Posted on 05/31/2006 1:40:45 PM PDT by pissant
yay for pragmatism. :)
It would be nice if you were right -- we'd all love for this to turn out right. However, the articles so far talk about evidence that isn't good (like photos from Marine intelligence troops, overhead surveilence footage, radio traffic logs, and testimony from the Marines who were there). So I'm afraid we'll just have to wait and see.
Yeah, this is frustrating for all of us, and it helps to blow off steam.
But when left-wing sites "joke" about harm to our troops or overseas contractors, or about harming Republicans in general, it doesn't reflect well on them. I hope we don't develop the same culture.
Someone put the IED in the ground, then set it off -- if we're going to harm anyone, let's harm that guy.
that's true, too. :)
But I'm not sure that's really a model we should draw upon today. Simply turning them off is an effective technique -- it's working pretty well these days. And so is looking for new sources of information on the 'net.
There is nothing good about CNN, nothing at all.
I've read two articles about this thing, both from major media outlets and I read nothing about radio logs or overhead surveilence footage. It's hard to understand what overhead footage would reveal about what went on inside. The interviews claim contradictions between accounts, but there were numerous interviews and details are sketchy. I understand the the photos Marine intelligence took were after the event occurred and the scene was probably tampered with.
It reminds me a little of the Duke University Lacrosse allegations. That could be distorting my view of this, true, but the press is doing essentially the same thing they did to those kids.
I finished a book recently: No True Glory, Bing West, author, about the Fallujah fiasco. The constraints those soldiers are under are unimaginable and their fidelilty to the mission is awesome. It also describes how the terrorists operate: sniping from mosques while claiming sanctuary. Wearing two sets of clothes to facilitate transformation from jihadi to civilian. It describes how rifles are taken from the dead jihadis to recycle them and claim civilian status for the dead. It tells how virtually all photographs conveyed by the media originated with sypathetic journalists, most from Al Jazeerah. Western journalists knew they would be killed and so didn't venture beyond their compound. Recall the soldier charged with killing the wounded jihad? The jihadi was a plant, a suicide bomber. The embedded journalist never reported this. Who to believe?
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.