car."
The U.S.-led coalition in Iraq has ordered an investigation into the shooting, to be led by a U.S. brigadier general with Italian officials' participation.
So not only do even the Italians admit they didn't tell us everything... it's not even clear whether the Italian general who's second in command knew about the mission.
In interviews published Friday, Sgrena said that no light was flashed at the vehicle and that the shots were not fired in front of the car.
Contradicting herself yet again. There are printed interviews from the day after the incident in which she clearly stated that a spotlight was shined at the car.
"It's not true that they shot into the engine," she told Corriere della Sera, adding that the shooting came "from the right and from behind."
Ummm, if the shots were from behind wouldn't that indicate you were past the checkpoint? Not a smart idea to roll through a checkpoint on that road at night.
Anyone read Michelle Malkin's column today saying that between $10 and $13 Million had been paid to the insurgents in ransom money for the hostage? She concludes by saying any Italian in Iraq might as well have a sign hanging around his neck saying "finance your terrorist activities by kidnapping me." And isn't it a kick in the teeth that our allies, the Itallians, are negotiating with the enemy?
All I want to know is why did they try to run that checkpoint?
IF they're really doing this we ought to chuck their asses out instead of kissing them to get them to stay. And let them take their communist propaganda writers with them.
The Italians involved will not come out of this looking very good.
"All I want to know is why did they try to run that checkpoint?"
Agreed. To be completely honest, we really didn't need to know Calipari's purpose for being there. Why would knowing why he was there make a difference to his car being fired on?
Does the evidence support or contradict the story given by the men at the checkpoint? If it contradicts their story, then something there is definately something that needs investigating. It doesn't mean that this wasn't an accident, but we don't need people lying and making matters worse.
If the evidence does support their story, then make that perfectly and transparrently clear to the Italian govenment and the Italian people. Make the evidence available online and to the press.
If American servicemen screwed up, they need to pay the price for screwing up. If they did not, the italians need to accept that their own agents screwed up.
Either way we need to resolve this honorably and move on.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is eventually discovered that the commie was in collusion with the Islam-fascists to fake the kidnapping in order to fatten their terrorist coffers.
I'm sure liberals, being the brainy bunch they are, are quite convinced that all of the facts need to come out before forming an opinion as to the veracity of the charges against the United States.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.