June 11, 2006

My Lai, or My Lie?

Perhaps this should not be surprising, but Marine Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich gives a version of events exactly opposite of those described by "cold-blooded" Congressman John Murtha and the Sunni residents of Haditha in a story by Josh White in the Washington Post:

Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, told his attorney that several civilians were killed Nov. 19 when his squad went after insurgents who were firing at them from inside a house. The Marine said there was no vengeful massacre, but he described a house-to-house hunt that went tragically awry in the middle of a chaotic battlefield.


Wuterich's version contradicts that of the Iraqis, who described a massacre of men, women and children after a bomb killed a Marine. Haditha residents have said that innocent civilians were executed, that some begged for their lives before being shot and that children were killed indiscriminately.

Wuterich told his attorney in initial interviews over nearly 12 hours last week that the shootings were the unfortunate result of a methodical sweep for enemies in a firefight. Two attorneys for other Marines involved in the incident said Wuterich's account is consistent with those they had heard from their clients.

Other comments in the Post article also seem to contradict claims of a cover-up levied by some.

I will not comment at this time to say which version of events is correct, but I'll note that Dan Riehl captured last week the various inconsistencies in the media-reported statements of Haditha residents, which makes this appear to be anything other than a cut-and-dried case as the media so eagerly reported it at first. I'll also note that radio traffic and reputed surveillance video from drone aircraft in the area can provide nearly irrefutable evidence supportingor disproving the facts as presented by some in this case. As Rick Moran notes at Right Wing Nut House:

One side or the other is lying in spectacular fashion.

And not just little inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony that one would expect in a war zone either. There are extremely disturbing indications that press reports detailing eyewitness accounts have failed to reconcile what Iraqis in Haditha were telling them with other known facts that were either conveniently left out or ignored altogether. There are also clear and unambiguous cases where Iraqi eyewitnesses have changed their stories 2, 3, and even more times.

It will be very interesting to see which side is lying, and what the repercussions of that lying will be.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at June 11, 2006 08:42 AM | TrackBack

Well....If I had to guess....Let's see...Marines on one side and MSM on the other. Defending our country vs. trying to pull down a duly elected administration. Which group has the bigger record of lying and misleading the public? I know who I'd vote for....

Posted by: Specter at June 11, 2006 09:16 AM

Unfortunately, the repurcussions if the media is lying will be exactly ZERO -- just like they were after the Katrina reporting was proven phony and hyped.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at June 11, 2006 10:41 AM

The reports coming out now telling the Marine side of the story do not surprise me. I have been saying that we should not rush to judgment against the Marines based on the media reports and the accusations of the likes of Murtha when the investigation was not complete and no charges had been made.

I too find the Marine side of the story that is coming out the one that makes better sense thus far, in contrast to what was coming out in the media. The media wanted and still wants another My Lai. Victor Davis Hanson's latest article in the National Review On Line is an excellent discussion of how there is an effort an the anti-war crowd to treat the present situaiton in Iraq as another Vietnam even though it clearly isn't.

Posted by: Phil Byler at June 11, 2006 11:07 AM

Over at American Thinker, Clarice Feldman has a pretty good round-up of why some of the Haditha stories are so suspicious to begin with.

Check it out here.

Posted by: Specter at June 11, 2006 11:55 AM

"They then kicked in that door, tossed a fragmentation grenade into the room, and one Marine fired a series of "clearing rounds" through the dust and smoke, killing several people, Puckett said."

That was fuckin retarded. You do not use frags when civilians are around, and you do not spray into dusty rooms indescriminately. This is a guerrilla war, quite searching for the decisive engagement. You disenfranchise the insurgent from the masses with moral leverage-seperate the fish from the water- not kill him with tactical victories, making numerous moral errors in the process. We have not retained a godamn thing since Vietnam.

Posted by: SSG at June 11, 2006 05:28 PM

SSG you are certifiably nuts!

Posted by: Sara (Squiggler) at June 11, 2006 05:50 PM

SSG probably thinks that cops can shoot to knock the gun out of someone's hand rather than go for the kill. LOL. Grow up - this ain't a perfect world.

Hey Sara - nice to see you here.

Posted by: Specter at June 11, 2006 06:41 PM

SSG: In the last four paragraphs of the WashPost article, it says: "After going through the houses, Wuterich moved a small group of Marines to the roof of a nearby building to watch the area, Puckett said. At one point, they saw a man in all-black clothing running from one of the houses they had searched. The Marines killed him, Puckett said.

They then noticed another man in all black scurrying between two houses across the street. When they went to investigate, the Marines found a courtyard filled with women and children and asked where the man was, Puckett said.

When the civilians pointed to a third house, the Marines attempted to enter and found a man with an AK-47 inside, flanked by three other men; the first Marine to enter tried to fire his weapon, but it jammed, Puckett said. The Marines then killed those four men.

The unit stayed at the scene for hours, helping to collect bodies as photos were taken. Wuterich, who remains on duty in California, where he lives with his wife and two young daughters, told Puckett that for months no one questioned his actions..."

Also, did you read anything about what Haditha was like before the Marines got there ... ?,2763,1553969,00.html

Did you know it was tips from Haditha civilians that gave away the plans for a massive insurgent attack the night before the incident in November...?

Or, do you just know what you want to know?

Posted by: FrauBudgie at June 11, 2006 06:47 PM

Same as all lefties Frau...only the twists of the facts that fit their POV. If it doesn't...well they won't believe it. The typical response when presented by facts is to 1) change subject quickly because then they don't look like they just lost face, and 2) swear at you if you keep pestering them with those darn facts.

