[JasonC]

Given the MSM and our enemies' ability to generate smoke, I don't agree with the general principle. But one fact in this case is pretty much impossible to evade. The unit initially reported the Iraqis were killed by the bomb, and that just clearly is not the case, and was known not to be the case very soon after the events. Unless that "initially reported" turns out to be "for about 5 minutes", that means somebody lied about it. And men generally don't lie to cover up what shining knights in armor they actually are, but the opposite. If that is what you mean by "too much smoke" then I agree.

[txrangerette]

Question: if it is that simple...that the incident report was deliberately falsified and so obviously, clearly wrong, and known to be wrong very quickly afterward, WHY would that have been done?? To what end?

You say a lie to cover up something wrong, indeed, horribly wrong. Did it cover up anything? Nope. Something so obviously wrong, so easily discerned, and so horrible, could not be covered up.

Somebody said, oh, it took THREE WHOLE MONTHS before it began to be looked at. They've GOT to be kidding. Three months is not long; if that is all a cover up succeeds in doing, it is useless. And anyone with even half a brain would know that. Actually, even a tiny fraction of a brain... How do you get to be a Marine if you are THAT DUMB?

There is something, something that we aren't getting yet in this story. I don't know how it will shake out, but right now it raises far more questions than it answers, no matter which version is assumed.