Allah has a post up linking to a New York Times piece on Haditha. I've no intention of defending the indefensible. But for now I'm not as pessimistic as Allah might sound. The Times piece suggests the killings of the men in the taxi may be the most "problematic." Here's what I don't get.
Two people briefed on the investigation said Thursday that evidence gathered on the shooting of the taxi passengers now appeared to be the most at odds with the account given by marines through their lawyers.
One Defense Department official said photographs indicated that the positions of those corpses — and the pooling of their blood — can be viewed as sharply inconsistent with the marines’ version that the Iraqi men were shot as they fled.
Okay, then why did one of the Iraqi witnesses tell the Washington Post that they were indeed fleeing when shot?
The final victims of the day happened upon the scene inadvertently, witnesses said. Four male college students -- Khalid Ayada al-Zawi, Wajdi Ayada al-Zawi, Mohammed Battal Mahmoud and Akram Hamid Flayeh -- had left the Technical Institute in Saqlawiyah for the weekend to stay with one of their families on the street, said Fahmi, a friend of the young men.
A Haditha taxi driver, Ahmed Khidher, was bringing them home, Fahmi said.
According to Fahmi, the young men and their driver turned onto the street and saw the wrecked Humvee and the Marines. Khidher threw the car into reverse, trying to back away at full speed, Fahmi said, and the Marines opened fire from about 30 yards away, killing all the men inside the taxi.
As for this:
Investigators have also concluded that most of the victims in three houses died from well-aimed rifle shots, not shrapnel or random fire, according to military officials familiar with the initial findings…
There are a few issues here to take into account. First, what pictures are any conclusions being based upon? If they are the Marines own intelligence pictures taken after the action, that absolutely spells trouble for the Marines. At the same time, if several pictures which have emerged later are being relied upon, then only autopsies can serve as definitive proof of a cause of death. Obviously, an ideology which beheads the living would think nothing of making a precise looking wound in a corpse.
Also, as Allah points out, one Times source suggests there was an absence of bullet and shrapnel holes in the house walls. That's contradicted by pictures many have already seen.
Virtually all of the inconsistencies the Times source points to in statements by various Marines can be explained by different groups acting in Haditha that day.
Moving to a third house in the row, Marines burst in on four brothers, Marwan, Qahtan, Chasib and Jamal Ahmed. Neighbors said the Marines killed them together.
Meanwhile, a separate group of Marines found at least one other house full of young men. The Marines led the men in that house outside, some still in their underwear, and away to detention.
It's also stated that one Marine is said to be co-operating. If that Marine can help get to the truth, that would be a very good thing. But I can't help but reflect on the so-called Camp Pendleton 8. See family and related websites here, here, here and here.
It has been reported that those Marines were experiencing some very heavy handed interrogation tactics, including threats of execution in an attempt to get them to talk. According to a report yesterday, their shackles have been removed.
For now my feeling as regards Haditha is that some amount of misinformation has obviously been introduced, making drawing any conclusions extremely difficult, even for investigators, perhaps. If anything, I would expect to find that one or a few Marines may have gone off and committed a crime - and some other number exercised the poor judgment to attempt to cover it up. But, for now, we don't have enough solid information to draw even that conclusion.
Ironic that depending on the day and the media involved, they seem to go from admitting there are still not sufficient answers, to concluding some atrocity has been committed. But then, Murtha opened the door to that.
Additional analysis at RUA with links to several other blogs commenting. And Bruce Kesler at The Democracy Project offers some analysis, as well.
Be sure and check in with Allah for updates. I'll have some here at top, if and when they become appropriate.
When the Defense Department says "can be viewed as sharply inconsistent with the marines’ version that the Iraqi men were shot as they fled", what kind of fleeing are they talking about? I had no idea the connotation was backing up the vehicle and driving in the opposite direction. I thought the "fleeing" was exiting the vehile and running on foot. If the Marines are saying the vehicle fled the scene vs. the occupants fled the scene, I'd like to know. Otherwise the Washington Post would not be affirming that there was actual 'fleeing" going on.
And the photos... whose photos were they? If they were from Hammurabi, I'd be extremely suspicious. If they were from a Marine source, I'd say they're reliable. Any ideas?
Posted by: Amy Proctor | Monday, June 19, 2006 at 03:38 PM