Posted by: Specter at June 11, 2006 07:54 PM

I can't wait until this sham falls apart and the Multi-Billions dollar lawsuits against the antique MSM and the excuse for reporters they employ hit the court system. Unlike the soldiers the media lies/hype have ruined without any evidence, there is an abundance of evidence to convict the media in any court in the land. Even the lefie judges will be scared to rule against the soldiers because they know the American people are fed up and have a lot of new ropes waiting to be put to good use. Being in the military does not do away with your right to use the civilian court system to collect what you are due, and a few hundred Marines are due a lot. I'll bet the lawyers are lined up around the corner to get a piece of this billion dollar pie. Can't beat a sure thing.

Posted by: Scrairon at June 11, 2006 07:58 PM

I second the motion that 'SSG' (????why) is nuts. Retired Vietnam vet.(E-8)

Posted by: Scrapiron at June 11, 2006 08:01 PM

Scrairon .. about those torte lawyers lined up -- I sure hope so.

Posted by: FrauBudgie at June 12, 2006 07:24 AM

People like SSG follow the old Usenet Rules of Disinformation. Catch up on them here.

Posted by: Specter at June 12, 2006 02:06 PM

Women, children shot to death with US military bullets, in blood-spattered BEDS. Which "side" is that?

Invasion of the two countries that, duh, form perfect path to Caspian Sea, to steal oil; military pulled up "terrorists" with cash, shipped to No-Man's prison on no evidence.

White House crowd: doesn't give a Damn about laws, treaties or grunts to help their corporate masters. Still don't get "Mission Accomplished":
how do you like $70.-barrel oil? Where's your low-cost medical insurance? Where do you Think your pension is? White House: shamed ALL Americans.


Posted by: Poppy at June 13, 2006 12:54 AM

A few questions for Poppy.

So we're "stealing oil," Poppy? Can you show me exactly which country we're stealing it from? How about which oil field? Which oil companies are stealing this oil, and how much have they stolen so far?

Which markets are they sending it to, and how much cheaper is it there than here? Which branch of the military specializes in stealing oil, and how do they ship it by the hundreds of millions of barrels, undetected?

Why don't we ever seem to find a reporter who can answer any of these questions?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 13, 2006 05:57 AM


Which incident are you speaking of? Gotta make that clear first, then we can talk.

Now...If it is Haditha....put yourself in the young soldier's shoes. IED explodes and kills one of your own. After the QRF gets there you start taking fire from a building near at hand. What do you do? Run away? Knock on the door and ask if you can borrow a cup of sugar? Or do what you are trained to do in house-to-house fighting?

Now in Mogadishu, during the famed "BlackHawk Down" incident, the militia shooting at the Rangers and Delta Force personnel included women and children. Those men were surrounded and fought bravely. But the fact was, it was difficult to distinguish between enemy combatant and innocent bystander. Of course, Clinton ran away from that.

The problem with your statement is that you fail to grasp the situation. There is a war. People are shooting at you. We shoot back. If the enemy decides to hide among innocents, then the chance of innocents being killed is large. It is not the bravery or our soldiers that should be questioned here, but the cowardice of the insurgents.

But other than a complete lack of analysis on your part, you sure got those Democratic talking points down.

Posted by: Specter at June 13, 2006 07:21 AM

Before you pigeon hole me...

Iraq vet, Infantry/Cav Scout, pro-war, GOP voter, ect.
If you have not been in Iraq in the past three years, I could give a rats ass what you think- you do not know.

Posted by: SSG at June 13, 2006 02:31 PM

In regards to the "disinformation" blogger crap. Get a life.

Posted by: SSG at June 13, 2006 02:40 PM

1st: I tried few times to post and Comment wouldn't 'stick' so I'm pleased that it's up/you enabled. Thanks!
2nd: To the one who claimed I "got Dem. talking points": Don't slap up labels without knowledge. I have contempt for pimp in the Oval Office; Dem's who voted for "Patriot" Act without READING it & authorization to invade Iraq; right-wingers who twist things; Rep's AND Dem's who don't question things --THEY are Supposed to represent You & Me, NOT the Oval Office occupant.

3rd: US military has been forced to fight kind of war that they didn't prep for, That's How/Why military got put in the position of "house to house." The Rummy: ordered generals NOT to even read After Invasion plans, thousands of prepped pages of 'how to put a country back together.' --They expected to seize ALL of Iraq's assets, not just oil, leave country splintered.
That's how the Rummy got caught flat-footed, watching museums stripped of treasures; museums weren't on their list.
4th: My contempt isn't at those who did the shooting, but those who Failed to equip, train Nation's Guard & military and shipped them out --un-prepared. Soft transport, inadequate water, bullets, maps, goggles, intel, translators? I consider that and the Dick, chair of Joints, who Allowed it: Treasonous. --All because They didn't Expect to Stay.
US military Didn't train for house-to-house --President of Vice, the Rummy, et al didn't care about After-looting/seizing of assets.
5th: Oil seizure:
a)they had to drop the plan: when pipelines got blown up, sev. times
b) $9 Billion bucks has disappeared, which GAO, nobody can account for; who needs oil if you can get cash? LOL....
Clinton did some odd things, but on his watch: American civilians weren't slaughtered; Treasury had vast surplus. 17 killed Vs 2,500 + 50,000 injured, maimed + Sept. 11
Invading Iraq has accomplished: precisely Nothing.
Ideology, anyone's, isn't going to solve probs. I believe we can't 'row in same direction' if we can't/don't talk to each other, so glad for the opportunity.

Posted by: Poppy at June 17, 2006 07:43 AM