Article

2006-05-27 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2006-05-27 13:03|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Here are the "sources" for the story...

officials close to the investigation said Friday...

congressional and defense officials said...

Marine officers have long been worried...

said officials with knowledge of the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity...

officials said...

officials said...

a congressional aide said...

said a Defense Department official...

Military officials say...

Military and congressional sources said...

a congressional staffer said...

I'd say when the dust settles it will likely be classified as the marines said it was at the outset, accidental shootings.

The great mass of anonymous sources tells me there is definately an agenda at work here.

Posted by badanov 2006-05-27 15:56|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2006-05-27 15:56|| Front Page Top

#2 I dunno. I think the sources are anonymous right now because there are big penalties for speaking out. I'm very concerned becuase, even when you get past the MSM bias, something here doesn't look right. It may have been a small number of Marines who lost discipline and control, but one is one too many.

I'll wait for the report and the inquiry. I'm very concerned.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2006-05-27 18:34|| 2006-05-27 18:34|| Front Page Top

#3 What struck me about this article was how the LAT writers put "fire team" in scare quotes, as if there were something sinister about the term or as if the Marines had formed a special unit just to kill Iraqi civilians. AFAIK the term goes back to WWII if not further.

The battalion about whose Marines these allegations are being made is, as I understand it, 3/1, which fought with great distinction at Fallujah in November 2004. Brad Kasal-- the Marine holding the pistol in the famous photo-- was in that battalion IIRC.

So this had better not turn out to be more MSM bullshit.

Posted by Matt 2006-05-27 18:35|| 2006-05-27 18:35|| Front Page Top

#4 I dunno. I think the sources are anonymous right now because there are big penalties for speaking out

Uhm, Steve, the CIA woman who got fired spoke anonymously. If officials are afraid to speak out they sure aren't showing it.

Posted by badanov 2006-05-27 18:38|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2006-05-27 18:38|| Front Page Top

#5 Oh, and the prima facie evidence being no pockmarks on walls?

I'll wait for charge to be filed, but I seriosuly doubt they will be.

This is a clear case of wishful thinking.

Remember: The Marines do not operate in a vacuum. There is another element likely responsible for killings, and they are the enemies the Marines are fighting.

Posted by badanov 2006-05-27 18:40|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2006-05-27 18:40|| Front Page Top

#6 If "officials" involved in the investigation leak information then they are breaking the rules and tainting the story. Also it iz in really bad taste for any govenment official (especially elected ones) to spout off any judgement until they at least get their day in court. Also I don't care if you served in a "fire team" last week in Iraq you cannot possibly know the why, what, and hows of this case so just shut up and wait. All I see at worst is an illegal shooting but probably not intentional (the Marines did not go out hunting civilians).

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2006-05-27 18:57|| 2006-05-27 18:57|| Front Page Top

#7 I'm concerned there's likley some truth to the story. I'd much rather sort it out and get to the bottom of it and weed out the bad eggs, if there are any. What wrankles me are folks speaking before the results of a concluded and vetted investigation are brought forward. Mind you, if the fire team took it upon themselves to whack folks who were just there, then they've sunk to Z's maddeness and ought to be punished. Again, I'd prefer to see the whole truth come out in due time -- popping it out early doesn't help anyone.

Posted by H8_UBL 2006-05-27 19:46|| 2006-05-27 19:46|| Front Page Top

#8 a congressional aide said...

That is a big part of our "leak" problem. We need criminal investigations of this stuff. These people have none of the protection elected politicians have.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-05-27 19:57|| 2006-05-27 19:57|| Front Page Top

#9 As I've said before I am waiting until they've had their day in a true no b.s. military court before making any comments. Until then I always give my fellow Marines the benefit of the doubt. Either way this whole situation sucks and I still want Murtha's f*cking skull.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-05-27 21:06|| 2006-05-27 21:06|| Front Page Top

#10 I dunno. I think the sources are anonymous right now because there are big penalties for speaking out.
Anonymous sources are under no obligation to be sources at all. They could simple say "I don't wish to comment on an ongoing investigation." By being an anonymous source you open yourself up to be seen as having a hidden agenda.

Of course if some Marines are found guilty of this, then they must be punished. But I think it is high time to start treating the illegal combats who are cought with IED materials as the war criminials they are with very public trials and sentences, and by sentences I mean hangings.

Posted by Hyperfine 2006-05-27 21:55|| 2006-05-27 21:55|| Front Page Top

00:04 Broadhead6
23:37 trailing wife
23:34 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:31 Frank G
23:27 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:17 3dc
23:16 trailing wife
23:07 trailing wife
22:52 Fordesque
22:50 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:48 trailing wife
22:35 John F. Kerry
22:27 gromgoru
22:12 JesseMacbethSr.
22:04 gromgoru
22:02 N guard
22:00 Oldspook
21:58 Tibor
21:55 Hyperfine
21:52 Slairong Snomomp1070
21:52 Frank G
21:51 JosephMendiola
21:49 Slairong Snomomp1070
21:25 Nimble Spemble