Posted on 06/01/2006 7:06:37 AM PDT by delacoert
WASHINGTON, June 1 (Reuters) - A U.S. military inquiry into whether Marines tried to cover up the killings of Iraqi civilians in Haditha will conclude that some officers gave false reports to their superiors, who then failed to scrutinize the information, according to a newspaper report on Thursday.
The Washington Post, citing an unidentified Army official, said the three-month investigation was also expected to call for changes in how U.S. troops are trained for duty in Iraq.
The investigation is one of two ongoing military probes into the Nov. 19 killings of 24 men, women and children in the town of Haditha, 125 miles (200 km) northwest of Baghdad in an area that has seen much activity by Sunni Arab insurgents.
(Excerpt) Read more at alertnet.org ...
And yet the number of KIAs (from combat) is not even at 2000. Pathetic how it's just a numbers game to these folks.
I remember having to sit through eight hours of sexual harassment training thanks to the nimrods at Tailhook. Grrrrr!
If the Pentagon is leaking, and it is becoming more and more apparent that it is, then the report is being selectively declassified.
Where soldiers are only worthy of being reported on when they DIE or SCREW up.
By the way, according to the MSM, nothing else happened other than DEATH and FAILURE.
One incident among 160,000 soldiers over three years and untold dozens of great accomplishments and here we have something our press just salivates over.
Michael Savage is right: the reporters, editors and publishers are vermin. Call Orkin!
More likely, the Wash Post is pulling crap out of their a**hole. Just like they always do.
Think "secret prisons". That was the last phony BS they started.
Think "looted antiquities" and ALL the handwringing, when the vast majority of th ecrap was safe and sound.
Think "Wedding party Massacre" --- the WaPost led the charge of false information.
Since when have these turds reported ANYTHING reagarding the WOT accurately??
Why is the Pentagon not seeking to plug these leaks? They could very easily do that, with a threat of prosecution.
It could be that the leaks are intentional-to brace us for the bad news.
Of course the liberal media constantly uses the numbers game against our troops but of course never mentions the tens of thousands of terrorists who were killed and captured by us. No need to demoralize the terrorists and their supporters, but it is always their treasonous mission to demoralize the public and hence to damage the war efforts.
I don't believe there can be any doubt that they are intentional. There are too many of them, and they are not showing any signs of being stopped.
My guess is that the leakers aren't tied to the investigation at all, but going by hearsay. Hard to stop a leak of that kind. But to the WaPost, a janitor who once worked at the Pentagon's chow hall is a reliable source and a source "close to the investigation"
I think the leakers are being authorized by the Pentagon to stretch the revelations in this story out over a matter of weeks, which is exactly what is happening, to soften the reaction to the details when they are officially released.
A janitor would be worthless as a source if what he says could not be believed or verified by another source. (Notice that most of these sources are saying the same things)
Try this source: On record
Lieut. Colonel Michelle Martin-Hing, spokeswoman for the Multi-National Force-Iraq, told Time the involvement of the ncis does not mean that a crime occurred. And she says the fault for the civilian deaths lies squarely with the insurgents, who "placed noncombatants in the line of fire as the Marines responded to defend themselves."
Or explain how the WaPo completely screwed up a On Record source: (From Hugh Hewitt):
The Post has been unable to get anyone from the Pentagon on the record on the investigation, using mostly anonymous sources. The one man they did get on the record on Friday was retired Brig. Gen. David H. Brahms, a long-time lawyer with the Marine Corps who has experience with these types of cases. His quote is in the third paragraph. See if you can guess why the prominent first-quote placement:
"When these investigations come out, there's going to be a firestorm," said retired Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms, formerly a top lawyer for the Marine Corps. "It will be worse than Abu Ghraib -- nobody was killed at Abu Ghraib."
I have a feeling someone was lying in wait for an Abu Ghraib reference. I read the quote and was taken aback because I spoke to the same Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms about the case this week, and his sentiments were very different from those presented in the Post. Which explains why he sent me this statement yesterday:
"Recent reporting on the events in Haditha, Iraq have included significant factual errors and/or misleading statements. This includes a quote attributed to me in the Washington Post this morning that was taken completely out of context and its meaning distorted. Many facts that are favorable to the Marines involved have not yet been disclosed."
Your faith in the veracity of the MSM is alarming.
Also it has been reported that the company commander of the unit in question is being represented by none other than Paul HAckett. I certainly hope that he is doing what he can to get the truth out and not leaking selective information to throw people under the bus.
IT really frosts me how this media lynching is taking shape.
Look it up.
Well, if he thinks he was miscontrued and taken out of context, then I'll go with him, not the WaPost. If you are unaware of the malfeasance over the last few years of the Post, then I can't help ya.
Guilty until proven innocent bump.
Brig General Brahms,"Many facts that are favorable to the Marines have not yet been disclosed."And they won't be if the msm has anything to do with it.
Try this source: On record
Lieut. Colonel Michelle Martin-Hing, spokeswoman for the Multi-National Force-Iraq, told Time the involvement of the ncis does not mean that a crime occurred. And she says the fault for the civilian deaths lies squarely with the insurgents, who "placed noncombatants in the line of fire as the Marines responded to defend themselves."
Or explain how the WaPo completely screwed up a On Record source: (From Hugh Hewitt):
The Post has been unable to get anyone from the Pentagon on the record on the investigation, using mostly anonymous sources. The one man they did get on the record on Friday was retired Brig. Gen. David H. Brahms, a long-time lawyer with the Marine Corps who has experience with these types of cases. His quote is in the third paragraph. See if you can guess why the prominent first-quote placement:
"When these investigations come out, there's going to be a firestorm," said retired Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms, formerly a top lawyer for the Marine Corps. "It will be worse than Abu Ghraib -- nobody was killed at Abu Ghraib."
I have a feeling someone was lying in wait for an Abu Ghraib reference. I read the quote and was taken aback because I spoke to the same Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms about the case this week, and his sentiments were very different from those presented in the Post. Which explains why he sent me this statement yesterday:
"Recent reporting on the events in Haditha, Iraq have included significant factual errors and/or misleading statements. This includes a quote attributed to me in the Washington Post this morning that was taken completely out of context and its meaning distorted. Many facts that are favorable to the Marines involved have not yet been disclosed."
32 posted on 06/01/2006 8:40:31 AM PDT by pissant
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1641730/posts?page=32#32
The janitor.
BTTT
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.