Replies

Notice who the NY Times article blames

Col. R. Gary Sokoloski, a lawyer who was chief of staff to Maj. General Richard A. Huck, the division commander, approved a news release about the killings that investigators interviewing him in March 2006 suggested was “intentionally inaccurate” because it stated, contrary to the facts at hand, that the civilians had been killed by an insurgent’s bomb.

Capt. Jeffrey Pool was the Public Affairs Officer who wrote the press release. He allegedly told investigators that he had changed the wording about civilians being killed by the IED. The info given to him by the Marines from Haditha was accurate, but he modified it.

So now, there are two, Capt. Pool and Col. Sokoloski who admit they knew the wording of the press release was skewed against the enemy, not our Marines (shocking, isn't it?). But who's getting charged? Those much lower in the command.

I do hope Gen. Huck can begin to set this straight with his testimony. Do we want to win this war or not?

I think there are valid reasons for Poole's wording.

Does he take time to write every detail (and do we want him to), or does he do a condensed version of the incident? There was the first IED in the road and then there was a second IED.... from the propane tank that blew as a result of a clearing grenade. One of the photos shows a burned out 'window' in the house from that explosion!

The issue is the execution shots. How in the hell can it be proved who did that? They've stolen our rifles. It's the Marines word against the enemy. The day NCIS brings the enemy to testify against the United States Marine Corps is the day NCIS needs to be charged with several counts of consiracy to commit treason, etc., etc., etc.